And that is precisely why Sola Scriptura is wrong. Once You eliminate the 2000 years of Sacred Tradition, all you have left is personal interpretation of the scripture in light of personal experience.
....” all you have left is personal interpretation of the scripture”.....
God says otherwise or are you saying He’s a liar?
....We have the prophetic word made ‘more sure’, to which you do well to ‘pay attention’ as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts....But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.....2 Peter 1:20
Note we are told what to know first of all....so if one fails to understand that truth then you are lost from knowing what truth is.....leaving oneself open to all manner of false teachings and traditions.....which catholicism teaches.
If sacred tradition is right and supposedly passed down, why are there so many contradictions between the ecfs on those issues most dear to roman catholicism??
I see a tiny flaw in the logic of your argument here.
On the one hand we have the inspired, inerrant, Holy Scriptures progressively revealed from the mouth of God to the mouth of the prophets by The Holy Spirit, and written down word by word in the language in which it was given, appearing from the time of Moses and Job until the death of the not-pope Beloved Apostle John The Theologian, at which time the Books of The Bible were closed with no further entries about 100 AD. That comprises about maybe 1,600 years of Divine Revelation.
On the other hand, we have about 1,900 years of uninspired, errant, fallible humans of limited intellect, knowledge, and vision of the future, baldly contradicting the Word of God as well as its faithful copiers, translators, and interpreters, to rewrite it and confuse the readers of its plain sense and common sense, assassinating its preachers and believers.
And all this is based on the cumulative effect of personal interpretations by influential people forcing their views on a credulous group of sycophants, calling their Romanist dominance "Sacred Tradition," denying the authority The God has fixed on His Word, and doing their say damndest to silence their opposition, condemning them all as "heretics."
I think you know what I'm going to tell you what to do with your twisted view as to who is doing all the inconsistent personal interpretation, whilst wagging their fingers at the reader adequately educated to make his/her own judgment on the reliability of the Bible as the sufficient rule of both faith and and practice.