Salaam brothers and sisters.
I was reading a particular post that among other things discussed the Coptic Revelation of Peter, I wanted to point out that there are other Revelations of Peter and not to be critical but the Coptic one which verifies the true account of the alleged crucifixion, that is, it happened as Allah swt says, is stated to be the same as quoted by the Church fathers ("Call no man father, for you have One Father in Heaven"
), I am almost positive Ante Nicene fathers vol 9 has the fragments of that one. If a.i..com notices they'll jump on it, it's just I own both NHC and A.N.F vol 9 how I know).
My true point is not that, just wanted to let you know so if you decide to look into it and come to the same conclusion I imagine unlike Shamhoun you would acknowledge it, if I am correct.
A Syriac version of the Homilies and Recognitions of Clement of Rome, not the one that is the oldest dated MS on earth (have that too, just published recently)at 410AD, which is not even the oldest copy as the Greek is as old as Sinaiticus, but a version translated from pre vowel point Arabic into Syriac (and a Geez version), called Kitab al Magall, Book of the Rolls, was published in the last century in 7 books.
The 8th has never been published or fully translated. It's an alteration that includes trinitarian ideas which the original never approaches but it has some interesting things to say about the self proclaimed apostle to the (pagans according to my Jerusalem Bible) "gentiles", which Acts even says Allah decided Simon Peter was (contradictions abound w mr. "If through my FALSEHOODS God's glory abounds why am I being judged a sinner?).
Such as he "changed books", "Paul or anyone like him" should not be taught the teachings in the book, and unlike the Greek Simon Magus is not used to veil the identity of "the enemy" who as Saul tried to murder Yakov the Just (Zaddik).
I am lucky to have a pdf of a partial translation from wwe.escholar.manchester.ac.uk, if needed I can email you the file by "Woodbrooke studies" ; A. Mingana, fasciculus 8 in the John Rylands Library. The translation was done at a time when few scholars were aware that Paul was persona non grata among the true 12 disciples of Issa (sa) as he expresses confusion that today would surprise no scholar.
'As God liveth no one ought divulge these mysteries to Paul or anyone like him." He admits he will be ommitting that Paul calls Peter "Master" as he is subservient to Peter. The Ethiopian translation is edited but you will find the Syriac MS at the end.
I noticed that in the once Canonical (Alexandrinus or Vaticanus, still in Ethiopia) 1 Clement has a Syriac version too, untranslated. I can no longer find the book I got it from but it said something about Paul maybe should not be a leader and step down. Anyone can get a pdf of this Syriac version but again, not in English.
Could anyone look into these matters? I hope they are of some use as it's obvious why neither are available in English to everyone, they confirm what we all know but that Christians long after did too and simply kept secret books or in the case of the 410 and earlier MS substitute Paul with Simon Magus, a well known fact to most scholars.
Also, there is the strange notion that the tribe of Benjamin existed in 1AD, this is not possible for many reasons I don't have to mention. I am certain it's a euphemism for "Herodian Jew", which is definitely the case with Paul and his "Kinsman" foster brother of the Tetrarch and "Herodion", many others in fact (see: R. Eisenman).
Paul is "Acher" in the Talmud, meaning other. Also from Acherah (Heb: barren, "Faith without works is barren" e. of James), in "Visio Pauli" he is taken to the "Acherusian lake" where it seems his teachings are systematically rebuked. Nobody pays attention to this but Ante Nicene fathers vol 8 has H&R of Clement and V.Pauli/R. of Paul.
Last but most importantly I have something of my own findings to offer.
Herod Arche-laus
Herod Acher-Saul
A Benjaminite is a Benjaminite because Herod is an "Other (King) Saul." Saul was of Benjamin. But also not of the 2 returned tribes. I can think of no other reason for a tribe called Benjamin existing then.
Ibn Taymiyya called Paul out for who he was, but said something baffling in the process. He said Paul, "Son of Rabbi(?) Joshua and something about a "King of the Jews" being his relative.
Poleme of Cilicia where Paul says he was from, like the Ebionites said of Paul, was circumcised to marry a Jewess, spurned eventually and turned on Judaism and hated circumcision (Paul "The mutilation", "Circumcision faction" re: 12 Apostles), and had a brother named Pallas who "wrote letters to the Jews of Syria to incite them.
All in book XX (double cross???) of Josephus Antiquities.
Ebionites re: Paul, see Epiphanius Panarion or Iranaeus.
