Paul is not an Apostle

[SethZaddik]

She is perhaps better recorded in the Gnostic gospels. where here role is more clearly depicted.
However Most of the traditional Christian Churches do regard her as the Apostle to the Apostles, as has been recognised by Pope Francis's recent elevation of her status.

As you say, she was chosen by God as the first to see the risen Christ, and to take that message to the other Apostles.

She is prominent in Pistis-Sophia, the longest and most complete of all so called Gnostic texts, and was revered for sure as an incarnation of Sophia.


But it was not my point how popular she was.


They didn't call her Apostle. Ever.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It is not prejudice to point out discrepancies in Paul's story and tell people why he is not and can't be an Apostle of Christ.

It is fact sharing.

I don't like the epistles of Paul or Paul, if he was alive at least today I would not like the guy who wrote those epistles, even if he was cool in person he admits he is a liar and thinks it "abounds to God's glory."

He talks trash about the real Apostles and often, go through his epistles or some of my messages and see for yourself, and is pro slavery, actually says slaves should treat "Masters as God, not as men and women" because it is what he says God wants!!!

So forgive me if I dislike a man who is corrupt and dishonest, self serving and mischievous, who says absurd things as I have shown and been showing including that women should remain silent in church and ask their husbands, their "Christs" if they have a question.

But I don't like terrible ideologies from characters with no sense of morality, traitors, Roman collaborators and false prophets.

You go too far in belittling Paul..
If you have followed any of my posts over time, you would understand that I am very much a Unitarian Christian.... If you Google "Non-subscribing presbyterian" you would get some Idea where I am coming from.
I like the style and manner of worship of Anglicans but the Theology of Unitarians.
You will also find that I am a strong advocate for people to read the Didache, (ann excellent translation is available by Aarom Milavec..

The Didache is probably the earliest extant writing, detailing the teaching and practice of the earliest Judo- Christian communities. and predates the Gospels. It shares almost nothing with the Christianity of Paul or the later Greco-Roman Christianity.
I highly recommend that particular book to you, as many other writers try to relate it to both Paul and the Gospels which makes a nonsense of it.

You can Love God as taught by Jesus, and as a Christian, with out accepting the Calvinistic or Trinitarian traditions of Paul or Rome. And recognise Paul for the importance of his works, in bringing people to God.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

She is prominent in Pistis-Sophia, the longest and most complete of all so called Gnostic texts, and was revered for sure as an incarnation of Sophia.


But it was not my point how popular she was.


They didn't call her Apostle. Ever.

You should read the Gnostic Gospels found in Nag Hammadi, of Mary and Thomas. and others

They did.... and they do now, call her Apostle to the Apostles as does the Pope.

I find it sad that some people Believe that every thing that is to be found is in the Bible. that is a very protestant attitude.

Pope Francis’ decision to elevate her memorial to a feast during the Jubilee of Mercy, he said, was done in order to emphasize the importance of this woman, “who so loved Christ and was so greatly loved by Christ.”

Noting how Mary Magdalene was the first eyewitness to the Risen Christ and the first to announce his resurrection to the apostles, Archbishop Roche hailed her as “the Apostle to the Apostles” – a phrase coined by St. Thomas Aquinas.

St. Mary Magdalene, the archbishop said, “announces to the apostles what in turn they will announce to the whole world.”

This article was originally published on CNA June 10, 2016.

Mary Magdalene – 'Apostle to the Apostles' – gets upgraded feast day

 

[SethZaddik]

I will now demonstrate the irreconcilably different accounts of the "conversion" of Saul, the wolf of Benjamin and leaven of the Pharisees.

Acts 9:4 Meanwhile Saul, breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the High Priest and asked him for letters to the synogogues at Damascus.....3 Now he was going along and approaching Damascus, suddenly a light from Heaven flashed all around him...7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless because they heard the voice but saw no one.

Acts 22:7

" I fell to the ground and heard a voice....9 Now those who were with me saw the light but did not hear the voice of the one who was speaking to me."

Luke's account has them hearing but saw nothing, no one. They heard a voice is all.

Paul says DID NOT hear the voice but DID see a light.


