Does anyone else think many Christians place too much emphasis on Paul?

Yes, i believe that too many Christians place too much emphasis on Paul. More accurately, these sorts (presumably most evangelicals & probably virtually *all* Southern Baptists, for starters) should be calling their religion Paulianity, rather than Christianity. ;)

It's what i call the "Christian Phariseeical" religion *about* Jesus (because they *do* have a "legalistic" perspective, lacking the Living Spirit *now*) -- rather than a religion which accentuates living the actual teachings *of* the historical Yeshua (or of Christ-in-Spirit, *now*, with Whom it *is* possible to have a *genuine* relationship).

People who really *love* Jesus -- it is wiser to understand what the religion *of* Jesus was actually *about* (& you learn this *only* from Yeshua, himself) -- rather than blindly following the religion of *Paul* -- which, in too many instances, taught a "different gospel" than Jesus did. Jesus's gospel was *not* about *himself* -- whereas the ones who follow Paulianity center their religiosity around their beliefs *about* Jesus. (These sorts seem to predominate on the Scene, here, at YA.)

i fully appreciate what Paul has to say in 1 Corin. 13, about love -- & believe it is truly inSpirited. Likewise with the "fruit of the spirit" in Galatians 5:22. i appreciate Paul's *integrity* in admitting that he (&, by implication, the other apostles) saw "through a glass darkly" (in other words, their own shadow-egos were *distorting* their viewpoints & presentations -- they were not spiritually seeing with total clarity) and that he made a distinction between some things being his own personal opinion -- & other things he taught being "of the Lord".

Unfortunately, too many of these Christians lack the acuity of perception to make those same distinctions, themselves! Paul's *opinions* & interpretations are in NO WAY the "Word of God" -- & it is blasphemy *of* God to claim they were! (Even when Jesus spoke -- if he was *not* -- at that time, "in the Spirit" -- those words are *not* to be misunderstood as coming from "God", for heaven's sake. Yeshua said, "Not my will, but Thy will be done." This proves he had his *own* egoic willfulness that was not ONE with Heavenly Father's will, at times. Jesus said, "If I bear witness to myself, my testimony is not true." [Jn. 5:31] Therefore *don't* believe that in Jesus's return he is actually going to fulfill something as heinous as Luke 19:27!)

Peter and James (who had actually spent lots of time with Yeshua, when he was alive) disagreed intensely with much of what Paul was teaching. i doubt that Mary Magdalene had any association with Paul, but i'm sure she would've disagreed strongly with much of what Paul was teaching, too!

However, i'm not sure that Christianity would've had the degree of extensive impact that it had *without* Paul. Christianity might only be 1/10th of the world population, at this point in time, instead of 1/3rd, if there'd been no Paul!

On the other hand, Yeshua spoke of one being taken, one being left behind... of the 7 foolish "virgins" & the 7 "wise" virgins... & of all those Christians telling all they've done in the Lord's Name (to whom he says, "Depart from me, you workers of iniquity, I never knew you"). These instances appear to me to be indicating that Jesus fore-knew that about 50% of Christianity would be *false* -- that they're really "in it" for personal *greed* motives; Christianity as a way of advancing their worldly *and* other-worldly *ambitions*. (A large percentage of Christianity is obviously "in it" in service to "mammon" & worldly power over others.) It's my suspicion that this approximately 50% of "Christians" that Yeshua, himself, long since passed judgment *against* are mainly the followers of *Paul* rather than being people who live their lives according to the most advanced spiritual Teachings of Yeshua!

Some of these rabid interpreters of Paul's theology actually teach that "once saved, always saved" -- which boils down to believing you can actually go out & rape & murder & steal, after you've been "saved" & you'll still go to Eternal Heaven, because you accepted Jesus as your Savior, his blood as ransom for all your sins! (To be fair to Paul, i'm sure he'd be aghast, horrified & totally appalled at this kind of perverse interpretation of what he was trying to teach. But look how manypeople that's sucked-in.)

*None* of the (false) theology of Paulianity is in "The Gospel According To Thomas" -- which is where i think we get the most *accurate* preservation of the historical Yeshua's teachings. (The 4 canonized gospels were written after Paul's influence had already taken-hold -- & are not free of that influence in their theology -- especially John.)

There was nothing legal about Paul. He just had the easiest sales pitch for the low mentals and people who didn't feel like getting circumcised. And easy for people who didn't feel like following Jesus' public sermons.

Yes.

Putting too much emphasis on ANY person should be considered bad.

Britney Spears has had just as much, if not more, public attention. Does that mean SHE is god?

I'll have to agree with that. The Bible is just as much a history book as it is a book about God.

Why not? Paul made up the entire thing

No.