[quote=the article]Turkish culture and tourism minister Ertugrul Gunay said the book could be an authentic version of the Gospel, which was suppressed by the Christian Church for its strong parallels with the Islamic view of Jesus.
[quote=Sam_777]however, the correct translation according to our CAF member “gilliam” that what the tourism minister was saying that the Gospel of Barnabas was suppressed; not that particular physical book.
I don’t think I’ve seen gilliam state that he is fluent in, or a translator of, Arabic. Rather, I think he is taking a poorly written article and trying to make sense out of it.
I see three possible interpretations of the Daily Mail’s reported claim of “suppression” by the “Christian Church.”
The first is the one that alarmed you, that somehow the Church is so powerful in modern Turkey that it was able to bottle up the book in the custody of law enforcement. Since the article earlier pointed the finger at the “Turkish state” and “Turkish police” for hiding the book, and few seriously believe the Turkish government is under the thumb of the pope or the patriarch, it is reasonable to assume the author meant something else: suppression by the Church in much earlier years because of its resemblance to Quranic scripture.
The second interpretation is that the gospel was present alongside the other gospels until Muhammad came along, at which point Christian authorities suppressed it when they noticed in surprise that one of their five gospels was too close to the teachings of this new religion. Obviously ludicrous.
The third interpretation is that the gospel was lost for many centuries and discovered after the time of Muhammad, whereupon Church officials had to decide whether it was authentic, and decided against it, because of the Quranic references. This may be closer to the truth, if part of the gospel dates from earlier. I think any reasonable scripture scholar is likely to discount the mention of Muhammad in the gospel as an add-in, even if they accept that parts of the gospel date from the first few centuries.
If the gospel is in any way authentic, dating from the first few centuries after Christ, suppression would have been likely at that time, well before Muhammad came along. The Church certainly did try to suppress various gospels and other scriptures that it considered non-canonical - but not because they resembled Islamic teaching, since that didn’t exist. By the time Islam rolled around, any purported gospel not in the canon would have been suppressed by burning or whatever other means, simply because it was not in the established canon. Church authorities would not have needed to read it for careful comparison to the Quran, since they assumed anything outside the canon must be heretical.
Are they truly Islamic TV stations, or just Arabic stations that happen to be in majority Muslim countries or employ a mostly Muslim staff? Regardless, this sort of thing is common in popular culture - it makes a flashy story, so people run with it, not paying much attention to the actual facts. You’ll find many threads in the CAF news forums where members carry on about some erroneous fact based only on a headline. Not necessarily propaganda in some organized plot to control people’s opinions - it may simply be sloppy journalism.