INDO TRINIDADIAN CUISINE AND ITS STRUGGLE FOR ACCEPTANCE. THE PHOTO SHOWS FOOD BEING PREPARED FOR A WEDDING IN THE 1950S

“Coolie, coolie come for roti, all de roti done.” This was the refrain that haunted many of the formerly indentured Indian immigrants in Trinidad and their descendants from their arrival almost to and including the present day. There is no immigrant story that comes without some painful recollections. It is a testimony however to the spirit of ALL Trinbagonians, that we have managed to grow beyond these recriminations and become a more unified people DESPITE the will of divisive elements such as politicians and pseudo-religious leaders. It seems odd now in a society that counts doubles as a staple food, and where roti has almost epicurean status in some places, that the derision of the Indo-Trinidadians and their food was once commonplace. One of the first articles I wrote for this newspaper back in 2012, was on the roots of Indo-Trinidadian gastronomy which is anchored firmly in the rations which the labourers received during their contracted residences on the sugar plantations of the island. Though the provisions were sometimes augmented or differed according to the estate, the general issue was as Charles Kingsley described it in 1870:

“Till the last two years the new comers received their wages entirely in money. But it was found better to give them for the first year (and now for the two first years) part payment in daily rations : a pound of rice, 4 oz. of dholl, a kind of pea, an oz. of coco-nut oil, or ghee, and 2 oz. of sugar to each adult ; and half the same to each child between five and ten years old.”

The variations would usually be the addition of a small quantity of saltfish, dried pepper or potatoes. Eked out by provision gardens, often planted with crops brought from India as seeds in the ‘jahaji’ bundles of the labourers, it laid the foundation of a spicy food culture which is as different from anything produced in India today. Those who have dined on authentic Indian dishes will attest to the immense difference from the deliciously creolized creations of Trinidad. Diversification of the Indo-Trinidadian palate came about in the 1880s when many shopkeepers realized what was necessary to attract a clientele from this ethnic group. Wholesalers began to import a variety of spices and curry ground with a ‘sil and loorha’ became more commonplace. Large quantities of ghee, channa (chickpeas). Essentials like mustard oil began to make their appearance at both rural and urban grocers.

Nevertheless, Indo-Trinidadian cooking remained an ‘underground’ scene, unknown to most other ethnic groups and rarely tasted outside of the mud huts where it was prepared unless one was invited as a guest. Tempting talkarees, rotis and meetai (sweets) churned out in the aromatic smoke of an earthen chulha (fireplace) were a well-kept secret, not by dint of cultural isolation alone, but also because of a growing sense of shame and self-loathing. Indo-Trinidadian children who attended government schools or schools operated by denominations other than the Canadian Presbyterian Mission to the Indians (CMI) were ridiculed for the lunches they carried, usually sada roti and some sort of bhagi or talkaree. It inculcated a massive inferiority complex which many carried into adulthood. This is well-remembered by persons today and finds its way into Caribbean literature such as the works of Sir V.S Naipaul and Ismith Khan. Well through the 1930s, Indo-Trinidadian concoctions was looked down upon as ‘hog food’ or fit only for the poorest classes. In a calypso sung by the Roaring Lion, he noted the cheapness of the diet by the chorus:

“Though depression is in Trinidad, maintaining a wife isn’t very hard, Well you need no ham nor biscuit or bread for there are ways they can be easily fed, like the coolies on bargee, pelauri dhal-bat and dhal-pouri , channa, paratha and the aloo-ke-talkaree”

Even doubles at its genesis in the hands of Enamool Deen in Princes Town was viewed as lowly stuff, unfit for consumption by all but rumshop drunks and hungry schoolchildren. In a memoir written by his son, Badru Deen, the struggle to introduce doubles to the urban consumer in San Juan and Port of Spain is well documented. It would be many decades before Trinidad’s most celebrated street food found a place in the national palate. As a fast food, roti was almost non-existent in the towns like Port-of-Spain where it only began to appear in the 1940s during World War II. Roadside roti-stalls were set up with all the necessary utensils, including several coal-pots, churning out dhalpouri with fillings of curried beef (ironic and at once immensely popular), goat, and curried aloo. Chicken a more expensive option. Some rumshops owned by Indians served roti as well.

It is a long and stony road that Indo-Trinidadian cuisine has travelled to gain the universal acceptance it enjoys today.

The bedrock of Christian Conservative political power has been their membership to a loose coalition of racists, bigots, nativists, xenophobes and the highest authority they all serve - greed. They are and have always been the primary obstacle to a more just and equitable American society. As always, they will lose. It's an American tradition.

to all you health nuts out there. why don't you get yourself a new hobby? thanks to you everything is no fat, no sodium, gluten-free, caffeine free, sugar-free, and all-around just fucking tasteless.
if you want to eat food like this leave the food that normal people eat alone, and eat tofu.
better yet wage your little health war on drugs. that way you can have alcohol with less alcohol, cocaine with less cocaine, and drunk driving without the drunk driving.
leave the damn food alone. what next water without H2O?

In the two weeks since the Republican National Committee declared Donald Trump the party’s presumptive presidential nominee, Republican politicians have rallied around him.
They’re betting, in the words of RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, that “people just don’t care” about Trump’s treatment of women or his other flaws.
That’s a nice way of saying that the party itself doesn’t care, as long as Trump does well in the polls. But Trump’s flaws aren’t ordinary. He’s a race-baiting, authoritarian demagogue. Anyone who supports him is saying, in essence, that race baiting, authoritarianism, and war crimes are acceptable.

Trump’s collaborators, like the 20^th-century politicians who collaborated in segregation, internment, and McCarthyism, don’t want to face the full meaning of their complicity.
But they must. All of them—Priebus, Newt Gingrich, Gov. Chris Christie, and the long line of cowards and sycophants behind them—must be held to account. They must explain to the public, under scrutiny from the press, why they’re willing to suspend the fundamental values of the United States.

To facilitate this scrutiny, I’ve put together an indictment. It’s a summary of Trump’s record as a sectarian arsonist, a threat to the Constitution, and a war criminal in waiting. The indictment has 10 counts, each one specific to a transgression or a target group. These aren’t just character flaws. They’re insinuations, accusations, and threats that make Trump a menace to minorities and to the country as a whole. Here’s the list.

1. Banning Muslims. Last fall, Trump issued a series of escalating statements against Muslims. He spoke of tracking them through a database and closing mosques.
He claimed that thousands of Muslims in New Jersey had appeared on television celebrating 9/11, and he persisted in this libel despite his failure to produce evidence. Then, on Dec. 7, he called for a “complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”
This was not an off-the-cuff remark. It was a written statement, which Trump read aloud at a rally. Critics pointed out that such a ban would be unconstitutional and un-American, but Trump hasn’t withdrawn it. He views civil liberties and human rights as expendable.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
2. Sowing distrust of Christian minorities. Christie, Rudy Giuliani, and other Trump supporters dismiss the Muslim ban as an aberration. But it’s just one example of Trump’s ruthless use of fear. Ben Carson, for instance, is a member of the Seventh-day Adventist church, a Christian denomination. Last October, after two polls showed him surging past Trump in Iowa, Trump tried to scare evangelicals away from Carson. “Look, I don’t have to say it: I’m Presbyterian,” Trump told a crowd. “I’m Presbyterian. Boy, that’s down the middle of the road, folks, in all fairness. I mean, Seventh-day Adventist, I don’t know about. I just don’t know about.” Afterward, Trump’s spokeswoman said “the remark speaks for itself.”
When Trump was asked why he had brought up Carson’s faith, he feigned innocence: “I just said I don’t know about it. I said nothing about it. … I’d never say bad about any religion.” But in the video of Trump’s attack, you can hear his insinuating tone and his deliberate choice of words. This was a cynical appeal to prejudice.

