Hi, I'm a Christian. Help Me Disprove My Religion!

[The Grand Nudger]

There is no doubt that Paul wrote Galatians, 1-2 Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Thessalonians 1, and Philemon. He isn't an "alleged author" he is "the" author of those works without doubt.

Nothing tells us that the author Paul and the character Paul are one in the same.  

Incorrect. Acts 13-28 is in the first-person. All the epistles - Paul's, the pseudo-pauline ones, Hebrews, James, Jude, 1,2,3, John, and 1,2 Peter are all written in the first-person.

-but this hardly matters..you'll find 1st person narratives in Dracula as well.  Nestled within that quoted comment is every reason you need to understand why the narrative POV is irrelevant, both "Paul" and Psuedo-pauline epistles are written in the first person.........clearly this POV is a device that various authors used to lend weight to the narrative.   

Incorrect, Paul claims authorship for all of his epistles. James, Jude, and Peter claim authorship for their epistles (note some are disputed). "John" claims authorship of Revelation.

-and as above, Jonathan Harker (as well as many other characters) claims authorship of some portion of Dracula.  Other portions are claimed -within the narrative- to be the diaries of the characters in question.

You are commenting on the literary convention of Paul, Epistles are the work of the literary convention of Paul...and this is what is rarely disputed.  Tell me, is "Paul" in Tacitus, Pliny or Josephus?  Could we get some contemporaneous rabbinical tracts denouncing this wayward star pupil?  If I wrote -myself- into a book...would you refer to the character Rhythm and the author Rhythm interchangeably?  What if I claimed it to be autobiographical, and it mostly was...but I smoothed over a few details here and there?  Say, in my book I won every argument, convinced everyone set before me mass-production style, and chit-chatted with kings, queens and potentates from the corners of my known world?  If we're talking about narratives, considerations of narrative style, form, and purpose ought to have a -bit- more weight.  "Paul", whomever he was...writes to convince, not record.  "Paul", as an author..whomever he was, -if- he was at all, and the character of Paul as expressed in the narratives are different animals entirely.  Even the character of Paul is a different beast from one narrative to the next.  This doesn't seem to be a problem for the narrative, at least as far as the compilers and current followers are concerned...they include all of the different Pauls.  It's only a problem for a historical Paul, set aside the literary convention of Paul.  These narratives are informative with regards to the convention, but not with regards to historicity....because they are narratives - not historical documents.  The subject here is narrative, not history.