Art, I think you've hit on a big point of contention here. Paul was not even a contemporary of Jesus. He was working from second or third hand information. He wrote a number of things that can't be reconciled with the words of Jesus as recorded, and certainly not with the Spirit of God as I know Him personally.

The "every word literally true" thing wouldn't make sense even if there were NO contradictions or inconsistencies, simply because these things were recorded by fallible men a very long time ago, in a language nobody speaks that way today - in a culture so different that we can't really understand it now.

I guess the question actually turns on the difference between the "fallible men" who wrote about their experiences and inspirations, and the usual Christian contention that all the scripture came from God himself and was not written by men at all. I just don't buy it.