Luke wrote both accounts so it can not be attributed to different authors, he was also intelligent and certainly was aware of his contradiction, what reason for doing that could there be other than to leave a clue for people who pay attention that Paul is a liar, which Paul admits and boasts of in his writings, that it (lying) "abounds to God's glory." That is the only reason I can think of for an author to contradict himself in one book so blatantly.

Acts 26 Paul totally embellishes further the already tall tale by saying "When we HAD ALL FALLEN to the ground, I heard a voice..." By his first account only HE fell, in front of Agrippa ALL present fell.

"You are out of your mind Paul!" Festus exclaimed.

I concur.

 

[SethZaddik]

You should read the Gnostic Gospels found in Nag Hammadi, of Mary and Thomas. and others

They did.... and they do now, call her Apostle to the Apostles as does the Pope.

I find it sad that some people Believe that every thing that is to be found is in the Bible. that is a very protestant attitude.



Mary Magdalene – 'Apostle to the Apostles' – gets upgraded feast day

I own and have read Nag Hammadi and that quote "Apostle to the Apostles" is not in it.

Nice try but you will have to try that on someone who hasn't read them and doesn't own the book.

Anyone can see you have not quoted a book from the Nag Hammadi texts, if you even mentioned one by name.

Don't make things up and then try to further it with claims that you know are not true.

I said she was highly honored, especially in Pistis-Sophia, I also said it was the longest and most complete of any surviving Gnostic text. I obviously read the others if I know this and would have told you so if it were true Mary was titled the Apostle to the Apostles.

She just wasn't.

 

[SethZaddik]

You should read the Gnostic Gospels found in Nag Hammadi, of Mary and Thomas. and others

I own the entire Nag Hammadi library that comes with the Gospels of Judas and Mary as well as the entire corpus of the Nag Hammadi codices, more material than just Gospels, I also own G.R.S. Meade's translation of Pistis-Sophia and I have read all of them and it.

So I have checked out the "Gnostic Gospels" and they DO NOT support your claim and just plain don't say that Mary is an Apostle or the Apostle to the Apostles, she has a prominent position but not as much as you think. I say think because clearly you have not read the Nag Hammadi library and maybe have read Gospel of Thomas but I doubt it because it has James the Just as head of the Apostles and as "the reason Heaven and earth came into being."

Mary is not that prominent in Thomas, a sayings Gospel of 114 sayings, some Canonical some not, and little story telling or character interaction. It definitely doesn't call Mary "Apostle" in any way. So you should not be using it as evidence of support your made up assertion that Mary Magdalene was Apostle to the Apostles, modified later to a Gnostic belief, because they didn't say that either (Apostle to the Apostles).

Which is the matter of debate, you claiming that she was called that and having no proof, trying to get away with it by saying the Gnostic Gospels say it when they don't.

You have no credibility now.

They did.... and they do now, call her Apostle to the Apostles as does the Pope.

I find it sad that some people Believe that every thing that is to be found is in the Bible. that is a very protestant attitude.



Mary Magdalene – 'Apostle to the Apostles' – gets upgraded feast day

The Pope calling her that is irrelevant to the facts, if true it his personal title, not from any legitimate source, which means the Bible.

It is not even a tradition of the Church Fathers or the Apocrypha, not a tradition at all really, just what a man said 2,000 years after the events.

What is sad is people MAKING UP traditions with NO SOURCE from antiquity, Apocryphal, pseudepigraphal, Gnostic or historical, theological writing, NOTHING but their imagination.

I read the crap out of non Canonical Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha and so called "Gnostic" (Sethian Christian) scripture and can tell you don't, so it's sad you think what you do yourself (not read extra Canonical writings) is sad but don't do anything to change it and just invent your own traditions instead.

There is 4 times as much (at least) Apocrypha of the New Testament era alone than is actually IN the New Testament.

None of it says what you are claiming about Mary Magdalene though, which is how I know you don't read Apocrypha or Church Fathers writings, because nobody supports the claim you are making and you would not make it if you honestly read the stuff you say is sad nobody does.

 

[SethZaddik]

In addition to the myriad reasons not to trust "Paul" like the admitted to and boasted about lying he claims "abounds to God's glory" and allows him to basically be an imposter to gain converts or "became all things to all men" "to the Jews I BECAME a Jew, to the Greeks/gentiles I became a gentile... I became all things to all men."

One reason by itself stands apart as reason to distrust "Paul" and that is his invention that Mosaic Law was ordained "by angels."

