You; " It's easy to disparage someone, but without an illustration, it's unsubstantiated. Much easier for you, I realize, than having to produce a viable example..."<quoted text>
What do you mean it's my opinion? Paul's epistles being part of scripture is fact. This is what I mean about discernment, you're so eager to promote your agenda against Paul, you become incredulous.
Regarding Paul's truthfulness, how about identifying the scriptures you're referring to?
It's easy to disparage someone, but without an illustration, it's unsubstantiated. Much easier for you, I realize, than having to produce a viable example,
However, if you think Paul is devious because his comments and ministry conflicts with Jesus' then the matter of their being two covenants, is very much relevant.
There is the uncorroborated accusation again, still no citation to prove your position.
Your are correct that Paul is not one of the 12, he could not be according to the requirements laid out by Peter.
Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from Johns baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection. Acts 1:21-22
Since I question your abilities at this point, I'll elaborate the points: 1. Paul had not been a believer in Christ for "the whole time" in fact, he was not at this point, even a believer in Jesus as messiah. 2. Paul was not a witness to Jesus' ascension. 3. Paul's ministry was not to the Jews through the mosaic covenant.
I'm not attempting to prove what is written for you to see. What I am doing is presenting what I believe scripture reveals. AND unlike you to this point, I'm providing the scripture references to illustrate my point. No one disputes Jesus' message. But to who and why his ministry existed, is obviously lost on you.
You've got a bad habit of making assertions that you don't back up and evidently think that repetition will make it credible. If that is all you have to contribute, it is insufficient.
How about you do this re; your comments about the RCC...!
and again you; "You've got a bad habit of making assertions that you don't back up and evidently think that repetition will make it credible. If that is all you have to contribute, it is insufficient."
Wow! we have another winner of the hypocrisy award!
Repetition of accusations about the RCC is historical with Protestants like you.