[Judith Anne]

That's one of the things about the EDIFICE that few, if any, hereon have been willing to admit--or admit very forthrightly. It's kind of like LDS theology and INSTITUTION. They present themselves as very similar to whatever sort of person they are trying to evangelize. The theology is soooooooo complex, convoluted, rubbery, they can stretch it to fit any evangelizing situation or perspective needed to seduce the likely suspect into their fold.

Isn't that what St. Paul did? "To the Jews, I am a Jew, to the Romans, a Roman," etc. Do I have to look up chapter and verse, or are you familiar with that statement of St. Paul's?

[Quix]

I used to would have thought that your discrimmination skills were better than that.

Oh, I see . . .

it’s that old

SAME

VS

DIFFERENT

handicap that so many Roman Catholics et al seem to have such a problem with.

My error. I forgot.

So, if I understand this slippery-ness right . . .

you are saying that Paul plays the same tune as the Mormons in concocting a different presentation of himself in a very deceptive way to convince the prospect that the prospect and the INSTITUTION are identical in key respects.

I realize that because of the Roman Catholic et al handicap in being unable [or unwilling?] to manage, to reach effective navigation of the

SAME

VS

DIFFERENT

canyon . . .

that the following might escape most of them . . . however,

to me

I see Paul as saying that to an intellectual, he’ll present the Gospel in an intellectual way. To a tent-maker, he’ll present it in a tent-making vernacular. To a sailer, he’ll present it in the metaphors of the sea. To a carpenter, he’ll present The Gospel from the perspective of a crapenter . . . to a farmer . . . in terms of planting and harvesting . . . to a stone mason . . . in terms of foundations and structures.

There’s nothing deceptively duplicitous in Paul’s efforts.

There’s nothing full of rubbery, double standard manipulative logic traps in Paul’s meaning and style.