I have heard this "rebuttal" before, and it largely hangs on how much harder it is supposed to be to translate English into a foreign language than the other way around.
For a number of years, I used a foreign language (the Tok Pisin language, of Papua New Guinea) in the course of my everyday work. All I can say is that I never at any time had any more difficulty in translating English into Tok Pisin, than I had in translating Tok Pisin into English.
If that is indeed a problem (i.e the translating of English into the foreign language), then this raises questions about the "translators" grasp of that particular language.
The other part of this "rebuttal" has to do with F.W. Franz saying he "wouldn't", rather than he "couldn't" translate that bible verse into Hebrew;
- perhaps because the question was irrelevant?
I would have thought that the proper response to an irrelevant question from the prosecutor would have been for Franz's lawyer to have protested to the court that the question had no relevance. Yet, there is no evidence that this happened.
Bill.