On my last post The book of Acts disproves Calvinism and all Protestantism, for good I’ve decided to make this addendum at the end:

[9/18/2014 7:25 PM (11:31 PM) After more deliberation on Paul, I decided that on the accepting Paul thing I’ve decided that (for myself) by this I only mean accepting him as a historical witness to the PRACTICE of first century Christianity, not as an apostle nor as an inspired writer, certainly not as an inerrant writer.  The church of Christ accepts him as inspired and inerrant, but I just can’t.  For me, whatever he says that is substantiable from the Practice of the Apostles, I will accept, but whatever is his own theory and his own theology, I reject, since he bases it on misuse, abuse, and outright twisting of the Old Testament, not to mention that logic that is not at all logical.]

That is, Paul is a witness to Christian orthopraxy…but when it comes to orthodoxy, he’s a ranting lunatic. None of his logic in Romans and Galatians holds together at all under any logical inspection, nor do his proof-texts have anything to do with the insane doctrines that he tries to prove. He can only be accepted as a witness to orthopraxy, and nothing more….and even there, this function of his must largely be limited to the book of Acts, for the epistles are either written by a mad-man, or heavily interpolated by mad monks.