[Forest Keeper]

We think so highly of Paul that he is considered the second greatest apostle after Peter. The Church that I grew up in and attended school in was called Sts. Peter and Paul. We have no issue with Paul; to the contrary we regard him very very highly.

But just two posts earlier, in 6,951 you say this to Dr. E: "Once again you use Pauline verses over Christ’s. Christ is inclusivist, with only those refusing Him going to Hell. Paul is exclusivist, with only those picked out of the jar going to Heaven."

What are we supposed to think? :) You are clearly pitting Paul as against Christ. He is not. Paul is espousing what Christ taught him DIRECTLY. If there is apparent contradiction in their respective teachings then one can reconcile them so that both are correct (Reformed approach), or one can declare one right and the other wrong (Apostolic approach).

We think that Calvinism is a dark and evil misinterpretation of Paul, ...

Then for you Roman Catholics, may you enjoy those views of your fellow Christians in all the fullness of Christ's love. :)

[MarkBsnr]

We do no pitting.

We understand Paul’s words through the lens of the Gospels. We say that the Paulines are exclusivist, not Paul; we say that the Paulines are wrong, not Paul.

We speak and you misinterpret our words; might that misunderstanding also apply to Paul’s words? We think that it is, much as a host of heresies were created in the first millennium. Paul was misinterpreted then; does that make Paul wrong? Obviously not.