First of all, let us look on the superficial case, trivialities and a trickster’s innuendo that catholic faith defender Duane tried to impose against Bro Eli Soriano regarding Textual scholarship or in simple terms, knowledge on greek\hebrew text in terms of linguistic approach.
So what if Bro Eli is not expert on those field? So was Peter and the apostles.
Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.
Paul was also in terms of extra-religious matters even regarding absolute truth.
1 Corinthians 13:9-12
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
QUESTION: How does ignorance in certain things as how to read hebrew correctly, how to pronounce correctly and as alleged misrepresent word consonance affects the doctrinal consistency of the truth we have in the church?! Can trivial errors be evidence for believing the corruption of the whole doctrines?!
Its a logical fallacy actually. Just look below at how Duane criticize Eli even with a mocking comic. Its logical fallacy. A monkey trying on the logic of Einstein. Hmmp!
Taking it at face value, Bro Eli was correct to say kurios (lord) is Elohim (the gods) in the manner how YHWH become adonai (lord). Nothing wrong. Its adopting the translator’s way of substitution. YHWH was substituted as Adonai therefore, it could be translated by virtue of that substitution to translate YHWH as Lord likewise kurios as Elohim bec the thought was, Lord was equatable to YHWH therefore lord is equatable to God or elohim, as i repeat, by virtue of the translator’s manner of substitution!
Is he wrong?
Then why do catholics used lord instead of YHWH, then?! Are you foolish to use lord as substitute to YHWH, and then attacks someone substituting kurios with Elohim, or say, translating, yet still in that essence of substitution?!
Answering #1 & #3
Taking it at face value, mispronunciation as well as wrong reading pattern is too trivial and superficial to be integrally a falsification of a man’s credibility. The simplicity of that fact, exposed the catholic’s desperation to criticize even with least bearing. Its a desperate move. As i said, ignorance in technical hebrew or greek language is not evidence of falsehood. You have to specifically disprove the doctrine for you to be credible. Bec likewise Peter was unlearned regarding technicalities of hebrew language or greek learned only in sophisticated schools, or learning programs.
Me, I cannot read Greek and Hebrew and its accompanying grammar but there is wide expanse of bible translation where we can derive closely how the correct reading should be. HOW MUCH ENGLISH TRANSLATION IS WRONG COMPARING TO THE CORRECT GREEK/HEBREW READING FOR SUPERFICIAL BLUNDER TO FALSIFY THE INTEGRITY OF OUR DOCTRINES?! I guess, little. Besides, what is the holy spirit as guide been for?!
Now, what have i proven?
Catholics are too desperate to refute someone by sensasionalizing superficial criticism as though it has substantial value but then they were trying to amuse themselves ignorantly as though impactful. Youre deceiving yourselves, catholics by employing a dud and genius wannabe!
Actually, Duane employed a logical fallacy. He foolishly, as though an English Illiterate, infers that partially true is integrally true…
Foolish Duane, akala ko match tayo?