I'm not sure what your argument is here. 1 Cor 15 is a chronological account of who the Risen Lord presented himself to, so chronologically Paul is separate. He also suggests (in the verses you're quoting) that he is an apostle, despite his prior persecution of the Church. This is classified in verse 10: "But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me."
Whether you use the narrow definition of apostle or the broad definition, there are still clearly apostles being called beyond the original 12
@bazashc Have you ever read it??? It’s 100% not a children’s book and whoever says that is lying to you. Not only is the vernacular dated and elaborate but the sentence structure and lengthy writing is often hard to get your head around as an adult. Love that book! but it’s not for kids
I was never radicalized. I have held and continue to hold fairly standard political stances.
What changed when I saw the video of Charlie getting shot is my resolve to defend the freedoms I hold dear and the religion that has brought me closer to Christ.
3 things that radicalized me:
1. Watching Charlie Kirk get shot in the neck
2. Watching some liberals celebrate his death and mock his grieving wife
3. Watching some conservatives fall victim to insane conspiracy theories and mock his grieving wife
WTF is wrong with people?
@BRBC_Professor@TruthHolder2023 Paul and Matthias are both examples.
You claim Paul was an exception, but there is no evidence for that. What there is evidence of is the calling of at least two new apostles by direct, divine appointment
Gal 1:1, 1 Cor 1:1, 2 Cor 1:1, Romans 1:1, and many others directly call Paul an apostle.
Acts 14:14 calls Paul and Barnabas apostles.
Gal 1:19 implies James (the brother of Jesus) is an apostle.
Others like Timothy, Titus, and Silas are linked to apostleship.
Depending on how broad you go with the definition, there are up to 25 people identified as apostles in some fashion.
I have no problem with you believing there were only ever be the original 12, but that's not the only valid interpretation.
@KyleDWilson1 Eowyn and Faramir are two characters I wish the movies had more time to flesh out. Their individual stories/characters are great, and their joint story is very sweet.
Jesus chose only 12. The 12 chosen included Judas. After Judas betrayed Christ and died, the Apostles replaced him with Matthias. This calling of a new Apostle in Acts 1 is in favor of the LDS position.
We can also consider 1 Cor 15:1-10 (extending your reference to the next two verses as well) to see that Paul considered himself to be an apostle (with many of his epistles referring to himself as such). The verses represent him as "separate" from the 12 due to chronology (when the risen Jesus appeared to them), it doesn't separate him from the 12 in really any other measure.
In regards to Acts 5:13, Paul didn't "join himself to them", he was called by Christ.
The data we have from the Bible is that an Apostle was replaced (Judas replaced by Matthias), that Christ called a new apostle after his ascension (Paul), and that Paul is shown as having the same level of authority as the 12 Apostles.
We do not have any explicit mention of Paul being a member of the 12, but it also never excludes him from that group. The data in my mind leans towards including him in the 12, but there is enough ambiguity to allow for interpretive tradition to fall in either direction. He is an apostle though according to the Bible.