luke 18:16

[Mexdeaf]

Yet another train wreck of a thread...

Don't blame the train, blame the engineer.:laugh:

 

[Harold Garvey]

You could blame the vandals, or maybe the N/A text for all the confusion, maybe the trolls!

 

[AntennaFarmer]

.....In Middle English, "of such is" contextually meant the same thing as "belongs to" today.

I have been unable to demonstrate that.

I find that (the English) of (standing alone) could have been intended as composed of or belongs to or a number of other things. (See oed.com entry for of; note time line). As to the particular construction of such is - I can't show that it has the sense of possession rather than the sense of composition. Clearly, the KJV translators could have said "belongs to" (as in Mark 9:41) had they desired to.

Can you document by example that the particular construction of such is has the meaning belongs to.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Any guesses where this thread is going?

I cannot for the life of me understand why grown men and mature Christians cannot discuss a topic without personalising the comments and why, once attacked, cannot ignore it and stick to the issue.