Jesus’ Failed Prophecy About His Return

[Drich]

Again the evidence is the maturing of the writing and how it reflects the ever growing nature of how we are to live and work in this religion. It is intuitive and logically progression one by the very nature of his letter could almost come to the same conclusions he did given a strong enough bond with the Holy Spirit. the fact that you do not see this again disqualifies you from judging what you clearly do not understand in even the most basic of ways.
If you still want evidence and still do not understand you are not smart enough to recognize it I will again point out Paul the subject of your objection did not have anything to do with the subject being discussed.

So a completely different writing style and vocabulary is NOT evidence of a different author but IS evidence of a deity changing the writing style of the original author. Hmmm.  Yeah.  Right.  This is what we call ad hoc.  You're making the evidence conform to your conclusion, which is the opposite of the correct method of argumentation. Unless you're a lawyer and lying is your job.

YES!
dumb ass  

Complete different writing completely different vocab style to complete different church or people or expression of Christianity or even denomination if you will. Each letter can be seen as a letter to a different denomination! He was not writing to a unified standardized church. That is why I said if you can not reconcile the potential 30K different denominations under one Christ you are not in a position to judge Paul.

You have no idea because you do not understand or have to juggle break down remove, add enforce or doubble down rules dependent on to whom you are speaking. Me talking to you is 100% polar opposite than me talking to a legalistic believer, (different side of the bible different vocab different approach/lot more book chapter and verse alot more quoting scripture rather than pop culture alot more focus on thing they say they believe in from which they can not back out of! None of which is ever mentioned here because to you "the Galatians or better yet the Romans are babies in the word and at best need to have the bible given in very small doses and water down with pop culture and modern morality. Something I would NEVER think of using with a legalistic brother in christ.

 which again is completely different than me speaking to a believer free in Christ. The rules change based on what people understand and believe then so too does my reactions and writing.

Not only that but Paul himself say he uses a series of scribes including DR. Luke who wrote the book of Luke and Acts. His eye site was very bad and could not see to read or write. so of course the spelling penmanship and little things would obviously be off. but the core message changes because the people change and anyone who has ever taken the time to go out into the mission field to speak to the 'atheists' knows why Paul would be polar opposite in writing style to the church at Rome verse to the people at Corinth.

That what dumb a$$es such as the men you quote can not fathom or able to reconcile because they are looking for the mechanics of literary writing styles verses any reason Paul would have to change his thoughts on a given subject.

But again Paul is not the subject of the OP John is.

---

So again aware of your argument but dismissed on the fact the argument does not consider any of the things Paul himself said he had to juggle.