JC wasn't crucified, says 1500-year-old bible

[Confused Ape]

The only change this will make is more fuel.for Muslim apologists

This book won't make any changes to anything because the Gospel of Barnabas has been known about for years.

Gospel of Barnabas

The Gospel of Barnabas is a book depicting the life of Jesus, and claiming to be by Jesus' disciple Barnabas, who in this work is one of the twelve apostles. Two manuscripts are known to have existed, both dated to the late 16th century and written respectively in Italian and in Spanish—although the Spanish manuscript is now lost, its text surviving only in a partial 18th-century transcript.

This Gospel is considered by the majority of academics, including Christians and some Muslims (such as Abbas el-Akkad) to be late and pseudepigraphical;[1] however, some academics suggest that it may contain some remnants of an earlier apocryphal work (perhaps Gnostic,[2] Ebionite[3] or Diatessaronic[4]), redacted to bring it more in line with Islamic doctrine. Some Muslims consider the surviving versions as transmitting a suppressed apostolic original. Some Islamic organizations cite it in support of the Islamic view of Jesus.

After a bit of research I discovered that this particular copy isn't 1500 years old - there's an inscription which says it was written in the year 1500.

All the reports about it are from 2012 and nothing's been heard about it since. This indicates that it's only a few decades older than the manuscripts which scholars, including Muslims, already knew about.