Your defense is lame and getting lamer.
Just because some ignorant people didn’t “think” of the Latin Bible as a translation doesn’t mean that it is not a translation. It is a translation, and no matter how much time passes, or how people “think” about it, it will always be a translation.
To bad Catholic’s (Which I was once one...)reject the clear teachings and doctrines of the Bible for their man made teachings and vain traditions. Such as The person of Mary, Praying to dead saints,the Papacy, The making of saint’s, the mass,and salvation of works etc..
These Catholic teachings are mostly founded on Scripture not taken in context ect....Very dear people but blinded by their traditions...again I know, for I was once one.
Matthew 15, Mark 7
You wrote:
“Your defense is lame and getting lamer.”
No, your dishonest attack is what is lame. I never once claimed that the Vulgate was anything other than a translation. I said it was a translation, but because of its age, many people all but forgot it was a translation and rarely brought up the issue. This is EXACTLY what I said: “In the 1520s there was no authorized translation and the Vulgate was rarely thought of as a translation because of its ancient past.” That comment was not only clear, but absolutely 100% undeniably correct. In post #53, I reiterated the truth - the Vulgate was a translation - a truth I never once, EVER, ANYWHERE denied. You, however, insinuated that I did deny it with comments such as this: “If you cannot even keep that salient fact straight in your head there is obviously no ground for discussion with you.”
I never once - NOT ONCE - ever said that the Vulgate was anything other than a translation. I also never made a mistake by denying the reality of the fact that the ancientness of the Vulgate made many readers of it all but forget, or not care about, the fact that it is a translation.
“Just because some ignorant people didn’t “think” of the Latin Bible as a translation doesn’t mean that it is not a translation.”
And who here is saying otherwise? No one. Why do you keep acting like someone has denied that the Vulgate is a translation? I NEVER ONCE said otherwise. Can’t you just present evidence for your claims rather than create straw man claims like that?
“It is a translation, and no matter how much time passes, or how people “think” about it, it will always be a translation.”
Is that news to you? Again, who here ever said that the Vulgate was anything other than a translation? No one. So why keep acting like someone did? Can’t you just present evidence about your wild claims about Tyndale rather than making stuff up like this? Is this all you have - wild, bizarre insinuations?
Do you have any evidence AT ALL for what you claim?
Any?