Thanks for the response.

For the purposes of this question, I don't think we need to delve deeper than his statement: “Paul is, by every measure of context and based on Paul's theology, talking about the body of Christian believers”. He therefore thinks that I have taken the statement out of context. I've invited him to provide quotes to support his point of view, but he hasn't yet responded.

I was being slightly flippant when I said that Paul may have been converted to the Perennial Philosophy, because I like to stir things up a little. On the basis of that one quote, however, it seems to me that my interpretation makes more sense than Matthew's. Do you really think that I am making an argument behind the text? If you think his interpretation is more likely, can you please explain why, apart from it's just what the Church says?

I already know that he is against the Perennial Philosophy, so don't want to go down that road with him again. He chose to focus on that one quote from Paul.

If I ask him about Arabia and Damascus, I suspect I will get a traditionally Christian response, which is usually an attempt to downplay the whole episode.

Thanks once again for all your help.