After admitting the Pope is wicked you imply a need for a Pope. There is none found in scripture. Jesus said "call no man father", it couldn't be more clear.

No, I didn't. I imply the need of a decentralized synodal Church - the way the Church of the first thousand years was ran, which is the tradition of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Jesus said "call no man father", it couldn't be more clear.

No, there's no such passage in Scripture. Mathew 23:9 says "call no man your father". But Peter refers to Mark as his son and as does Paul to Timothy. It's such a bizarre literalist argument - what, you think calling your biological dad father is going against Jesus' command? Furthermore, it denies the patriarchal order made by God here on Earth, which mirrors the monarchical patriarchy within the Trinity (Father - Son - Spirit). A man is the father of his family. A priest is a father of his parish. Patriarchs or bishops are fathers of the Church. A monarch/king is a father to the nation - all the way going to Christ and His Father. This is how the world was conceived of by people for thousands of years of Christianity (going back to the OT).

He also said "call no man your teacher" - so what's up with that? This is a word-concept fallacy - the title "father" is not the same as the relationship. The point Jesus makes is that our loyalty lies to our Father in heaven and not in something found in this world.

Here's a short video on the orthodox perspective on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K8m2BADWrI

I can't think of a single Bible believing church looking to Luther for any tradition. They all look to scripture.

There's literally an Evangelical Lutheran Church. But my point was that Luther set the precedent of every person being their own authority in interpretation of Scripture. This is why there's not a single Protestant Church but thousands of denominations. And each one contradicts the other in some way. It's pluralism.

By that logic I need a "Papa" (or Pope) to even read what you wrote. How am I to interpret anything you said unless a Pope first tells me in his own words? Absurd when you think about it.

Day to day communication is not the same as interpretation of an ancient sacred text, that is part of a living tradition which keeps and passes down the correct teachings and correct interpretation. Texts don't interpret themselves. I, as an Orthodox Christian believe the correct interpretation is within the Church, given to us by the Church Fathers and not by a single person.

Of course you can misinterpret what I wrote - and you obviously do because you hold Protestant presuppositions, and everything I say about Christianity is interpreted through that lens. This is fine, people constantly misinterpret each other. The problem is when you have a very specific dogmatic teaching where correct interpretation is crucial for that tradition. Even one small mistake can lead to the degradation of the faith and falling away from the Church. Every heresy and false teaching is the result of incorrect interpretation (even if they continue as big traditions of their own like the Non-Chalcedonians, Roman Catholicism, Protestantism, Judaism and Islam).