I have no *posse* and dan and RWC are not my followers. Dan posted something relevant and RWC is then OP of the thread. Both were courtesy pinged and since they are both following the thread, I cannot be accused of calling in *my posse*. They would have seen it anyways.
As for Francis.......you’re the one bringing the (alleged) authority of the papacy into it.
Francis does have something to do with it, because he is your pope, and that is what was being discussed when you disparagingly accused the author of being his own pope and the need for an authority to *correctly interpret* Scripture for him. By invoking the title of *pope* you used that as the authority to which you were appealing.
So if the discussion is the authority and the pope is used as the standard of it, then yes, Francis is relevant.
So the questions remain unanswered.
Who should we rather trust? Pope FRANCIS???? Just look at his track record. You want HIM interpreting Scripture for you? Or anything else for that matter?
A couple more. Since you feel an authority is necessary to properly interpret Scripture, what authority do you recognize and what gives you the right to make your own determination of what a legitimate authority is?
Based on Francis’ record, his values resemble more Luciferian ideals than Christianity.
Anybody with a basic understanding of The Bible can make that assessment using logic.
These jokers want us to believe that his words have no meaning and that we should revere some old ‘traditions’ (not biblical) or some dead extra canon teachings.
Look squirrel is there response when you use Scripture to respond to them.
It’s no wonder they are losing congregants in droves.
You didn’t answer my questions.
That’s OK.
I’m not surprised.