I was told by you that it's not authoritative MAD,
No, what you were told by me was that it's not authoritative in the way that you think that things like the Catechism are "authoritative".
That doesn't mean that "The Plot" not "authoritative" as a source of information.
so by your own words MAD does not speak in The Plot. RD said, "MAD says," and I'm saying, "Where does MAD say." You told me, "Not in 'The Plot,'"
LIar.
already. Are you changing your answer?
My answer is the same.
You want to know what MAD says, read "The Plot."
No, it's not the "be all end all" of texts. It was written by a fallible human being.
But you will never obtain a better understanding or overview of the Bible (aside from just reading the Bible itself) through any other man-made document than "The Plot."
Again, I place "The Plot" second to the Bible. What more of an endorsement do you want?
Authoritative?
That word means "able to be trusted as being accurate or true; reliable."
So sure, by definition, you can trust that "The Plot" is accurate or true, reliable even, but it is not perfect, because it was written by a fallible human being. Might it contain errors? Sure. But it's reliable.
And if it's not, then that's what this forum is for, to discuss beliefs and point out errors that others have.
Read it.
Or don't.
But, barring just reading and studying the Scriptures yourself, you will never understand the Bible better than you do now if you don't.
I'm pretty sure they still have the 30-day money back guarantee, so if you don't think it was worth reading after doing so, you can always get your money back. And If I remember correctly, they don't even tell you to return it.