Well...I didn't mean it THAT way. :o)
That's good, because she's standing behind me with her snub nose Ruger .357.
I'm not being obtuse here, I really do not know what you mean by the evidence not being spelled out in Scripture. How are you defining "evidence" here? Paul said many times that he was speaking truths, mysteries even, that he received from Jesus Christ.
Correct. But Paul did not lay out chronologically or in any other fashion exactly what the revelation consisted of. He lets out a phrase here, a clause there, a sentence elsewhere. John and Moses put the whole thing down in words.
These are a few I can think off the top of my head. Do these count as "evidence"?
Sure. But there is no book called "The Revelation of Paul". There is a book called the Revelation of Peter, which was ruled non Canonical, for instance, as well as other non canonical books of revelations of others. But Paul does not write such a book. Have you ever wondered why?
That's your problem...You're trying to out think God...
Paul's epistles are Holy Scripture...Peter knew that...Why don't you???