There you again projecting a preconceived notion or belief into what has been written.
>> Paul is an also. Not a primary.<<
There were no “primaries”. That notion was invented by the guys hoping to wear the pointy hat in Rome.
>> They were directed to the churches under Paul's jurisdiction<<
Jurisdiction? LOL We are no longer under the law. That language rings hollow to Spirit filled Christians.
There you again projecting a preconceived notion or belief into what has been written.
You must read your compatriots' posts a little more closely.
>> Paul is an also. Not a primary.<<
There were no “primaries”. That notion was invented by the guys hoping to wear the pointy hat in Rome.
That notion was invented by Christians who think that Christ supersedes any man.
>> They were directed to the churches under Paul's jurisdiction<<
Jurisdiction? LOL We are no longer under the law. That language rings hollow to Spirit filled Christians.
I suggest that you reread both Acts and Paul's Epistles. Paul had absolute jurisdiction over his churches and wrote in that manner.
There you again projecting a preconceived notion or belief into what has been written.
Negative. This has been stated repeatedly here.
>> Paul is an also. Not a primary.<<
There were no “primaries”. That notion was invented by the guys hoping to wear the pointy hat in Rome.
Negative again. There are many here who consider Paul to be the Apostle whom Jesus finally got right; He was just practising on the 12.
>> They were directed to the churches under Paul's jurisdiction<<
Jurisdiction? LOL We are no longer under the law. That language rings hollow to Spirit filled Christians.
If you have any doubt about Paul's jurisdiction over the churches in his diocese, you must reread his epistles.