Is hakhal the correspondent substantive to ekklesia in LXX
ben.crick at argonet.co.uk
Sat Jul 22 18:41:25 EDT 2000
On Sat 22 Jul 2000 (14:08:02), daladier at elogica.com.br wrote:
> Is qahal the correspondent substantive to ekklesia in LXX?
Yes, generally: see Acts 7:38 ... EH THi EKKLHSIAi EN THi ERHMWi, KTL.
Compare Deuteronomy 18:16, BaYYoWM HaQQaHaL ....
Revd Ben Crick, BA CF
<ben.crick at argonet.co.uk>
232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
More information about the b-hebrew