Perhaps Sen. Orrin Hatch can explain to his constituents in Utah, many of whom belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, why he “totally endorses” a candidate who would target a Christian minority in this way.

3. Dog-whistling against Cuban Americans. By early December, Carson had faded. The new threat to Trump was Sen. Ted Cruz, who had passed Trump in Iowa polls.
So Trump did to Cruz what he had done to Carson. At a rally in Des Moines on Dec. 12, Trump tried to drive a wedge between Cruz and conservative Christians: “I do like Ted Cruz, but not a lot of evangelicals come out of Cuba, in all fairness. It’s true. Not a lot come out. But I like him nevertheless.” Again, the video of Trump’s remarks shows his cynical intent.

 Trump repeated the attack at a rally in Council Bluffs on Dec. 29:

Just remember this. Just remember this. You gotta remember, in all fairness: To the best of my knowledge, not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba. OK? Just remember that, OK? Just remember. In all fairness, here we are. Just remember that folks. When you’re casting your ballot, remember.

Perhaps Gov. Rick Scott of Florida can explain to his Cuban American constituents why he’s telling the GOP to “coalesce behind” the candidate who said these things.

4. Stereotyping Latinos. When Trump announced his candidacy in June 2015, he said that some undocumented immigrants from Mexico were drug mules or rapists, but others were “good people.”
Then he sank into pure tribalism. Illegal immigrants, legal immigrants, unfriendly Latinos—they were all suspect. On July 4, Trump retweeted an allegation that Jeb Bush “has to like the Mexican Illegals because of his wife.”
Trump didn’t bother to explain the logical inference that got him from Mrs. Bush, who immigrated legally from Mexico more than 40 years ago, to present-day “illegals.” When Trump was asked whether he regretted the retweet, he said no. “I don’t regret anything,” he told Anderson Cooper. “If my wife were from Mexico, I think I would have a soft spot for people from Mexico.”

Trump’s conflation of Latino ancestry with softness on “illegals” might have been forgiven as a one-time lapse. But then he repeated it. In February 2016, he told a crowd in Arkansas that he was still grappling with a lawsuit against Trump University “because there’s a hostility toward me by the judge—tremendous hostility, beyond belief. I believe he happens to be Spanish—which is fine. He’s Hispanic—which is fine … but we have a judge who’s very hostile.”
The next day, Trump was asked why he had brought up the judge’s Hispanic background. “The judge has been extremely hostile to me. I think it has to do with perhaps the fact that I’m very, very strong on the border,” said Trump. He offered no evidence of a connection between the lawsuit, the judge’s ethnicity, and the immigration debate. Instead, Trump simply repeated: “He is Hispanic, I believe. He is a very hostile judge to me. I said it loud and clear.”

Yes, loud and clear. Being Hispanic or Mexican American is, in Trump’s mind, sufficient grounds to accuse someone of judicial bias and softness on illegal immigration. Perhaps former Gov. Rick Perry of Texas can explain why he’s now praising Trump as a man who “loves his country” and pledging to “support him and help him and do what I can.”

Ralph Freso/Getty ImagesSupporters of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump look on during Fountain Park during a campaign rally in Arizona.
5. Practicing group blame against blacks. The worst anti-black statements attributed to Trump are 25-year-old hearsay. But in what he’s written more recently, you can see resentment. In December 2011, he tweeted about Kwanzaa, a nonreligious African-American holiday: “What a convenient mistake: @BarackObama issued a statement for Kwanza but failed to issue one for Christmas.” (The charge was false.)
In November 2014, during riots in Ferguson, Missouri, Trump tweeted: “Sadly, because president Obama has done such a poor job as president, you won’t see another black president for generations!” A few hours later, Trump complained, “President Obama has absolutely no control (or respect) over the African American community.” And in April 2015, after the death of Freddie Gray, Trump tweeted, “Our great African American President hasn’t exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are so happily and openly destroying Baltimore!”

It’s hard to believe that Trump’s ridicule of Kwanzaa, his explicitly racial use of “thugs” (you don’t need to guess that it’s code for black people—Trump draws the connection for you), and his perpetual quest to prove that Obama wasn’t born in the United States don’t reflect some underlying animus. Trump’s 2014 tweet also provides a rationale for voting against future black candidates. But even if you give Trump the benefit of the doubt on all these things, his comments convey an ugly assumption: that a black president, by virtue of his color, is responsible for the worst behavior of other black people.

Perhaps Priebus or some other RNC official can explain why that assumption, which no Republican leader would apply to a white president with regard to the behavior of white people, isn’t flatly racist.

6. Blaming sexual assault in the military on the integration of women. Trump has a record of cringeworthy quotes about women, ranging from the indirectly attributed (“treat ’em like s---”—which Trump denies he said) to the directly recorded (“fat pig,” “piece of a--”). In April 2015, Trump’s Twitter account recirculated this joke: “If Hillary Clinton can’t satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?” Trump’s spokesperson blamed the retweet on a staffer. But in August and again in January, Trump was at it again, retweeting several references to Megyn Kelly as a “bimbo.”

Sunday’s New York Times story, based on more than 50 interviews, suggests that Trump has trouble distinguishing between women as sex objects and women as colleagues. Even if you distrust these interviews and give Trump a pass for his crude language about some women, it’s hard to explain two tweets he posted on May 7, 2013. First he wrote: “26,000 unreported sexual assaults in the military-only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?” (The typo was his.) Nine minutes later, he added: “The Generals and top military brass never wanted a mixer but were forced to do it by very dumb politicians who wanted to be politically C!”
Trump later tried to spin his remarks as ambiguous, but his meaning was clear: When you integrate men and women, even in the military, there will be sexual assaults. Therefore, integration is dumb.

Perhaps Rep. Kevin McCarthy, the House majority leader, can explain to the women of America why he has enlisted as a convention delegate for the man who wrote these things.

Tom Pennington / Getty Images
7. Advocating torture. Many Republicans defend waterboarding on the grounds that it isn’t really torture and that it could save lives by extracting timely intelligence. Trump rejects these constraints. He told an audience in South Carolina that even if waterboarding were torture, it would be “absolutely fine,” and “we should go much stronger.” In Ohio, he said that even if waterboarding didn’t extract useful information, he would approve it and even harsher measures, because “if it doesn’t work, they deserve it anyway, for what they’re doing to us.” That’s a policy of torture, without limits, as sheer retribution.

Perhaps Gov. Mike Pence of Indiana, who presents himself as a faithful Christian, can explain why he’s promising to “campaign hard” for a man who preaches such cruelty.

8. Targeting civilians. On Dec. 2, Trump announced a new target in the war on terror: “With the terrorists, you have to take out their families.” In a follow-up interview, he was asked whether that meant deliberately killing family members. “They would suffer,” he said. “There has to be retribution.” On Dec. 6, he explained that because terrorists “want their families left alone,” these families could be targeted as a deterrent against future attacks. On Dec. 15, he elaborated: “I would be very, very firm with families. Frankly, that will make people think, because they may not care much about their lives, but they do care, believe it or not, about their families’ lives.” The next day, Bill O’Reilly asked Trump: “You’re not going to assassinate them, are you?” Trump replied, “I don’t know what I’d do.”