It was not. Read the Tanakh one hundred times and every time in every version it will have God revealing HIS (God's) Law directly to Moses, Moses and God, no angels involved.

No Jewish sect on record believed counter to the Torah that angels ordained the Law, they actually believed it applied TO angels and existed prior to angels and Creation, and now they have similar beliefs about the Law that do not involve angels ordaining it, they have Laws and can, like the Watchers, violate the Law of God, which is His Word.

Depending upon your view of angels, nevertheless the Bible is clear, they DID NOT "ordain" the Law.

Paul must have been telling one of his "glory abounds" lies about God.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

None of it says what you are claiming about Mary Magdalene though, which is how I know you don't read Apocrypha or Church Fathers writings, because nobody supports the claim you are making and you would not make it if you honestly read the stuff you say is sad nobody does.

Why are you so frightened to accept that Mary Magdalen has the status of an Apostle.

Is it because she is a Woman?

What is it that gives a someone who wrote some two thousand years ago, greater authority than some one born today?

The writers of the Gospels were separated by one or more generations, or from first hand knowledge, of the events they wrote about. Only the various epistles give an authors first hand experiences and beliefs, and they could contain errors and misunderstandings.

Inspiration from God did not die with the ancients.
Or do you believe that God is no longer around?
Or that the Holy Spirit no longer Guides us?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Acts, after it tells the story of the Ascension, as I stated in my OP, lays down the requirements for "Apostleship" at 1:12-21.

So that is the answer to "where does Acts one use the word Apostle?"

If the idea you are hypothesising about Luke making a pitch for Paul as the legitimate 12th Apostle was grounded in logic, logic dictates he would state his case and conclusion, he does not do this or hint that he thinks this, he makes Paul contradict himself and Luke in the three accounts of Damascus road conversion myth, allows us to see Paul lied to James at the final meeting in Jerusalem about his anti Law, anti Moses (in the eyes of James zealous for the Law of Moses believers) teachings, submit to a purification ritual and almost get assassinated only to be saved by the enemy of all Judean Jews, Rome, 400 soldiers, a ridiculous amount that says Paul must have been important to Rome and Nero, who he appeals to for deliverance (not Jesus (p)).

**

logic dictates he would state his case and conclusion

Since when do all assailed in the scriptures defend themselves? This wasn't Jesus's practice.

Since when is everything in the Bible that it has for believers revealed in plain sight, without digging and dint of effort?

The 400 soldiers were in response to dozens of known assassins that Paul's nephew warned him about. You are making arguments against the writings of Paul from sheer speculation.

 

[BilliardsBall]

And if you "know who Mathias was" you know that Luke has him fill the one vacancy in the Apostleship, that two people on earth alive at the time qualify and that Mathias replaced Judas legitimately according to Luke and thousands of years of tradition based on what Luke says and meant, Matthias was Apostle # 12.

It has always been a source of discomfort for the Churches that 12 Apostles doesn't refer to Paul, that it is not possible according to proper exegesis has been hushed.

Not by me though, I tell everyone.

There were more than 12 apostles. My point is that Mathias did what, exactly, of renown following the Acts?

 

[SethZaddik]

Paul the self proclaimed "apostle" to the gentiles (as if it makes sense to send one man to the majority and 12 to Jews only, the minority, as if such a position ever existed..."Make disciples of ALL NATIONS." Ethos(Nations/gentiles/Greeks) is one of the words translated gentiles, goyim the original) always makes an interesting debate.

Every Christian I have ever known, upon hearing that Paul can't be an Apostle because there are only 12 inevitably dodges the issue by trying to make the definition of Apostle the issue and not how many CHRIST actually had, which they know is 12.

It never works because Apostles of Christ are not the world's only apostles ever to exist, it simply means emmisary.

What matters is Paul never knew Jesus (p) and therefore can not be an Apostle and according to HIS OWN standards (requiring 2 or 3 witnesses) he can't be trusted.


That's old news, the best was the guy who claimed Mary Magdalene was called Apostle to the Apostles, a fabrication I subsequently called said person on who proceeded to assume that I know nothing of the Nag Hammadi Gnostic texts, unfortunately for him I OWN the book and have read it, so when he/she decided to play fast and loose with the truth and say "it's in the Gnostic Gospels."

