PreachParsly
Apr 21, 2007
Are you referring to John 1:29?
PreachParsly
Apr 21, 2007
OK. Now I feel stupid!
Oh, don't feel like that. I just wasn't sure what you were asking.
:-D
In case your curious about the Greek grammar, the word translated "who" in the verse/translation you quoted is [url=http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?book=Jhn&chapter=1&verse=29&strongs=3588&page=]'ho.'[/url] (you can click the link) When the word is used in the fashion it is in that sentence it can be translated as "who", "which", "that", or similar words. It's one of those words you have to use the context to translate it. It can also be a definite article (the). but in that sentence it can't be translated as "the".
PreachParsly
Apr 24, 2007
dorcas wrote:
Preach explained
it can be translated as "who", "which", "that", or similar words. It's one of those words you have to use the context to translate it. It can also be a definite article (the). but in that sentence it can't be translated as "the".
Thanks.
Hmm... I don't see how it would. Can you explain what you mean? In what manner are you seeing that it [i]could[/i] do our thinking a disservice?
I still wonder whether it [i]matters[/i] to refer to 'the Lamb' as 'who' - even though it is legitimate linguistically.
Does it somehow do our [i]thinking[/i] a disservice?
hmm... I don't see how it would. In what manner do you think that it [i]could[/i] do that to our thinking?