That’s at least five occasions on which Trump declared noncombatants legitimate targets, based purely on their value as hostages, and refused to limit what he would do to them. Since then, he hasn’t backed off. At a debate in March, he was asked what he would do if the military refused his orders to target terrorists’ families. “They’re not going to refuse me,” Trump replied. “If I say, ‘Do it,’ they’re going to do it.” In subsequent remarks, he said he would “have the law expanded” to make his orders legal.

Perhaps former Gov. Mike Huckabee, Sen. Tom Cotton, or Jerry Falwell Jr. can explain why they’re backing a candidate whose proposed use of noncombatants is legally akin to terrorism.

9. Rationalizing plunder. Trump says his strategy against ISIS is to “take their oil.” But as Jim Geraghty points out in National Review, Trump has preached oil confiscation since 2011—long before ISIS, in its present form, existed. Trump has said we should seize oil from Iraq, Libya, or any other oil-rich country we invade. It’s “not stealing,” Trump argues, since we’d just be “reimbursing ourselves.” The reimbursement starts with $1 million for the family of every American soldier killed in the target country, plus extra cash to “take care of other countries that helped us” in the war. The Geneva Conventions forbid such plunder, but Trump doesn’t care. He explicitly invokes the ancient rule of conquest: “To the victor belong the spoils.”

Perhaps Dick Cheney, who defends the Iraq war as a matter of national security and humanitarianism, can explain why he’s supporting a candidate who frankly advocates taking that country’s wealth.

Thomson ReutersAnti-Trump protester demonstrates outside RNC headquarters in Washington
10. Inciting violence. Trump has repeatedly encouraged violence at his rallies. On Nov. 22, he defended supporters who beat a protester at one of his events in Alabama. “Maybe he should have been roughed up,” Trump said of the protester. On Feb. 1, he told a crowd in Iowa: “If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. OK? Just knock the hell—I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.” On Feb. 22, when a demonstrator interrupted his speech in Las Vegas, Trump told the audience, “I’d like to punch him in the face.” Trump went on: “I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They’d be carried out on a stretcher, folks.” On March 13, after a Trump supporter sucker-punched a protester at a rally in North Carolina, Trump said he had “instructed my people to look into” paying the supporter’s legal fees.

Perhaps Gov. Nikki Haley, who purports to represent a new GOP more interested in listening and healing, can explain why she’s falling in line behind Trump.

There are lots of other reasons to vote against Trump. But these 10 counts are the core of the case against him.
They’re not about ignorance, error, or policy details. They’re about his contempt for principles. Trump has demonstrated that there’s no ethnic, racial, or religious group he wouldn’t target for political advantage. He doesn’t hate Mexican Americans, Cuban Americans, Seventh-day Adventists, or Muslims. They just happen to be the groups whose demonization, in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries, seemed likely to help him. If targeting Jews or Baptists had served his interests, he would have demonized them.

Trump has also demonstrated that there’s no line he won’t cross. He would promote vigilantism. He would bar people from this country based on religion—or, presumably, based on race or ethnicity, if terrorism came from a racial or ethnic group. He would torture people just because “they deserve it.” He would target the innocent to punish the guilty. He would subvert the Constitution and reduce the world’s greatest republic, through his mercenary foreign policy, to a medieval empire.

When Trump sees black people rioting, he doesn’t look for an underlying injustice. He sees an opportunity to mock “our great African American President” for failing to “control” them. When Trump hears about sexual violence in the military, he doesn’t ask why so many men treat their female colleagues this way, or why they get away with it. He asks why women were allowed in.

This is not a man who needs seasoning, pollsters, or get-to-know-you sessions on Capitol Hill. You can’t fix him with a TelePrompter, a super PAC, or a team of policy wonks. He’s not a project. He’s a menace. He’s unfit for the presidency of any country, let alone the world’s greatest military power. When the final indictment of Trump is written, the politicians who closed their eyes to his ruthlessness and kissed his ring will be recorded as co-conspirators. To make America great again—to keep America America—they must be voted out.

If you're lost you can look and you will find me
Time after time
If you fall I will catch you I'll be waiting
Time after time

The Bamboo Cathedral, Trinidad.

Located in Tucker Valley, Chaguaramas. It is a stretch of approximately 300 metres, along the Tracking Station Road where the bamboo stalks bend towards each other forming a canopy above the road. The arches formed above bear a resemblance to those found in cathedrals and has remained unchanged for 150 years.

Let's imagine... if you glimpsed the future, you were frightened by what you saw, what would you do with that information?
You would go to... the politicians, captains of industry?
And how would you convince them? Data? Facts? Good luck!
The only facts they won't challenge are the ones that keep the wheels greased and the dollars rolling in.
But what if... what if there was a way of skipping the middle man and putting the critical news directly into everyone's head?
The probability of wide-spread annihilation kept going up.
The only way to stop it was to show it. To scare people straight.
Because, what reasonable human being wouldn't be galvanized by the potential destruction of everything they've ever known or loved?
To save civilization, I would show its collapse.
But, how do you think this vision was received?
How do you think people responded to the prospect of imminent doom?
They gobbled it up like a chocolate eclair! They didn't fear their demise, they re-packaged it.
It could be enjoyed as video-games, as TV shows, books, movies, the entire world wholeheartedly embraced the apocalypse and sprinted towards it with gleeful abandon.
Meanwhile, your Earth was crumbling all around you.
You've got simultaneous epidemics of obesity and starvation.
Explain that one! Bees and butterflies start to disappear, the glaciers melt, algae blooms.
All around you the coal mine canaries are dropping dead and you won't take the hint!
In every moment there's the possibility of a better future, but you people won't believe it.
And because you won't believe it you won't do what is necessary to make it a reality.
So, you dwell on this terrible future.
You resign yourselves to it for one reason, because *that* future does not ask anything of you today.
So yes, we saw the iceberg and warned the Titanic. But you all just steered for it anyway, full steam ahead. Why?
 Because you want to sink! You gave up! That's not the monitor's fault.
That's yours.

One of the nice things about living in T&T, is that you can always find friends to help you build a little shack to call home.

Stop asking why they keep doing it and start asking why you keep allowing it.

Cussons, My Fair Lady

Lost Facades of the 1970s Anti-Walmart

By MessyNessy

11th May, 2016

12

Does anyone remember the American retail chain BEST Products? The last store disappeared in 1997 after forty years in business selling cheap home furnishings, consumer electronics, jewellery, housewares, toys from their catalog showrooms. Their retail concept might not have worked so well, but their architecture in the 1970s and early 80s made shopping trips to the strip mall a heck of a lot more entertaining…

(c) SITE

The owners of BEST Products, husband and wife Sydney and Frances Lewis were collectors of 20th century art. It was rumoured that they even traded store merchandise to grow their art collection, most of which is housed at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts today. In the mid-1970s, they contracted American architect James Wines, founder “SITE” (Sculpture in the Environment) to give nine of their retail stores an avant-garde make-over that would reflect their artistic sensibilities.

(c) SITE

BEST Parking Lot Building designed for locations in Houston, TX and Los Angeles, CA in 1976, a fusion of the asphalt parking lot with the retail building (c) SITE

As a result, they brought the avant-garde to the average American consumer and turned the strip mall into street art…

(c) SITE

Their Houston store, dubbed the ‘Indeterminate Facade’ with its crumbling bricks, is said to have appeared in more books on 20th-century architecture than photographs of any other modern structure. In 1987, Sydney and Frances Lewis were awarded the National Medal of Arts.

