[Natural Law]

"I think RCs dismiss Paul because they haven't even read Him."

I know Catholics recognize Paul as an author of Holy Scripture which proves that you don't really "think" but rather "feel" guided by your biases. Catholics also know what Calvinists do not, that Scripture has a hierarchy in which the actual words and eye witness accounts of the examples set by Jesus are paramount. Everything else in both the Old and New Testaments is only supportive. Corrupting Paul by citing his works out of context is a greater blasphemy than denouncing or rejecting him.

[Hegewisch Dupa]

"...which proves that you don't really "think" but rather "feel" guided by your biases."

Like a Dalmatian, you're spot on.

[RnMomof7]

I know Catholics recognize Paul as an author of Holy Scripture which proves that you don't really "think" but rather "feel" guided by your biases.
Catholics also know what Calvinists do not, that Scripture has a hierarchy in which the actual words and eye witness accounts of the examples set by Jesus are paramount. Everything else in both the Old and New Testaments is only supportive. Corrupting Paul by citing his works out of context is a greater blasphemy than denouncing or rejecting him.

The problem is catholics take the word of Jesus out of context, not looking at the circumstances,the language, the audience , or even the verses of the same discourse.. and thus end up with defective doctrine