It is not. I guarantee you Mary Magdalene IS honored, but NOT called Apostle to the Apostles.

I can't stand lies and liars, which is why I can't stand Paul.

As I see it he has convinced generations of Christians that it is OK to lie if you think it abounds to God's glory, and this generation is the worst with the internet and everything.

I can't see Jesus (p) as being the reason for all the lying preachers that breath madness and threats of hell to anyone not in their religion or Church as well as its members.

Paul is who they are emulating and they don't even know they are doing anything wrong by lying about other religions gods or God being demons, a moon god, using dirty missionary tactics targeting the uneducated in third world countries, claiming not just that Jesus (p) IS God, but claiming that the Bible supports this theory when it doesn't.

Jesus admitted inferiority to "Our Father in Heaven", his Father too.

Which makes the 3=1 equal God theory impossible to substantiate with scripture.

 

[SethZaddik]

Sorry the best or most hilarious attempt at rescuing Paul was the absurd theory that Luke was going to write Paul in as Matthias replacement but just never did for some reason never revealed (because it doesn't exist).

Luke wrote that Matthias was #12 because... Mathias was #12. If Luke wanted Paul to replace Judas or Matthias he would have written just that.

But he did not. Christians have no conscience when it comes to Paul and realizing he is a fraud, takes five minutes to prove but it is always rejected out of faith.

Faith without knowledge is not faith, it is gullibility.

 

[SethZaddik]

The issue with Paul is sensitive for Christians and I respect that, but when the facts are presented and explained in context and the evidence looked at without bias, there simply is not a logical sentence in any language that can answer the question, "Why is this maniac in the Bible, he doesn't belong here"?

He didn't know Jesus and can't stand the Apostles or Jews, who he calls "the circumcision faction" "the mutilation" or "Men of James sent to spy on our freedom in Christ" claims to have "withstood Peter to his face"and claims the "so called pillars" taught or "added nothing to me" that his or "my gospel" not theirs is the "true gospel" and that he is not inferior to the Chief Apostles who are "false apostles masquerading as Apostles of Christ.......No wonder, even Satan appears as an angel of light."

When I started this thread a Christian made a remark that only Christians understand the Bible and it is amusing to see "non believers" try and interpret it.

I didn't have to interpret, I gave the plain meaning of what was said and explained properly and correctly what it meant. The problem is that the Christian thinks they understand correctly, the Bible, when they usually never read the whole Bible or even just the New Testament in their lifetime!

So when someone of a different religion but same God knows things they don't it is assumed that the person is wrong simply because they are not Christian and it ends up being pawned off as a faith issue that blinds the non believers.

But that is a lie, I AM a believer and I seek Truth WITH Faith AND Knowledge and what God gave me, I use.

It has nothing to do with Faith and everything to do with knowing what the New Testament says and means, if Christians asked one question they would never get an answer.

If there are 12 Apostles, but Paul is not one of them, what gives Paul the right to appoint himself #13?

The answer will be something like "God."

How do you know that?

Paul tells us so.

Who else says that he is an Apostle?

Luke does.

Luke wasn't an Apostle though, was he? He doesn't have a say.

The Bible is the word of God, either believe it or go to hell.

OK.

 

[SethZaddik]

For fans of Paul unfortunately I have only shown the tip of the iceberg, there is a lot to this saga of Paul vs the 12 Apostles and it doesn't end in the New Testament but goes on into the Books of Clement of Rome, Kitab al Magall book 8 in Syriac especially names Paul as one not to be entrusted with the writings you are reading being sealed up "Do not show these books to Paul, or anyone like him." It's an early version of the Greek and Syriac Homilies and Recognitions which places into Simon Magus mouth from time to time the words of Paul and claims he made are refuted by Peter, in a humble manner.

Early in the book "The Enemy" (Saul is written on the margin of a MS. which is in Greek as old as Sainaiticus, Syriac 425 roughly and the world's oldest dated MS.) appears to attack James and get papers to arrest disciples, thinks he has killed James who survived and went to Syria for a while, it has a letter from James, Peter and Clement and the story of the Apostles that focuses on Peter, James, Barnabas and Mark as well as Clement.