(c) SITE

(c) SITE

But then came Amazon and eBay and by 1996, BEST Products was de-listed from NASDAQ. With 169 Best stores, 11 Best jewellery stores across 23 states, and not to mention a nationwide mail-order service, the Lewis family filed for bankruptcy for the second time and closed their last store the following year.

Currently all but one of their buildings have been either demolished or altered to remove their distinctive features.

via Failed Architecture

The ‘Peeling Facade’ store lost its peeling wall design to a pawnshop ↑

The store in Sacramento which had an entryway that would slide open in the morning and slide shut at night, is now a very average-looking block of concrete operating as a Best Buy.

via Failed Architecture

The only store whose avant-garde design was saved was the “forest building” in Richmond, Virginia, which is now home to the West End Presbyterian Church.

After James Wines witnessed his buildings disappear one by one from the suburban landscape, the architect who still runs his studio today, remarked that, “In France, this would never happen.”

No, it's not a result of crime, it's a result of decades of policy. Reagan started it, Clinton knocked it out of the park. The United States has 5% of the world's population and 25% of it's prisoners. Prison Reform is one of the only issues which there is bi-partisan agreement. That agreement being: we've destroyed the lives of an entire generation, devastated impoverished communities and we have to fix it. We seriously f***ed up.

Got pulled over today..Cop came up and said he just worked a long day and ended his shift..He said if I had a good reason for speeding that he'd let me go..So I said Officer my wife left me 5 years ago for a cop, and I thought you was bringing her back..he said..have a good day Sir..

Once upon a time, a man and woman fell in love.
But such things cannot last.
For the heart is a treacherous thing.
And love, love is nothing more than a fairy tale.

love is a lie. It is a trick played by the cruel on the foolish and the weak.

When Chicago had more deaths than Iraq in a whole year..... AMERICAN TERRORISTS
When all the gangs in LA were continuously killing each other...... AMERICAN TERRORISTS
When all the school shootings and public bombings by an average white American were occurring...... AMERICAN TERRORISTS
want to see what terrorist look like ? It's anyone from anywhere who wages attacks on innocents.

Did You Know - Meaning of names of Towns/Villages in Trinidad (Part 2)
Anglais Road - Anglais is the French word for "English" and it is believed that this area in Cumana Toco is named after the English who attempted to create a settlement in the area in 1631, while Trinidad was still a Spanish colony.
Arena - An Amerindian word meaning "Place Of Sand"
Aripo - An Amerindian word for the Flat Baking Stone on which the Amerindians made bread.
Basse Terre - A French place name meaning "Loose or Poor Earth"
Bejuecal - An East Indian word meaning "Place Of The Bamboo Reeds"
Bonasse - This village in Cedros is believed to have been named after the French word meaning "Nice".
Bonne Aventure - A French name meaning "Good Adventure"
Brasso Seco - - A Spanish place name meaning "Dry Branch"
Buenos Ayres - A Spanish name meaning "Good Air"
Calcutta Settlement - Named after Calcutta in India
California - Although in other parts of the world, the name California is usually associated with areas of Spanish influence, it is believed that in Trinidad the name arose because of the Amerindian sub-tribe, the Kalipuna,who settled in that area.
Cap de Ville - An area in Point Fortin named after a French estate owner Monsieur Cap de Ville
Carapichaima - Formed from two Amerindian words. Chaima was the name of an Amerindian tribe while their settlement was called Carapa
Carenage - Named by the French because of the careening of boats in the bay to clean their bottoms
Chaguaramas - The Amerindians named the bay after the giant Palmiste trees that lined Chaguaramas bay and eventually the name was given to the entire peninsula.
Champs Fleurs - A French name meaning a "Field of Flowers"
Chandernagore - This place name has East Indian roots and is a corruption of the name Chander Nagar which mean "Place Lighted By The Moon"
Cocorite - Named after the Cocorite trees that were in the area
Cumana - This area shares its name with several other places in South America where the Spanish settled.
D'Abadie - A French place name after a French Creole estate owner
Dalley Village - Located in Santa Flora, this village was created in 1948 and named after Christopher Dalley who was the joint managing director of Trinidad Petroleum Development Company (TPD), the company that created the village
Embarcadere - A French word that means "Wharf or Shipping place"
Fondes Amandes - Located in St Anns this is French for "Almond Grove"
Galera - This peninsula in Toco is a Spanish word for a type of sailing ship called a Galley
Gasparee - Named after the Spanish settler Gaspar de Percin la Roque
Grande Riviere -A French place name meaning "Large River"
Guaico - An Amerindian word that was taken from the river that runs thru the area.
Guapo - A Spanish name after the river in the Point Fortin area which they called "Beautiful River "
Hindustan - This place name was given because of the East Indian inhabitants
Indian Walk - This area in Moruga is named after a trail that was used for centuries by the Guarahoon Indians who visited Trinidad, travelling in their dug-out canoes across the channel from Venezuela.
Kernahan Village - Named after an Irish family that lived in this area of Manzanilla
La Brea - A Spanish place name meaning Tar which came about because of the presence of the Pitch Lake. The word pitch comes from the Amerindian word "Piche".
La Fillette - A French place name meaning The "Little Girl."
La Lune - Originally a Spanish name, La Luna, meaning "The Moon" because of the beauty of the moonlight on the water in this area of Moruga.
La Tinta - A Spanish name meaning "Inky" for a bay on Chacachacare.
Las Cuevas - A Spanish name arising from "The Caves" in the area
Los Iros - A Spanish name meaning "The Rocks"
Madras Settlement - Named after Madras in India
Majuba Cross Road - An African place name for an area in Diego Martin
Mandingo Road - Mandingo Road got its name from the descendants of the Mandingo tribe of West Africa who settled in this area of Moruga
Marabella - A Spanish name meaning "Good Sea"
Matelot - Derived from a French name apparently related to the word Sailor Or Boatman
Matilda Junction - This intersection on the Moruga Road was named after Ma Matilda who owned land adjoining the Fair Field and New Fancy Estates and allowed passage through her land, thus reducing the journey of persons travelling from Moruga to Princes Town.
Mayaro - An Amerindian place name after the "Maya Plant"
Morne Bleu - A French name meaning "Blue Mountain"
Mucurapo - An Amerindian place name that according to Anthony De Verteuil was originally Camocorabo and the Spanish changed to Cumucurape and meant "The Place of the Silk Cotton Tree "
Oropouche - An Amerindian word
Palo Seco - A Spanish name meaning "Dry Stick"
Penal - An English place name because of the "Penal Colony" that was once in the area
Petit Café - This area in Moruga is within the section known as Indian Walk. It is so named because women did brisk trade selling edibles to the travellers at this location.
Point Gourd - This name for an area in Chaguaramas is derived from the original Spanish name of Punta Gorda (Fat Point) which the French called Pointe Gourde and the English changed to Point Gourd.
Point Radix - Under the Cedula of Population of 1783, a French immigrant with the surname Radix was granted all of the northern headland of Mayaro Bay. Over time the headland came to be called Point Radix.
Rancho Quemado- A Spanish name meaning "Burnt Land"
Rio Claro - A Spanish name meaning "Clear River"
Rustville - This area is Mayaro is named after Randolph Rust, a Trinidad oil pioneer
Salybia - In the early part of Trinidad history, the Amerindian tribe, the Kalinago had a settlement in this area. The name, Salybia, is thought to be derived from Chaleibe, their name for Trinidad.
San Juan - A Spanish name given by Governor Chacon after St John the Baptist
Sangre Chiquito - A Spanish name meaning "Little Blood"
Sans Souci - A French name meaning "Without Care"
Sierra Leone Road - An African name because many freed slaves from Sierra Leone lived in this area of Diego Martin.
Tabaquite - An Amerindian name
Tacarigua - An Amerindian place name
Tamana - The name Tamana is derived from the name of an Amerindian Tribe, the Tamanaco, who originally lived in that area.
Tompire - An Amerindian place name for this area on the outskirts of Cumana
Tortuga - A name given by the Spanish settlers because of the many land "Tortoises" that were found in the area
Tumpuna - An Amerindian place name
Tunapuna - An Amerindian place name derived from the words "Tona" meaning water and "Pona" mean on.
Turure - An Amerindian place name
Valencia - A modification of a Spanish place name arising from a planter, Valentia, who had an estate in the area
Vessigny - A French name as a result of the Corsican settler Simon Paul Vessiny who opened a sugar estate in the area
Vistabella - A Spanish name meaning "Good View"
Waterloo - This is a Flemish place name

