Lost Letters of Paul, The

Full title: The Lost Letters of Paul the Apostle 
Author: Paul the Apostle
Published: Manuscript before 65 CE, Hypatia Publishing 2023 
Format: Dead tree e-book
Content: Five lost letters of Paul the Apostle. For some reason never considered for the New Testament canon or never distributed.
*Letter to the Church in Antioch -- This follows Paul's usual format of short declarative Greek. The theology within is consistent with the known true writings of Paul.
*Letter to the Church of Jerusalem -- This one is contentious. It lays out the theological difference between Paul and Peter and it is plain they did not see eye to eye on most things. The relationship between Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles is extensively and messily laid out. It is clear why it did not make the canon. There is no affirmation here. It's a messy in house argument. 
*Letter to Nero -- Highly unexpected, but not. This is written in Latin not the usual Greek. Paul lays out his case to Nero himself. It is the most concise statement of Paul's doctrine of any of the Epistles as he is speaking to a Pagan with no knowledge of his point of view and for the official record. 
*Letter to Pericles & Homer in Athens -- There is little theology here. It is dealing with an inter-church dispute between two presbyters. The general tone is to stop being dicks and remember Christ. It is chiding to both parties. Again the reason it was not in the canon is plain.
*The Revelation of Christ -- Paul lays it out. His theology the reasons and his beliefs. The book is notable for what is not within. No trinity, no Jesus as god, No order of how to run a church. The view of women is highly egalitarian. This does not match the late 1st-2nd century proto-orthodox theology.
==Reaction==
The Evangelical press jumped to comment and sat back down. This is very much the Paul of the accepted genuine letters and NOT the Paul of Timothy. These are not canon books with different text, but extra canon. They also say some comforting and uncomfortable things. 
Paul is Paul, but it makes very plain that the Church was not of one accord and the teachings of the first century were not the teaching of later centuries. It's complicated and they do not like that. They feel their certainty slipping away.
Scholars of the period are clapping gleefully. More is more. Every document gives a better idea of the landscape at the time. 
Out side of that it is of minor interest and getting little attention. 
Category:Intangibles
Category:Culture
Category:Books
Category:Religion