Can you give me a quote where I made an assertion?
Here you go:
Still, the fact remains that men wrote these letters, men translated these letters, men preserved them, and there is very real evidence that they were "tweaked" if not outright changed through the centuries as various religio/political views came and changed with them.
What evidence led you to that conclusion? It's a simple question, and one does not have to be writing a college term paper in order to be asked that question. Atheiests and skeptics ask this of Christians constantly, yet when the tables are turned the atheist or skeptic responds in an indignant manner that they are somehow excused from this.
You mention Bart (not Brad) Ehrman's book Misquoting Jesus. Yes, I have read it, and found it to be an excellent primer on textual criticism. Sadly, it has been taken as a book that exposes the Bible as being full of errors. Many conservative scholars have come out with papers that are critical of Ehrman. One in particular is Ben Witherington, he states that many of Ehrman's arguements come straight from the German school of higher criticism from over one hundred years ago. All of these objections have been refuted by scholars. Sadly, Ehrman is trooting out these old views, and people how are ignorant of church history are gobbling them up as if they are the latest craze in scholarship. Witherington also points out that based on the nearly 5700 New Testament manuscripts we have an accuracy rate of 99.5%. Note that I am not even including the 19,000-plus copies that are extant in the Syriac, Coptic, Aramaic and Latin.
My conclusions are based on the evidence that Pauls extant writings were long out of existence, that copies were made, that these copies contained errors the further down in time you examine them, and that at the time that the books for the bible cannon were considered, various sects were competing for their own letters to be included. Some made it, others didn't.
What led you to this conclusion? I have not found anything that indicates that this is how the New Testament canon was put together. Now it is possible that I have missed a book or two. I do not claim inexhaustable knowledge on the subject, but I have read many conservative and liberal scholars regarding the assembling of the canon, and the arguments of the conservatives appear to line up with they way things were, to the best of our knowledge.
I might add though, that books like Misquoting Jesus and others are out there for anyone to examine the evidence, history and scholarship of the bible cannon, including Pauls letters. However, the evidence has had little effect on people of faith who are determined to believe no matter what evidence comes to light. For this, I have no desire to argue or change their minds. More power to them.
The problem is not that the "evidence has had little effect[sic] on people of faith who are determined to believe no matter what evidence comes to light." The problem is people that are so eager and willing to reject the Bible based on the old and refuted arguments of the 19th century. The problem is simple. I, like you will not argue with these sorts. However, I will not stand by and allow conclusions based on flimsy or no evidence, to remain unchallenged.
You haven't asserted anything. (I think) Would you assert that Pauls writings are really from Paul, and as such, inspired of god?
No, I have not asserted anything. I prefer to try to understand your views before I make my views known. I am not trying to be duplicitous, I am just attempting to gain clarity. However, to answer your question, yes, I do believe that Paul actually wrote the epistles that have his name. This view is based on internal and external evidences that are too numerous to enumerate here. I also believe that they are inspired by God. This view is again based on the internal and external evidences that are also too numerous to list here.
I would love to dialoge with you further on this, but if you are convinced that I am just blindly following the Bible, then there would be no benefit to either of us.
Peace to you.