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

the epistle intends that the same meaning be given
to the word in both insta.'1 ce s.
We shall now examine
both texts in order that we may determine the precise
significance of the term.
2.3.1 Col 1:19
25
It is surely correct, as E. Best
suggests, that lithe occurrence of the phrase 'all the
pleroma' in Col 1:19 without qualifying epithet -
and
to be understood properly it requires such -
suggests
II
that pleroma is a common word to Paul and his readers • •• I
but the problems that the 'modern reader is confronted
with in attempting to pro~ide
an acceptable interpretation
for this 'common word' are none the less difficult.
The difficulty is itself increased by the associated
grammatical problem -
what precisely is the subject of
It is to this question that we turn first.
There are three obvious possibilities: Christ, God
Although it is quite acceptable
theologically to assert that Christ is the subject and
therefore the one who reconciles (as in Eph 2:6) the
presence of ~v a.f>'t't~ would be required to
carry a reflexive sense, as would the OL' a.~'toU
and
€I, Ct,~'t6v of the following verse. Though this is not
impossible, it is unlikely because the genitive form
-182-