>>3579
<<The word for nomon/nomos is law
I concede that I'm wrong that it meant "law", but Paul wasn't referring to the Mosaic Law. Again, you're ignoring the website I linked, and you ignored every single quote I posted on how "nomon" and "nomos" weren't used to refer to the Mosaic Law, by Paul himself. Also Romans 7:12 where he affirms that the Law is holy and just and good.
>In Revelation chapter 2 Jesus praises the church of Ephesus for denying a person who claimed to be an apostle but was not. Obviously the only person who claimed to be an apostle and went to the ephesus church was PAUL.
Jesus literally refers to the apostles in pluralistic form, thus it can't have been just Paul. Thus going by Revelation, there were multiple apostles that went to Ephesus preaching their own doctrines. Paul might as well have not been one of them.
Going into how he was rejected in "Asia" later.
>"And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb."
Paul was AN "apostle", but he wasn't one of THE apostles, there is no doubt about that. Those were the original 12 + 1 since Judas was replaced with Matthias.
>However their maybe a possible distinction let's argue that Paul replaced thomas just in case I mean it's possible
You're even saying that if he was an apostle that he replaced Thomas. Again, this is nonsensical since Thomas was one of the original 12.
>Notice is states all of the churches this includes ephesus since ephesus is in asia.
Perhaps, but even though Ephesus was in Asia, he specifically mentions it in the next verse as where he was helped by God. It makes no sense that he would be rejected in the entirety of Asia, but then talk about his experience in Ephesus positively.
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/apostolic/2_timothy/1.htm
Now, even if we say Paul as an apostle was rejected, this doesn't mean that thus it was the Mosaic Law that he said was abolished. This makes no sense as I already quoted a case for the "nomos" that was abolished not being the Mosaic Law, and also quoted Romans 7:12, where he clearly affirms the Law is holy and just and good (after Jesus's death).
And speaking of Asia, let's talk about one of the other Epistles addressed to the folk of Asia, specifically the Colossians. Colossians 2:16. He says to them not let others judge them in food, drink, or Sabbaths(!), feast days, full moons, etc., again all part of the Mosaic Law. He doesn't tell them that it's all abolished, in-fact on the contrary.
>Let me ask you a simple question. What would you rather read hitler about a book published by a professional historian or his literal autobiography
The Gospels are of course to be held in a higher regard than the Epistles, but I'm not going to reject the majority of information we have on the early church and its doctrines simply because it's not part of the Gospels, or because some people claim that he disavowed the Law (which of course he didn't).