[metmom]

I will not read his motives; he tells us pretty much what they are, and one thing that can never be denied about Paul is that he is pretty open and honest about things, so his intentions were not hidden it seems.

But he made it very clear that he will say, do and become anything in order to gain converts. Some can see it as a virtue, others as a vice.

That is not really true, as anyone who has a decent working knowledge of Scripture would know.

I seriously doubt that he would lie, cheat, steal, murder, compromise his beliefs, preach a different gospel.

Identifying with someone culturally, becoming all things to all men, is not the same as saying, doing, or becoming anything to gain converts.

That's an intellectually dishonest portrayal of Paul's words.

[Legatus]

I seriously doubt that he would lie, cheat, steal, murder, compromise his beliefs, preach a different gospel.

I can't be sure because like with rnmomof7's conception of the Trinity I look at it once or twice and then try to pretend I'm not seeing it; but I think smvoice asserted exactly that Paul's Gospel was different than Peter's Gospel.

In these mega-threads I don't know that I've ever seen one Protestant correct another Protestant on a point of doctrine and what it really seems like is that as long as one isn't Catholic absolutely anything goes... as long as it doesn't look like it might be Catholic at which point it's "pagan, pagan, pagan".

[kosta50]

That's an intellectually dishonest portrayal of Paul's words

Accusing a Freeper of dishonesty is an ad hominem.