**but that difference is not driven by disagreement about what the text says, but what it means.**
So, speaking of John 6 — is that a translation problem or an interpretation problem, or dare I go one step further and just say is it simply an “understanding” or “misunderstanding” of each other’s background theology problem?
John 6 is not a translation problem. We differ on how to interpret the text, but we could use either the NAB or the ESV and still disagree.
I say the context shows Jesus is talking about spiritual bread and spiritual life, while Catholics argue it is physical bread and spiritual life.
In my experience, we can both give our explanations, and then need to understand that we still disagree. It is probably a simpler thing for me - as long as you partake and believe, I’m content. It is a bit more difficult for the Catholic, who believes I’m not really partaking. But some issues will need to be resolved in heaven.
There are lots of unresolved differences in the Catholic Church as well. Is Genesis literal or figurative? Is Jonah literal? Charismatic or not?
In the end, our differences lie primarily in Sola Scriptura, or not. When Paul said he revealed the whole counsel of God, was it whole? Or was it needing further unfolding?
Having debated much of it at length, I tend to avoid religion threads now. But that is where our differences lie - not in translation.