Scholars have been saying for ever that they deliberately used the infamous Simon Magus to cloak their feelings about Paul in H&R but the older version is less subtle and shorter with an Apocalypse at the end, Book 8 was suspiciously never published but can be gotten on PDF at Data stream or some University, Edited by A.(?) Mingana from the John Rylands library.

 

[SethZaddik]

But I have some more information about Paul.

Matthew 5:34 Concerning Oaths

"But I say to you, do not swear AT ALL, either by Heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by earth, it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. And do not swear by your head, for you can not make one hair white or black.

37. Let your yes be yes, or no, no; anything more than this COMES FROM THE EVIL ONE."

Don't swear by God, earth, ANYTHING WHATSOEVER just say yes or no and otherwise it is from the evil one. Simple, fair, good advice.

Anyone who say "before God, I lie not." is almost always lying.

Galatians 1:20 (subtitle "Paul's vindication if his Apostleship!!)

20. In what I am writing you, BEFORE GOD, I do not lie!


"Let your yes be yes and no be no, anything more is of the evil one." Matthew 5:37

Paul's "Before God" is "anything more than this" (yes or no, swearing oaths) is "Of the evil one."

That is not a misquote. Jesus said not to swear on God or anything and anything else was from the evil one.

Fact.

Paul swears "Before God I do not lie."

Either you believe Jesus (p) or you don't.

 

[SethZaddik]

Why are you so frightened to accept that Mary Magdalen has the status of an Apostle.

Are you delusional? I am saying you are wrong when you say the "Gnostic Gospels" or anything else, confirms it.

I am saying that you made it up and have no source and lied about it being in Gnostic scriptures that I own and have read so know

Is it because she is a Woman?​

What is it that gives a someone who wrote some two thousand years ago, greater authority than some one born today?

The writers of the Gospels were separated by one or more generations, or from first hand knowledge, of the events they wrote about. Only the various epistles give an authors first hand experiences and beliefs, and they could contain errors and misunderstandings.

Inspiration from God did not die with the ancients.
Or do you believe that God is no longer around?
Or that the Holy Spirit no longer Guides us?

You are just spewing more falsehoods to cover up old one

 

[SethZaddik]

In addition to the myriad reasons not to trust "Paul" like the admitted to and boasted about lying he claims "abounds to God's glory" and allows him to basically be an imposter to gain converts or "became all things to all men" "to the Jews I BECAME a Jew, to the Greeks/gentiles I became a gentile... I became all things to all men."

One reason by itself stands apart as reason to distrust "Paul" and that is his invention that Mosaic Law was ordained "by angels."

It was not. Read the Tanakh one hundred times and every time in every version it will have God revealing HIS (God's) Law directly to Moses, Moses and God, no angels involved.

No Jewish sect on record believed counter to the Torah that angels ordained the Law, they actually believed it applied TO angels and existed prior to angels and Creation, and now they have similar beliefs about the Law that do not involve angels ordaining it, they have Laws and can, like the Watchers, violate the Law of God, which is His Word.

Depending upon your view of angels, nevertheless the Bible is clear, they DID NOT "ordain" the Law.

Paul must have been telling one of his "glory abounds" lies about God.

I could not have been more clear it is simply a matter of fact that you said the Gnostic Gospels say Mary is Apostle to the Apostles.

It is also a fact that they don't say anything of the sort.

Not exactly something that scares me, or makes me a misogynist, I love Mary Magdalene and the Nag Hammadi scriptures and they do honor her as does the Pistis-Sophia.

I have just said it all five times and you need to invent reasons not to address the fact you got busted lying.

They don't say what you claim they say, which has been mentioned 5 times at least.

 

[SethZaddik]

Why are you so frightened to accept that Mary Magdalen has the status of an Apostle.

Is it because she is a Woman?

What is it that gives a someone who wrote some two thousand years ago, greater authority than some one born today?

The writers of the Gospels were separated by one or more generations, or from first hand knowledge, of the events they wrote about. Only the various epistles give an authors first hand experiences and beliefs, and they could contain errors and misunderstandings.

Inspiration from God did not die with the ancients.
Or do you believe that God is no longer around?
Or that the Holy Spirit no longer Guides us?

I was taking it easy on you but you asked for it.

What book in the Nag Hammadi texts or otherwise Gnostic scripture says what you said, I quote you, "Mary Magdalene, Apostle to the Apostles."?