THE GOSPEL OF BARNABAS

By Samuel Green

I can remember well one of my first conversations with a Muslim. One of the first things he did was to accuse the Church of suppressing the Gospel of Barnabas. He said that if I read this Gospel I would see that Jesus foretold the coming of Muhammad. (Maybe you have heard or said something like this yourself?) I had never heard of the Gospel of Barnabas so I sat there silently. However I wanted to know whether or not the Gospel of Barnabas was true so a bought a copy from a Muslim bookshop and began to study it. The following article is a summary of my results. I hope that you find it helpful.
Contents

1. The Gospel of Barnabas and the Epistle of Barnabas
2. The Gospel of Barnabas and the 1st Century A.D.
3. The Gospel of Barnabas and Islam
4. The Gospel of Barnabas and the 14th Century A.D.
5. When was the Gospel of Barnabas Written?
6. The Muslim Evidence for the Antiquity of the Gospel of Barnabas
7. Why was the Gospel of Barnabas Written?
8. Who wrote the Gospel of Barnabas?
9. Conclusion

1. The Gospel of Barnabas and the Epistle of Barnabas
There are two books which carry the name, Barnabas. There is the Gospel of Barnabas and the Epistle of Barnabas. These are two very different books. The Gospel of Barnabas is the book promoted by Muslims today, while the Epistle of Barnabas is an ancient Christian book which teaches about the lordship, death and resurrection of Jesus. The Epistle of Barnabas is freely available and thoroughly Christian. The distinction between these two books needs to be understood because sometimes people confuse them; they think that a reference to the Epistle of Barnabas is a reference to the Gospel of Barnabas, but it is not. They are two completely different books.
2. The Gospel of Barnabas and the 1st Century A.D.
The Gospel of Barnabas is promoted by Muslims as an original Gospel written by the man named Barnabas[1] who it is claimed was a disciple of Jesus (p. 2). Thus they claim it was written by a Jewish man in the 1st century A.D. who travelled with Jesus. If Barnabas really is the author then it is reasonable to expect that he would be familiar with the basic facts of Jewish life at this time. We will now consider this book to see if he does.
a/ Christ. The word (Christ) is the Greek translation for the Hebrew word (Messiah). Both these words when translated into English mean the Anointed One or the Chosen One. This word is not an obscure or rarely used word, on the contrary it is one of the most famous words in the Jewish and Christian religions. There is no doubt that a religious Jew like Barnabas would have been very familiar with this word.
At the very start of the Gospel of Barnabas Jesus is called the Christ: God has during these past days visited us by his prophet Jesus Christ (p.2). However, throughout the book Jesus denies being the Messiah: Jesus confessed and said the truth, "I am not the Messiah" (chap. 42). How can Jesus be the Christ and deny being the Messiah when both words mean exactly the same thing? Whoever wrote this book did not know the Greek meaning of the word Christ is Messiah. Barnabas was a Hebrew who lived on the island of Cyprus, a Greek-speaking island, and travelled around the 1st century Greek-speaking world![2] He was Hebrew and knew Greek and could not have made this mistake with such a famous word.
b/ The Rulers of the 1st Century A.D. In chapter 3 we are told that Herod and Pilate both ruled in Judea at the time of Jesus' birth: There reigned at that time in Judaea Herod, by decree of Caesar Augustus, and Pilate was governor. This is historically wrong for Herod and Pilate never ruled Judea at the same time. Herod ruled Judea alone from 37-4 B.C., while Pilate ruled thirty years later from 26-36 A.D.[3] The real Barnabas lived during the rule of Pilate, so if he really was the writer of this book, how could he make such a simple mistake?
c/ Geography. In chapters 20-21 of this book we are told about Jesus sailing to Nazareth and being welcomed by the seamen of that town. He then leaves Nazareth and goes up to Capernaum:

Jesus went to the sea of Galilee, and having embarked in a ship sailed to his city of Nazareth. ... Having arrived at the city of Nazareth the seamen spread through the city all that Jesus wrought (done) ... (then) Jesus went up to Capernaum (chaps. 20-21).

There is a major error in this account. Nazareth was not a fishing village, in fact it was about 14 km from the sea of Galilee and situated in the hills of a mountain range![4] Capernaum was the fishing village that Jesus arrived at with his disciples, not Nazareth.[5] Nazareth and Capernaum were two towns which Jesus often visited with his disciples[6] therefore any disciple of Jesus would know these towns well. However the author of this book does not! This casts doubt over the claim that he was a disciple of Jesus. It also make us doubt that he ever lived in that region.
Conclusion: the Gospel of Barnabas makes basic mistakes about the language, history and geography of the Jewish world in the 1st century A.D. These types of mistakes cast doubt over the claim that it was written by Barnabas in the 1st century.
3. The Gospel of Barnabas and Islam
The Gospel of Barnabas overwhelmingly supports the teaching of Islam. However, there are a few rare occasions when it does not.
a/ The Messiah. The Qur'an teaches that Jesus is the Messiah, and it never teaches that Muhammad is the Messiah:

Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary (Qur'an 3:45, Pickthall).

However, the Gospel of Barnabas denies that Jesus is the Messiah, and instead says Muhammad is the Messiah:

Jesus confessed and said the truth, "I am not the Messiah". (chap. 42). Then said the priest: "How shall the Messiah be called?" ... (Jesus answered) "Muhammed is his blessed name" (chap. 97).

Both these ideas contradict the Qur'an.
b/ Wives. Marriage in the Qur'an binds a woman to one man but it does not bind a man to one woman. Muslim men are free to have several wives (Qur'an 4:3) and an unlimited number of female servants (Qur'an 70:30). However, the Gospel of Barnabas teaches the Biblical idea of marriage, that marriage binds a man and a woman equally together:

Let a man content himself therefore with the wife whom his creator has given him, and let him forget every other woman (chap. 115).

c/ The Birth of Jesus. The Qur'an clearly teaches that Mary had pain when she gave birth to Jesus:

(A)nd she withdrew with him to a far place. And the pangs of childbirth drove her unto the trunk of the palm tree. (Qur'an 19:22-23, Pickthall)

However, the Gospel of Barnabas teaches the opposite: The virgin was surrounded by a light exceeding bright, and brought forth her son without pain (chap. 3).
d/ The Heavens. The Qur'an teaches that there are seven heavens: The seven heavens and the earth praise Him (Qur'an 17:44, Pickthall). However the Gospel of Barnabas teaches that there are nine heavens:

Verily I say unto thee that the heavens are nine, among which are set the planets, that are distant one from another five hundred years journey for a man (chap. 178).

