But the Bible doesn’t say that Jesus turned from Peter to the group for that next sentence, and wouldn’t asserting that be adding to the words of the Bible? I accept that it could be interpreted that way, but I do not accept that it cannot be interpreted that Jesus was still speaking to Peter.
No one has addressed why one interpretation of this passage is better than the other. You want me to believe a certain interpretation is the only acceptable one based on what? Your interpretation of how other passages relate to this one? But there are many interpretations of those other passages, too. So how is anyone ever to determine the Truth, if different people can read the same passage and come up with different interpretations.
Obviously depending on the words alone will make it impossible, as evidenced above where the fact that Jesus was addressing different people at different times has to be inserted in order to clarify the text. So who has the authority to add clarifications?
O2
The bible DOES illustrate that ALL were being spoken to at the start; impulsive Peter jumps out of his virtual school desk chair, saying "Me, ME, ME!!!" and gives an answer; do you not agree?
I'm glad you've noted about the ADDING WORDS TO implication.
This is PRECISELY what the RCC does in SO many of it's assertions.
Please, if you will, hold IT to the same standards as are tried to be applied to Protestantism?
If that request is too much; can we be allowed to use the same rules that Rome does?