You might want to think about who set up the churches to whom Paul wrote and then tell us why he never mentions anything...nothing...nada...ab out Jesus.<quoted text>
In response to your statement that I'm making it all up as I go along, don't I have the right to clarify my original intended argument? People misspeak all the time, and then back up to clarify. That's just intelligent conversation. It's expected that people will make mistakes in what they say. I'm not claiming perfection here. I wasn't specific enough, and now I'm correcting that. Are you saying that I can't or shouldn't now that you think you have me on the ropes? Sorry, but this is an open discussion. We all have the right to clarify our original intent.
Paul's letters weren't about detailing Jesus' miracles. Oral tradition of the time was already doing that. Paul wouldn't need to.
Paul's letters were instructions to the various early churches to unify them in a time when disunity would crush the growth of the church.
I am of the opinion that Matthew wrote his gospel first, and in Hebrew because he was a Jewish tax collector. I am also of the opinion that all 4 gospels plus Acts were written prior to the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem. I have already gone into the reasons why I believe this. There are other reasons that I didn't go into, that I could, but will save for now. Do you want me to go over this again at a later date?
How could John be anti-Semitic in light of the fact that he was also a Jew? If anything, John was taking shots at the leaders who turned Jesus over to the Romans for execution. His comments wouldn't have been directed at ALL Jews.
Paul teaches in direct opposition to Jesus in many places. I have heard all the apologetics that make it all better for those who wish to gloss over this fact. It doesn't change the fact that he puts himself at least on a level with Jesus, and at some points, even higher than Jesus.