Perhaps I’m misinterpreting your syntax but it looks to me like you are saying Pauline writings are not scripture? Please elaborate.
***Perhaps I’m misinterpreting your syntax but it looks to me like you are saying Pauline writings are not scripture? Please elaborate.***
I would say rather that there is a substantial population (going right back to the first century) who have misinterpreted Paul and who base a rather esoteric theology upon those misinterpretations. Remember that even Peter instructs us to not misinterpret Paul.
With that said, very recently, a Reformed apologist instructed me that Pauline verse overrode the Gospels because the Gospels were merely about what Jesus said, and the Reformed interpretation of Paul was theology.
We hold Paul to be the second greatest Apostle and take his writings very seriously; however, the Gospels are the pinnacle of Scripture. The NT is to be seen through the lens of the Gospels and the OT interpreted through the NT.
The cake of Reformed theology, for instance is Paul and the icing is the OT. Jesus is largely irrelevant except when a snippet of verse taken out of context apparently agrees with an exotic Pauline interpretation.
We believe that Paul saved the Church from early extinction. He was chosen by God and made into an Apostle apart from the initial band of disciples. How could we not venerate him? His very handkerchiefs cured people of sickness and he preached to the Gentiles. He was a great great man of God.
Warping his Epistles into evil theologies does not sit well with us.