The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for us. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really it's your church father or fathers reinterpreting for you (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between yourself and God's word. You claim there is a need for an interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate with you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions. I'm merely echoing the warning that Jesus clearly gave to you but you resist the truth. Nothing to do with needing an interpreter, it's you resisting the truth in unrighteousness.

You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions" or "God's rituals".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for us. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really it's your church father or fathers reinterpreting for you (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between yourself and God's word. You claim there is a need for an interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate with you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions. I'm merely echoing the warning that Jesus clearly gave to you but you resist the truth. Nothing to do with needing an interpreter, it's you resisting the truth in unrighteousness. You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions" or "God's rituals".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for us. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really it's your church father or fathers reinterpreting for you (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between yourself and God's word. You claim there is a need for an interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate with you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions, that you are literally putting over the Bible. You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions" or "God's rituals".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really it's your church father or fathers reinterpreting for you (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between yourself and God's word. You claim there is a need for an interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate with you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions, that you are literally putting over the Bible. You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions" or "God's rituals".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really it's your church father or fathers reinterpreting for you (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between yourself and God's word. You claim there is a need for an interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate with you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions, that you are literally putting over the Bible. You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions" or "God's rituals".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really it's your church father or fathers reinterpreting for you (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between yourself and God's word. You claim there is a need for an interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate with you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions. You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions" or "God's rituals".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really it's your church father or fathers reinterpreting for you (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between yourself and God's word. You claim there is a need for an interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate to you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions. You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions" or "God's rituals".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really it's your church father or fathers reinterpreting for you (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between you and God's word. You claim there is a need for interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate to you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions. You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions" or "God's rituals".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really just your church father or fathers (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between you and God's word. You claim there is a need for interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate to you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions. You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions" or "God's rituals".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really just your church father or fathers (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between you and God's word. You claim there is a need for interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate to you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions. You have no leg to stand on against the documented words of Christ himself. "Call no man father", and don't put "traditions of men" on the same level as God's commandments.

Notice he didn't say "God's traditions".

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really just your church father or fathers (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between you and God's word. You claim there is a need for interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate to you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions.

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really just your church father or fathers (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between you and God's word. You claim there is a need for interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate to you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Wrong tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your tradition and religion. Jesus specifically warned about the "traditions of men". It was in this same context of religious traditions.

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really just your church father or fathers (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between you and God's word. You claim there is a need for interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate to you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.

It's weird you believe this, because the OT and its continuation in the NT is literally a tradition that is upheld by rituals and sacraments. Denying tradition is sawing off the branch you're sitting on. It is this tradition of the Church that has produced the Bible (remember that there was no Bible until 4c.)

We are saved by the reality of the situation, by God's grace through faith. By God's gift to us. That's not a tradition or a ritual. Period.

Wrong tradition didn't produce the Bible, that is the work of the prophets and apostles who authored it from divine inspiration.

You've twisted everything I've said to fit your TRADITION and RELIGION.

The point was that everyone ultimately has to appeal to an authority for interpretation of Scripture.

So you did imply that we need a Pope to reinterpret scripture for you. You just call your Pope "the Church" when really just your church father or fathers (btw 'Pope" means Papa so same issue).

So yes that brings up the glaring issue that you put a layer between you and God's word. You claim there is a need for interpreter beyond the Holy Spirit. You claim that your church fathers (Popes) are able to communicate to you in a way that you can understand but God's word cannot.

Period. That is the truth. That's what you're saying.