Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

The writer of Acts professes to relate details of Paul's ministry. Yet the writer of Acts shows no awareness at all of any such Pauline writings, nor ever cites any of Paul's peculiar beliefs, claims, or 'Epistles'.
The only writings the writer of Acts ever connects with Paul are those that Paul received from the elders of the Jerusalem church, and as a courier passed on.

The accounts of Paul in Acts, and those in the 'Pauline Epistles' do not jibe. This strongly suggest that at the time of the writing of Acts, there were no such 'Pauline Epistles' known, all being latter produced forgeries.

Originally Posted by Cheerful Charlie

Or still were local epistles circulated in a few churches that accepted, more or less, that Paul was authoritative. These epistles would not early on be widely disseminated beyond these 7 Asian churches, And not well known, though Paul might be known. The claim these were all later forgeries cannot be supported.

Cheerful Charlie