>>3588
>But Jesus in Revelation talks of multiple false apostles in Ephesus. Paul is just a single apostle on the other hand.
This doesn't mean that Paul isn't being talked about in revelation. That is like me doing this their are multiple false doctrines in christendom. Catholicism is just a single doctrine on the other hand. That doesn't suddenly make Catholicism not a false doctrine that's ridiculous.
>Why do you think he was named saul?
I'm pretty sure the tribe of Benjamin had more names than "Saul"

>Again same things with galatians
How do you explain "for unto this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done awau in Christ. That is literally smacking your head with a bible saying that moses laws were abolished when Jesus said contrary. You're doing mental gymnastics.

>James questioned Paul because Paul said that circumcision wasn't necessary for gentiles under the New Covenant. Even Peter came into conflict with Paul about this, and Paul writes about it in Galatians, incident at Antioch. Of course however this doesn't abrogate circumcision as a whole (he circumcised Timothy)
Actually funny thing with this. In acts 15 that was talking about circumcision. Peter and James were actually for restricting circumcision. They also say you are saved by grace in christ. However Paul states the opposite numerous times. This led to James confronting him about it in acts 21. Not to mention in acts 15 the attitude towards Paul was different. They were actually rather positive with him. It's only after he begins his ministry that they begin to question him.

Jesus actually mean's God's salvation. Joshua means God is my salvation.