You said "Gnostic Gospels", which one, at what paragraph or chapter or verse, they are not universally numbered and there are quite a few called Gospels that are not technically Gospels. You got Thomas, Philip, Egyptians, etc?

Which was it?

You tell me where it says that and I will be happy to type it in myself, concede defeat an announce your utmost supremacy.

But if you can't.... It's because you lied. Spoiler alert, you lied. It's not being aggressive just a fact, you said they say it, they don't say it, simple equation.

Not in....

Gospel of Truth

Gospel of Thomas

Gospel of Philip

Gospel of Mary/Greek G. of Mary

Gospel of Judas.

The last two don't have it and also are not part of the Codices, they just put them in my edition and not even the Gospel of Mary says it.

It is not a reflection of my feelings but a reporting of straight facts. Learn them or get used to this happening if you don't stop saying things you don't even know if are true or false and this time happen to be false and you happened to have gotten caught.

 

[Muffled]

This may sound quite shocking to the average Christian who has never really thought twice about it, but did you know that Paul is NOT an Apostle according to anyone but himself and himself through Luke, who was not a disciple of Christ (p) in the flesh and not an Apostle either so has no say.

But Luke actually gives us proof that Paul can not be a legitimate Apostle. Acts 1:21 sets the rules for being an Apostle in (metaphorical) stone, confirming that 12 is a necessary number and not arbitrary but symbolic, obviously of the 12 tribes of Israel (or 11+ 2/2, 12).

"So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that lord Jesus (p) went in and went out among us---one of these must become a witness with us to his ressurection."

1:24 " Lord, you know everyone's heart. Show us which of these TWO YOU HAVE CHOSEN."

Matthias was chosen, by God, through prayer and lot, to replace Judas as one of TWO men ON EARTH even eligible to fill Judas' "place in this ministry and Apostleship."

Mathew 18:16 and Paul himself declare in 2 Corinthians 9:19

(Paul): "Any charge must be sustained by the evidence of two or three witnesses."

Of the 22 times Paul is called "apostle" in the New Testament 20 times are by himself and 2 by Luke, who was not an authority or witness to Paul's alleged secret revelations from Jesus (p), and the three reports of Damascus road contradict each other irreconcilably, I wonder if Luke even believed Paul as he had to have been aware his account contradicted Paul's account that contradicts Paul's later account making him look like a liar, which is no issue as Paul boasts his lies "abound to God's glory."

So according to the law of witnesses according to Dt. 19:15 and in Mt. and in Paul's own words, Paul is not an Apostle.

According to Revelation "Vision of New Jerusalem" there are ONLY 12 Apostles of the Lamb.

According to Acts there can be no 13th "Apostle" which contradicts itself by calling Paul one, but it doesn't serve as eye witness testimony.

Paul never met Jesus (p). He was never called "Apostle" by a real Apostle.

He claims his theology was from "no man", that he was chosen by God and Jesus (p) to represent the gentiles, everything was revealed to him and nobody taught it to him.

Yet Jesus (p) told his disciples to make disciples of all nations, nations meaning gentiles or goyim, Acts records Peter was the leader of the Apostles mission to the gentiles.

Acts also reveals Paul and those with him were, "Forbidden by the Holy Spirit from preaching in Asia."

Paul writes to Timothy, "This YOU KNOW ALL, those who are in Asia have turned from me."

And Revelation was written specifically to the "7 Churches of Asia."

It seems apparent that Paul had little choice in the matter and his only option was to convert the Roman pagans to "his gospel" of justification by faith alone.

Very popular in heathen Rome I imagine, compared to the Mosaic Law. Except the Mosaic Law was never imposed on gentile converts so it was really moot, he had little success in his lifetime and if not for Marcion we wouldn't even know who "Paul" was, nobody cared until his cult, about Paul at all.

It is a tragedy that the Bible sets rules and then doesn't expect anyone to notice that Paul not only is not an Apostle but that he never was eligible in the first place.

I believe that depends on how you are using the term apostle. My pastor uses it as though it were capitalized to mean only those 12 who walked with Jesus because they were called to be apostles. Paul is anapostle according to the meaning of the word which is "sent by God."

 

[Muffled]

He is called an Apostle 22 times, 20 is him and 2 are Luke.

But I already covered that, pay attention please.

He calls himself an apostle which he is.