P. Derek Overfield PhD Thesis - Research@StAndrews:FullText

the OT -
and this is in line with the very widespread
use of the term in secular literature~
but it is
precisely in Colossians and Ephesians that this active
sense is doubtful~
the difficulty is increased by the
jt;txtaposi tion of verb and sUbstantive.
A second
difficulty relates to the fact that it is precisely in
Colossians and Ephesians that the word has theological
significance -
and little or no agreement exists as to
what this theological significance is.
A third difficulty
concerns the relationship of the two epistles in question
and, more particularly, the relationship of the ~A~G
concepts in these epistles. These questions are
•
obviously ~nter-related~ the answer that we give to
~ny
one will certainly affect the other two and this is
nowhere more certain than in the case of the last
question. If the use of ~A-np(1J!..1a. in Ephesians is
dependent on that of Colossians then the solutions to
the problems of voice and theological significance will
be quite different from what may be the case if ~A-npW~a.
in Ephesians is to be interpreted without reference to
the Colossian epistle.
It is to this question that
we now turn.
2.3 ID."6eWIJ.a. in Colossians
nAf)ptq.La. occurs in Colossians only at 1 :19
and 2:9 and it is quite obvious, whatever the exact
significance of the term may be, that the author of
-181-