Jesus Christ is much more important than Paul.
I think the author would agree and actually says so.
When put next to Buddha, Muhammed, or any other religious leader, Jesus clearly triumphs.
Of course, this means Paul is more important that you know who.
“Jesus Christ is much more important than Paul.”
Absolutely agree. So surely you want to hear from the apostle our resurrected Lord chose to speak to you (a Gentile, correct?). It’s all about who HE chooses as his instrument. And he chose Paul.
I, for one, am thankful!
Obviously, and the article expresses that it is in that interest that Paul is important:
There’s no serious doubt to whether Jesus actually lived or that He was crucified. The real question is whether or not He rose again, which would definitively prove whether He was who He claimed to be. His followers play an important role here, because if He didn’t rise from the dead, they lied or fabricated the resurrection somehow.
It is as a most unlikely but profound witness to the resurrection of Christ that Paul is focused on.
However, Catholics typically evidence a marginalization of Paul and even the rest of the NT in order to prevent the gospels from being understood in the light of Acts and the epistles which explain the gospels. For the gospels do not show how the NT church understood the gospels, and in which Catholic distinctives are not manifest .
Just curious why you felt the need to say that? Do you think anyone here would disagree?
Well, yes. And Paul is much more important than Peter.