4. The Gospel of Barnabas and the 14th Century A.D.
There is good evidence that links this Gospel of Barnabas to the 14th century A.D.
a/ The Jubilee Year. The Jubilee year is a celebration commanded by God in the Torah. It was to be observed every fifty years:

Consecrate the fiftieth year and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a jubilee for you; each one of you is to return to his family property and each to his own clan. The fiftieth year shall be a jubilee for you (Leviticus 25:10-11, NIV).

In the year 1300 A.D. Pope Boniface VIII falsely proclaimed that the Jubilee should be celebrated by Christians every 100 years instead of 50 years. However the next Pope, Clement VI, changed it back to every 50 years, and so it was celebrated in 1350 A.D.[7] Therefore, in the church's history there is a 50-year period when the Jubilee was thought by many to be every 100 years. The author of the Gospel of Barnabas has unknowingly accepted the Pope's false decree as true and included it in his book. For in the Gospel of Barnabas these words are put on Jesus' lips:

(I)nsomuch that the year of Jubilee, which now comes every 100 years, shall by the Messiah be reduced to every year in every place (chap. 82).

Is there any other evidence that could date this book to the 14th century? There is.
b/ Dante's Heaven. Dante was a famous and popular poet of the 14th and later centuries. Among Dante's work is a book of poetry called, The Divine Comedy.[8] In this book he describes ascending through the heavens to reach paradise. Dante describes ascending through nine heavens, with paradise being the 10th.
The author of the Gospel of Barnabas describes, in the same way as Dante, nine heavens before paradise:

Paradise is so great that no man can measure it. Verily I say unto thee that the heavens are nine, among which are set the planets, that are distant one from another five hundred years journey for a man ... and Verily I say unto thee that paradise is greater than all the earth and heavens together (chap. 178).

It appears that the author of the Gospel of Barnabas could have taken the idea of the nine heavens from reading Dante.
c/ The Manuscript Evidence. The manuscript evidence for this book is from after the 14th century. The oldest copies are written in Italian and Spanish and these are dated from the 15th century A.D. or later.[9]
5. When was the Gospel of Barnabas Written?
So far we have seen that the author of the Gospel of Barnabas was not familiar with the language, history or geography of the time of Jesus. He also has several 14th century ideas in his book and the manuscript evidence dates from the 15th century onwards. It therefore is reasonable to conclude that the Gospel of Barnabas was composed in the 14th century A.D. and not in the 1st century by a disciple of Jesus. Is this a reasonable conclusion? It seems so because even some Islamic scholars agree with this dating:

As regards the "Gospel of Barnabas" itself, there is no question that it is a medieval forgery ... It contains anachronisms which can date only from the Middle Ages and not before, and shows a garbled comprehension of Islamic doctrines, calling the Prophet the "Messiah", which Islam does not claim for him. Besides it farcical notion of sacred history, stylistically it is a mediocre parody of the Gospels, as the writings of Baha Allah are of the Koran. (Cyril Glassé, The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989, p. 65)

(The medieval period is from the 8th to the middle of the 15th century A.D.)
6. The Muslim Evidence for the Antiquity of the Gospel of Barnabas
There are no copies of the Gospel of Barnabas among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The contents of the Dead Sea Scrolls have been public knowledge for many years and you can learn for yourself what scrolls were discovered by going to any major library and reading a book on the subject. What is common knowledge is that no part of the Gospel of Barnabas has been found among these scrolls. This is an important fact to know because some Muslims have put pictures of the Dead Sea Scrolls on the cover of their editions of the Gospel of Barnabas. This is an attempt to deceive people into thinking that the Gospel of Barnabas in an ancient document. The book shown to the right is an example of this deceitful behaviour.
In many modern editions of the Gospel of Barnabas there is an introduction or appendix entitled, "How the Gospel of Barnabas Survived".[10] This is a shortened version of what was written by Muhammad `Ata ur-Rahim in his book, Jesus a Prophet of Islam.[11] In this he seeks to demonstrate the antiquity of the Gospel of Barnabas. For many people what Rahim has written has convinced them of the antiquity of the Gospel of Barnabas. For this reason I will now examine in detail the evidence he gives.
Rahim writes:

The Gospel of Barnabas was accepted as a Canonical Gospel in the Churches of Alexandria up until till 325 A.D. (Rahim, p. 41)

Rahim makes this claim but you will notice he provides no evidence for it. I am not aware of any evidence, and until some evidence is provided this claim is baseless.
Rahim continues:

It is known that it (the Gospel of Barnabas) was being circulated in the first and second centuries after the birth of Jesus from the writings of Iranaeus (130-200 A.D.), who wrote in support of the Divine Unity. He opposed Paul whom he accused of being responsible for the assilation of the pagan Roman religion and Platonic philosophy into the original teaching of Jesus. He quoted extensively from the Gospel of Barnabas in support of his views. (Rahim, p. 41)

Again we see Rahim make a claim but not provide any evidence for it. He claims that the early church theologian, Irenaeus, quoted the gospel of Barnabas as he opposed the Apostle Paul. When this claim is investigated it is found to be false. The writings of Irenaeus are readily available[12] and I have examined them and he never quotes the Gospel of Barnabas. This is why Rahim cannot refer to where in Irenaeus' work he quotes the Gospel of Barnabas. Nor is Irenaeus opposed to the Apostle Paul as Rahim claims. In fact he endorsed the Apostle Paul and quotes Paul's writings as authoritative scripture. Consider what Irenaeus writes:

(God) at first narrated the formation of the world in these words: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth"(Genesis 1:1) and all other things in succession; but neither gods nor angels [had any share in the work]. Now, that this God is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Paul the apostle also has declared, [saying,] "There is one God, the Father, who is above all, and through all things, and in us all" (Ephesian 4:6). I have indeed proved already that there is only one God; but I shall further demonstrate this from the apostles themselves, and from the discourses of the Lord (Jesus). (Irenaeus Against Heresies)[13]

Rahim continues:

In 325 A.D., the famous Council of Nicea was held. The doctrine of the Trinity was declared to be the official doctrine of the Pauline Church, and one of the consequences of this decision was that out of the three hundred or so Gospels exant at the time, four were chosen as the official Gospels of the Church. The remaining Gospels, including the Gospel of Barnabas, were ordered to be destroyed completely. It was also decided that all Gospels written in Hebrew should be destroyed. An edict was issued stating that anyone found in possession of an unauthorised Gospel would be put to death. (Rahim, p. 42)

This claim is total nonsense. The edicts/canons from the Council of Nicaea are freely available for you to read and I encourage you to do so.[14] There were twenty edicts issued at the Council of Nicaea. None of them were about selecting or rejecting any Gospels. Nor were there any edicts about executing a person for being "in possession of an unauthorised Gospel". Rahim's scholarship is very poor indeed; he seems to be inventing his own evidence.
Rahim continues:

In fact, it is known that the Pope secured a copy of the Gospel of Barnabas in 383 A.D., and kept it in his private library. (Rahim, p. 42)

