>>10682281 lb
>Did Jesus write the bible? Read the Bible? Endorse the bible?
Jesus Christ is God the Word made flesh. He IS the Word. He was before all things, and in the beginning the Word was with God creating all creatures, and was God. The Father sent His Word to the earth to prophesy about the Lamb of God through His chosen Prophets. It is that Word Christ Jesus fulfilled, all the things written about Him, which is even better than an "endorsement". He didn't simply endorse, He DID. The fact that He did what was written about Him is better than an endorsement. Furthermore, as a Man, He went to synagogue, even the Temple as a child of 12, and studied and read the Word. The Gospel Narratives say as much.
To address your "torture", the reason Christ Jesus was the Lamb of God was because the one who had to pay for the sin that came into the world was a man. A man owed the penalty, the price. So God put on flesh and PAID IT with His own flesh. He was the only man without sin, as only God does not sin, therefore it could only be God made flesh that could remit sin.
As to "who wrote the Bible", the Author is God. The Father sent down His Word, and not only spoke it audibly Himself (to Moses and others), but also took command of the tongues of His chosen Prophets, who both spoke that Word and wrote it. They were not the "authors" of it, but merely the conveyors, as ambassadors sent by a King. Since the Word existed before it was written, were that written lost, this wouldn't change what already existed.
>Can the pope change the bible? (History)
If you are talking about ability to carry something out rather than carrying something out with impunity, then yes. He has changed it, not physically, but in his doctrines. The Man of Sin shall be cast alive into the Lake of Fire.
The Man of Sin (and his army of locusts/priests), to use your word, "simulates" the drinking of human blood and human flesh. Their belief however, is that it is "actual" flesh and blood. When Christ spoke of drinking His blood and of eating His flesh, He was representing the Lamb of God. Passover Lambs were indeed eaten under the law, though never the blood, but those things were the type and shadow of the real Lamb of God. The old passover lambs indeed had to be eaten physically with physical mouths, but those things only cleansed the OUTSIDE. Christ came to cleanse the INSIDE, the invisible part of man, the soul. Therefore, when He talked about eating His flesh and blood, He was speaking about something changing the SOUL. That which is spiritual must have spiritual food. He even said as much at the end of His discourse in John 6 when He said His Words were "spirit".
Why would Q ask these questions? That's above his pay grade (though not necessarily personally). Q (a team) is focused on a secular state of the world, not on the things which Christ already finished. Besides, Christ rules all nations with a rod of iron. He doesn't need help, but He does bring about His Father's will, raising kings and deposing them, raising up nations and deposing them. It would be better that we all fall on our faces as a Nation and repent before God. I know many are. If God so chooses, He doesn't require everyone to repent, though they should. He will spare even if a remnant seek Him in Truth and repent before Him, confessing that as a nation, we have sinned.