Why??? Certainly nothing offensive or in violation of the law was said in claiming he was the door or vine...
You ignored my first clause: “If the non-Catholic interpretation of John 6 were true...”
If the non-Catholic interpretation of John 6 were true, wouldn’t the declaration that we must eat his body and drink his blood be received by the crowd with the same equanimity as his statements that he is a door/vine/way, etc.?
Why??? Certainly nothing offensive or in violation of the law was said in claiming he was the door or vine...