[metmom]

That's yet another flaw in "sola Scriptura", by the way: it can't tell you whether the original (Greek or Hebrew) "Scriptura" was translated properly, or mistranslated/mangled!

It's not a flaw of sola scriptura.

And you know what? The Catholic church isn't going to tell you when it mistranslates something either. So much for depending on men and tradition.

[paladinan]

metmom wrote, in reply to my comment:

[Paladinan] That's yet another flaw in "sola Scriptura", by the way: it can't tell you whether the original (Greek or Hebrew) "Scriptura" was translated properly, or mistranslated/mangled!

[metmom]
It's not a flaw of sola scriptura.

(??) How could it not be? If your English translation has the wrong word, and you're using the English translation to make your point, surely you see the problem? 2 Timothy 3:16 does NOT use the word "perfect"... though BipolarBob thought it did, and his entire argument (on that point) rested on that (incorrect) word. If a technique allows you to build your entire argument on a false word or bit of data, that's definitely a flaw in the technique.

And you know what? The Catholic church isn't going to tell you when it mistranslates something either. So much for depending on men and tradition.

Er... I'm not quite sure what you mean to say, here. Do you believe that there is NO possible way to get a true translation of Scripture, EVER? You seem to be saying, "Maybe Sola Scriptura can't give a good translation, but neither can the Catholic Church!" Is that what you're saying? I need to be sure, before I try a reply.