Jesus is not the Lamb of God slain for our sins?
Jesus is not the Good Shepard?
Jesus is not the gate by which we enter the heavenly kingdom?
Jesus is not the Living water, such as the rock which the Jews drank from in the desert?
Jesus is not the Divine Son, equal to the Father?
Jesus is not the Bread of Life which came down from heaven?
Jesus is not the Lord?
Jesus is not the true Vine?
Wow, I guess we Catholics really have gotten it all wrong!
****Rather, what we see is more RC eisegesis, reading into texts what is not there, and in other passages excluding any other interpretation other than Romes, even though allegory is what is most supported. Do not claim you are being objective, as you are not and you cannot if you will defend Rome.****
You claim that Catholics read into Scripture what is not there and the Church says that those who do not believe do so because they do not see the truth that is there.
I cannot claim objectivity? Why, because my objective opinion and belief in the opposite of yours? Do you have some infallible power that is not available to me?
I will say again, as I said to another here in this thread, you don’t know the first thing about me, how I came to believe or why I believe so strongly, and yet feel confident in commenting on something so deeply personal.
The arrogance and presumption is some of these posts couldn’t be more contradictory of the humility of Christianity.
So be it.
I do not try to convert anyone, or change their mind regarding their beliefs and Bible interpretation. I merely stand behind my own, freely and thoughtfully formed through study and prayer.
I also do not presume to be superior or to belittle anyone because they differ so radically from me in belief.
I think we have said all that can be said here and when the conversation becomes an attack, I must withdraw.
Peace be with you.
Indeed, you once again have exampled a misapprehension of context, which shows the use of the use of metaphors versus literal. Jesus is not literally a transubstantiated into an animal, or literally a snake, or vine, or a sheepgate, but He is literally the Divine Son of God and the Lord.
I cannot claim objectivity? Why, because my objective opinion and belief in the opposite of yours?
No, because you must defend Rome, and therefor cannot even allow as a possibility any other interpretation than that which supports her.
I will say again, as I said to another here in this thread, you don’t know the first thing about me
Yes, i do, i know that you evidence yourself to be a RC who must defend Rome, and therefor cannot even allow as a possibility any other interpretation than that which supports her.
The arrogance and presumption is some of these posts couldn’t be more contradictory of the humility of Christianity.
Rather, it is you and fellow RCs who are relegating all evangelical Christians to be third class citizens (after the second class EOs), and cannot allow even the possibility that they could be right in anything that contradicts Rome's official teaching. And who then protest when her arrogation is challenged and refuted.
I also do not presume to be superior or to belittle anyone because they differ so radically from me in belief.
i appreciate the attitude, but you are belittling what we believe, and as a Catholic you presume that you are part of a superior class who by a "supernatural sense of faith" under the guidance of the Church's living Magisterium "unfailingly adheres to this faith." (CCC, 889
And as Rome has infallibly declared she is infallible, when speaking in accordance with her infallibly declared formula, she cannot be wrong when she thus says she is right. And thus you cannot allow even the possibility that we could be right in anything that contradicts Rome's supreme magisterium, regardless of the weight of substantiation.
I think we have said all that can be said here and when the conversation becomes an attack, I must withdraw.
All debate is an attack on a contrary position, and thus on those who hold to it. You may want dialog, but when one cannot allow that the opposing party could be right, then it is no longer dialog .