Again Rahim provides no evidence for this serious claim. It is very poor scholarship to make such claims and provide no evidence. I am not aware of any evidence, and until some is provided this claim is baseless.
Rahim continues:

In the fourth year of the Emperor Zeno's rule in 478 A.D., the remains of Barnabas were discovered, and a copy of the Gospel of Barnabas, written in his own hand, was found on his breast. This is recorded in the Acta Sanctorum, Boland Junii, Tome II, pages 422-450, published in Antwerp in 1698. (Rahim, p. 43)

When this claim is investigated it is found to be false. The Acta Sanctorum (Acts of the Saints) is available in major libraries and the internet.[15] I have read the references that Rahim refers to and they do not say what he claims. What the Acta Sanctorum actually says is:

The relics of Barnabas the Apostle were found in Cyprus under a cherry tree, having upon his breast the Gospel of St. Matthew copied by Barnabas’ own hand. (Acta Sanctorum, Jun II, p. 422.)[16]

Again we see Rahim's poor scholarship. The story of Barnabas says he was found with the Gospel of Matthew not the Gospel of Barnabas.
In the version of Rahim's work that is found in the introduction section of the Gospel of Barnabas we read a ridiculous claim.

The famous Vulgate Bible appears to be based on this Gospel (of Barnabas). (p. xv)

This is total nonsense and again lacks any evidence. The Vulgate Bible is a very famous early translation of the Bible into Latin. It was done by Jerome in the 4th century A.D., and has been the standard Bible used by the Roman Catholic church. It does not contain the Gospel of Barnabas nor was it based on the Gospel of Barnabas. Jerome based his translation on the books of the Old and New Testaments which he read in the original languages.[17]
Next, Rahim considers three official church documents. These documents are catalogues of which writings are regarded as scripture and which writings are not. Rahim writes:

In the Glasian (sic) Decree of 496 A.D., the Evangelium Barnabe is included in the list of forbidden books. ...
Barnabas is also mentioned in the Stichometry of Nicephorus as follows:

Serial No. 3, Epistle of Barnabas ... Lines 1, 300.

and again in the list of Sixty Books as follows:

Serial No. 17. Travels and teaching of the Apostles.
Serial No. 18. Epistle of Barnabas.
Serial No. 24. Gospel According to Barnabas.

(Rahim, pp. 42-43)

In this case Rahim accurately represents the sources. Barnabas is mentioned in them, and it is recorded that there was a Gospel and an epistle (letter) in this name. However, evidence is required to establish that the Gospel of Barnabas mentioned in these documents is the same book that Muslims promote today. There are in fact several reasons why we cannot just assume they are the same book.
First, as we have seen already, there is good evidence that the modern Gospel of Barnabas was composed in the 14th century A.D., a date even some Islamic scholars accept.
Second, there is the related evidence from the Epistle of Barnabas. The Epistle of Barnabas appears in these lists along with the Gospel of Barnabas. They are both attributed to Barnabas, and are recorded in the same lists at the same time. For these reasons the Epistle of Barnabas provides us with the best available evidence as to the character of the Gospel of Barnabas mentioned in the same lists. In 1859, a 4th century A.D. copy of the Epistle of Barnabas was discovered.[18] I have provided the text of this epistle for you to read.[19]
So what does the Epistle of Barnabas show? If it confirms the teaching of the Gospel of Barnabas that Muslims promote, then this would provide good evidence that this book is indeed the same Gospel mentioned in these lists. But it doesn't. The Epistle of Barnabas is a thoroughly Christian document, though it is not to be regarded as scripture. It teaches Jesus' sacrificial death, resurrection and lordship.

For to this end the Lord endured to deliver up His flesh to corruption, that we might be sanctified through the remission of sins, which is effected by His blood of sprinkling. (Epistle of Barnabas, ch. 5)

Therefore, the related evidence from the Epistle of Barnabas suggests that the Gospel of Barnabas mentioned in these lists was still a Christian document which taught the death, resurrection and lordship of Jesus. It is therefore a different book to the one that Muslims are promoting.
Next, Rahim appeals to an old Greek fragment of text:

There is a solitary fragment of a Greek version of the Gospel of Barnabas to be found in a museum in Athens, which is all that remains of a copy which was burnt:
(Rahim, p. 43)

The problem with this evidence is that the text on this fragment is not the text of the Gospel of Barnabas! Here is a translation of the text from the fragment.

Barnabas the Apostle said that in evil contests the victor is more wretched because he departs with more of the sin.[20]

This sentence bears no resemblance to any sentence in the Gospel of Barnabas. The fragment is from a different book altogether. Therefore this fragment does not provide any evidence for the antiquity of the Gospel of Barnabas. Again Rahim's scholarship is found false. Rahin is making mischief.
Conclusion. There is no evidence that the Gospel of Barnabas that Muslims promote is an ancient document. Therefore the 14th century date for its composition remains valid.
7. Why was the Gospel of Barnabas Written?
Why would somebody in the 14th century A.D. write this book and pretend that it was written by Barnabas in the 1st century? What could be their motive for doing this? In order to answer this question we need to consider what the author was trying to achieve with his book; what was he trying to teach? If we can understand what he was trying to teach and convince people then we should be able to understand why he wrote the book. So what does the Gospel of Barnabas teach?
The main topic of the Gospel of Barnabas is the life of Jesus. It retells most of the events of Jesus' life as recorded in the Biblical Gospels, but at some points there are changes and additions to these stories. These changes are not random, instead they follow a clear pattern. They are intentional changes to make the Biblical accounts conform to the teaching of the Qur'an. Consider the following changes:
a/ John, Jesus and Muhammad. In the Bible we read how John the Baptist announced the coming of Jesus:

Now this was John's testimony when the Jews of Jerusalem sent priests and Levites to ask him who he was. He did not fail to confess, but confessed freely, "I am not the Christ. " They asked him, "Then who are you? Are you Elijah?" He said, "I am not." "Are you the Prophet?" He answered, "No." Finally they said, "Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?" John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, "I am the voice of one calling in the desert, `Make straight the way for the Lord.'" ... The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:19-29, NIV)

In the Gospel of Barnabas we see how this account has been transformed to make Jesus predict the coming of Muhammad, as the Qur'an says Jesus did (Qur'an 7:157, 61:6).

(T)hey saw many who came to find him, for the chiefs of the priests took counsel among themselves to catch him in his talk. Wherefore they sent the Levites and some of the scribes to question him, saying: "Who are you?" Jesus confessed, and said the truth: "I am not the Messiah." They said: "Are you Elijah or Jeremiah, or any of the ancient prophets?" Jesus answered: "No." Then said they: "Who are you? Say, in order that we may give testimony to those who sent us." Then Jesus said: "I am a voice that cries through all Judea, and cries: "Prepare you the way for the messenger of the Lord," even as it is written in Esaias;." (chap. 42)
Then said the Priest: "How shall the Messiah be called ..." Jesus answered: "The name of the Messiah is admirable ... Mohammed is his blessed name (chap. 97).

b/ The Son of God. In the Bible the title son of God is a title given to the nation of Israel (Exodus 4:21-23) and also to all of her kings (2 Samuel 7:11-14, Psalm 2). Jesus was the promised king of Israel, the Christ, the Messiah, and so he is also given this title. In the Bible we see the apostle Peter identify Jesus as this King:

When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?" They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets." "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. (Matthew 16:13-17, NIV)

Contrary to the Bible the Qur'an teaches that Jesus is not the son of God (Qur'an 9:30). In the Gospel of Barnabas we see that its author has altered Peter's confession to conform with what the Qur'an says:

(Jesus) asked his disciples, saying: "What do men say of me?" They said: "Some say that thou art Elijah, others Jeremiah, and others one of the old prophets." Jesus answered, "And Ye; what say ye that I am?" Peter answered: "Thou art Christ, son of God." Then was Jesus angry, and with anger rebuked him saying: "Begone and depart from me" (chap. 70)

c/ The Death of Jesus. The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus was crucified and died.

