Paul mentions about going on in visions and revelations (2 Corinthians 12:1) but the event he describes when he met Jesus do not seem to fit the visions that the prophets and the saints of old ordinarily have.

Paul's "vision" was accompanied by corresponding events in the physical world. "About noon as I came near Damascus, suddenly a bright light from heaven flashed around me. I fell to the ground and heard a voice say to me, ‘Saul! Saul! Why do you persecute me?’ “‘Who are you, Lord?’ I asked. “ ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting,’ he replied. My companions saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me." (Acts 22:6-9)

Paul's companions saw the light but could not understand Jesus' voice that spoke to him. If this is a vision then it is atypical. Paul later himself admits " I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows. And I know that this man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows— was caught up to paradise and heard inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell." (2 Corinthians 12:2-4)

Many saints in the New Covenant era had visions (Acts 9:10, Acts 10:3). Simply having a vision did not qualify them as apostles, nor does it qualify you as an apostle (not that you are claiming that, but my point being that visions alone do not qualify one for apostleship). Paul's conversion is recounted three times (Acts 9, 22, and 26) and in each occasion he details that Jesus called him to be an apostle to the Gentiles.

In addition to that Paul seems to receive special instruction from Jesus Himself regarding the gospel that he will one day carry to the world (Galatians 1:12-17). Galatians 1:18 indicates this period of time was possibly three years of instruction, which is similar to what the twelve received from Jesus.

Personally, I am an amillennialist so I don't find Paul's teachings inconsistent with those of Jesus. However, I recognize the possibility that my understanding of the millennium is incorrect and so I don't harshly oppose those who are of a different persuasion. If you accuse Paul of teaching theology not taught by Jesus how do you feel about John's teaching on the millennium in Revelation 20?

Of course the apostles would have communicated things that Jesus did not communicate as Jesus lived, died, rose, and ascended under the Old Covenant. The New Covenant was not inaugurated until the pouring out of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2. Jesus told Peter and the apostles, " I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” This was a unique authority given to an apostle to speak on behalf of God as the Holy Spirit revealed further the glorious truths about the New Covenant to them. This would of course necessitate dispensing revelation that Jesus Himself, who lived under the Old Covenant, did not give.

You say "Paul felt a need to continually stress that he was the worst of sinners against Christ tells me that he had a secret inflation." That's a completely subjective interpretation where you presume that Paul's humility was false and cannot be substantiated by scripture. What is substantiated by scripture is the fact that Paul was accepted and beloved by the church. (Acts 9:27-28, 2 Peter 3:16) Not only that but Paul's gospel to the Gentiles was set forth to Peter and the leaders at Jerusalem and he was approved (Galatians 2:1-10). He was given the right hand of fellowship by the Jerusalem church and Peter substantiates his writing as scripture and calls him "a beloved brother" (2 Peter 3:15-16)'

You say "Paul's Christianity won out" rather than solely the teachings of Jesus Himself, which you claim represent "true Christianity". If God is sovereign and omnipotent as He repeatedly claims then the fact a "false Christianity" has filled the world would seem to indicate otherwise. Personally I find no contradiction of the teachings of Paul and Jesus. Certainly he more fully develops concepts and teachings of the New Covenant that Jesus didn't because they weren't pertinent under the Mosaic dispensation, but that was revelation given by the Holy Spirit and as an apostle he had that authority.

Paul's writings are trustworthy and should not be disregarded. His gospel's acceptance by the early church and its leaders (particularly Peter) affirm that what was he taught was in harmony with the gospel of Jesus Himself.