Hi heir,
I've added more to my former post
here. I believe in a universal gospel of the kingdom based on the Fatherhood of God and Brotherhood of man proclaimed by Jesus and taught by his apostles and followers, however their teachings may have changed, altered and modified certain aspects of the original teaching...as often happens within the evolution of any given religious tradition or culture.
Since Jesus didnt necessarily promise the coming of a 13th disciple, and warned of false teachers coming in his name, I dont see any precedent or imperative to believe Paul as precisely as you do but to take his words carefully and discern them in relation to the words of Jesus and the original 12 apostles. Since I also do not believe the NT contains the whole or final truth of Jesus, and the biblical record is imperfect and subject human error and embellishments....I find other sources for Jesus teaching and universal truth in general as helpful in discovering what Jesus is all about and the various ways to interpret the Christ story and message (historically, allegorically, mythically, and so on).
Your insistence then for exalting Paul's gospel as
the only one that "saves" is incidental to taking the NT under the assumption that it favors a Pauline disposition, but I see that more of how it was canonized and made by scribes/editors to appear that way when there is much more to consider in the historical context.
See: The Paul Problem