Then he (Pilate) released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified. ... As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross. ... When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by casting lots. ... And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. (Matthew 27:26-50, NIV)

Contrary to the Bible, the Qur'an teaches that Jesus was not crucified and did not die on the cross (Qur'an 4:156-157). Again, in the Gospel of Barnabas we see that its author has altered Jesus' crucifixion to conform with what the Qur'an says:

God acted wonderfully, insomuch that Judas was so changed in speech and in face to be like Jesus. The soldiers took Judas and bound him ... So they led him to Mount Calvary, where they used to hang malefactors, and there they crucified him (chap. 216-217).

These examples show how the author of the Gospel of Barnabas has systematically rewritten the Biblical Gospel to make it agree with the Qur'an. Only on rare occasions does he make an error (see section 2). When we consider these changes we can understand what the author was trying to achieve. He was rewriting the Gospel so that it now agreed with the Qur'an; he was trying to convince people that Jesus taught what the Qur'an teaches.
Rewriting the Gospel to make it agree with the Qur'an has happened elsewhere. In 1979 the Muslim scholar Ahmad Shafaat rewrote the Biblical Gospel to make it Islamic. His book is called the The Gospel According to Islam.
Ahmad Shafaat says about his Gospel:

The book before you is a Gospel. It is written in the light of the revelation of God made to the prophet Muhammad. ... This outline is supplemented in this book by some background material (derived mostly from the New Testament and sometimes transformed accordingly to the Qur’anic revelation) to form a Gospel of approximately the size of Mark. ... As we said earlier, this book is offered as a new Gospel, a Muslim equivalent of, and alternative to, the existing Gospels. (Ahmad Shafaat, The Gospel According to Islam, New York: Vantage Press, 1979, pp. 1-2)

Ahmad Shafaat has explained very clearly what he has done. He has rewritten the Biblical Gospel by transforming it according the Qur'an. He calls his new book "a Gospel"; it is written with chapters and verses, and he offers it as an alternative to the Biblical Gospels.
Reading the Gospel According to Islam is just like reading the Gospel of Barnabas. Just as the author of the Gospel of Barnabas changes Biblical accounts to make them agree with the Qur'an so too does the Gospel According to Islam. Consider how the Gospel According to Islam rewrites the crucifixion of Jesus so that it agrees with the Qur'an:

And Pilate sent an order, that Jesus Barabbas be released. But the officers who received the order did make an error and released Jesus of Nazareth, and crucified Jesus Barabbas. And when he was released he departed for Galilee, and he met two travellers who were going to Emmaus ... And Jesus answering said unto them, Lo, Jesus of Nazareth is not crucified nor dead, but he liveth. (26:21-30, The Gospel According to Islam)

And just as throughout the Gospel of Barnabas Jesus is made to predict the coming of another prophet so too in the Gospel According to Islam Jesus is made to predict another prophet:

He hath appointed me (Jesus) as a sign for men and a mercy from Him. This was a matter decreed ... That I may bring to the world the good news of a messenger who will come after me as light and mercy to all the nations; his name shall be called Admirable. (2:21-3:1, The Gospel According to Islam)
And then there shall arise the Man of perfection with great power and glory; and he will build a new house of prayer ... Peter therefore asked Jesus, Teacher, tell us what is that blessed named. And Jesus answering said, His name shall be Admirable, Counsellor, as it was prophesied by Esias. (23:15-20, The Gospel According to Islam)

There are still more examples of where Muslim leaders have rewritten books to make them agree with Islam. In August 2006 Turkish Muslim leaders rewrote 100 famous stories for publication in Turkey.

Pinocchio, Tom Sawyer and other characters have been converted to Islam in new versions of 100 classic stories on the Turkish school curriculum. ... Pollyanna, seen by some as the embodiment of Christian forgiveness, (now) says that she believes in the end of the world as predicted in the Koran. (Malcolm Moore, The Daily Telegraph (UK), 31/08/2006)[21]

It could even be argued that Muslims have taken their inspiration for rewriting these books from Muhammad himself, for in the Qur'an we see that Muhammad transforms the stories he heard about Jesus. Consider this story about Jesus from Muhammad's time.

Jesus spoke, and, indeed, when He was lying in His cradle said to Mary His mother: I am Jesus, the Son of God, the Logos, whom thou hast brought forth, as the Angel Gabriel announced to thee; and my Father has sent me for the salvation of the world. (Arabic Gospel of the Infancy of the Saviour)[22]

Muhammad transforms this story so that Jesus says he is a Muslim, only a prophet, and is not the son of God:

Mary pointed to the child then; but they said, "How shall we speak to one who is still in the cradle, a little child?" He (Jesus) said, "Lo, I am God's servant; God has given me the Book, and made me a Prophet. Blessed He has made me, wherever I may be; and He has enjoined me to pray, and to give the alms, so long as I live, ... " That is Jesus, son of Mary, in word of truth, concerning which they are doubting. It is not for God to take a son unto Him. (Qur'an 19:31-35, Arberry)

Conclusion. The authors of the Gospel of Barnabas and the Gospel According to Islam have both rewritten the Biblical Gospel to make it agree with the Qur'an. The aim of these books is to try to convince people that Jesus was a Muslim and predicted the coming of Muhammad.
8. Who wrote the Gospel of Barnabas?
The content of the Gospel of Barnabas provides us with the best evidence for who wrote it. As we have seen the content, method, and style of this book are highly similar to the Gospel According to Islam written by Ahmad Shafaat. Since we know that Ahmad Shafaat is a Muslim, it is most likely that the author of the Gospel of Barnabas was also a Muslim who rewrote the Gospel in a similar way to Ahmad Shafaat. Who else but a Muslim would want to make the Gospel agree with Islam?
Some Muslims have said to me that since the Gospel of Barnabas has some minor teaching contrary to the Qur'an (section 2) this proves it was not written by a Muslim for a Muslim would not make these kinds of mistakes. However, just because an author makes a few minor mistakes about Islam does not mean he is not a Muslim. Islamic authors today still make minor errors in their writings. This does not mean they are not Muslims, it just means they are learning, as we all are. It is the same with the author of the Gospel of Barnabas. Thus it is still most likely that the author of the Gospel of Barnabas was a Muslim.
9. Conclusion
The Gospel of Barnabas is not an authentic Gospel of Jesus. The author does not understand the language, history or geography of the 1st century A.D., and there is no ancient evidence for the book. The internal evidence of the book suggests it was written in the 14th century, and there are Muslim scholars who agree with this dating. The book is a rewrite of the Biblical Gospel most likely by a Muslim who wanted to portray Jesus as a Muslim who taught Islam and predicted the coming of Muhammad. This type of rewriting has been done elsewhere by Muslims in the Gospel According to Islam. It is disgraceful for Islamic leaders to continue to publish, promote and distribute this false Scripture. It is disgraceful for them to create this deliberate confusion and make mischief.