It has been said....”you don’t listen and respond to what’s said in a way that indicates you actually understand the point at issue..... Instead you hear something, categorize it according to the template you have before you, and choose whichever talking point most closely approximates an item on the menu of your template. It is like talking not to a man but to a machine.
Now instead of simply a comment you are using this as a means of doing just that...yet again.
Good. Here's the template: I read the post. I select things that are incorrect in it. I look at the relevant scripture and next I look at the relevant context. I can understand both because I know Catholic theology well enough, having received thourough Religion Forum training (I have a FR diploma on my wall). I then present the scripture to the reader and explain it.
My 6676 is an example of that method. You made an assertion about a particular part of the scripture and decided to apply it to the entire scripture. I then looked at verses that contradict your generalization and cited them to you.
If you expect some different style of communication, you probably will not get it from me.