I don't concede your view has merit in regards to the bible and truth, because it doesn't. Denominations disagreeing on minor points still isn't 'ok' and being flawed humans doesn't justify or excuse anyone from misinterpreting or twisting scripture. Those issues should be set right. There is simply nothing more I can say to you on this matter.
There is a lot you can say. You haven't addressed a single logical, rational argument I have made. You simply spout the arguments of your indoctrination to support the dogma you are clinging to. You haven't addressed a single point of the many I have made. For example when you tried to use 2 Peter 3:15, I gave a very detailed, logical, rational argument why 2 Peter 3:15 is not an endorsement of Paul's writings as the word of God. Your only reponse was to claim that Peter was grouping Paul's writings with other scriptures, when the word scripture in the original greek text carries no implication of sacredness of holiness. Even if Paul's writings were the word of God, 2 Peter 3:15 cannot be used as proof it is.
Let me recap all my points you have failed to address and add a couple more:
1. God told Moses he would send a prophet "and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him." That prophet was Jesus, not Paul. To suppose that Paul needed to tell us anything beyond what Jesus told us is in direct contradiction of the prophecy in Deut 18:18.
2. Jesus also states he would send the Holy Spirit to remind us of all he spoke in the flesh. No mention of the Holy Spirit coming to teach us everything Jesus failed to teach the disciples or add anything to what Jesus spoke. How could Paul write about what Jesus spoke if he never knew Jesus in the flesh? Peter, James and John, however were direct witnesses and heard the words of Jesus for themselves. Paul specifically points out that he received nothing form Peter, James and John and speaks in a deragatory manner of them. (Galatians 2:6). Strange that the Holy Spirit would not lead Paul to learn about Jesus in the flesh from his own disciples.
2. Peter never called Paul an Apostle and no one in the Bible except Paul himself ever defended his Apostleship. John 5:31 "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. Rev 2:2
3. The book of Revelation refers to the 12 apostles of Jesus Christ. Acts records when Judas was replaced by Matthias. No were is there any mention of a 13th apostle or a prophecy of an Apostle to the Gentiles. Paul was an evangelist not an Apostle. Understand the difference between an Apsotle and Evangelist and you will see why Peter warned specifically about Paul's writings.
4. To anyone who doesn't have a pre-conceived notion or dogma to defend, 2 Peter 3:15 is a warning about Paul's writings and not an endorsement of it as the word of God. This would have also have been the perfect place for Peter to defend Paul's apostleship, but instead only calls him a dear beloved brother.
5. Paul admits more than once that his writing's are his own ideas and thoughts and not commands from God. I listed multiple verses that warn about adding to the word of God. If Paul were truly writing the "word of God" under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he would not have added his own comments or commands.
6. Peter says that Paul wrote with the wisdom that God gave him. The word of God comes from the leading of the Holy Spirit, not the wisdom of man.