[B-Greek] PANTA EN PASIN and PANTA KAI EN PASI
Carl W.Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Aug 30 05:30:25 EDT 2007
We really need to see the relevant texts within their contexts. I
list below the passages that I've found; two of them have PANTA EN
PASIN, one has PANTA KAI EN PASI. There are also a couple others that
are similar but but quite of the same magnitude, or so it seems to
me. Let me start with these latter, which I think that I'm closer to
understanding.
a. Phil. 4:12
οἶδα καὶ ταπεινοῦσθαι, οἶδα καὶ
περισσεύειν· ἐν παντὶ καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν
μεμύημαι, καὶ χορτάζεσθαι καὶ
πεινᾶν καὶ περισσεύειν καὶ
ὑστερεῖσθαι·
OIDA KAI TAPEINOUSQAI, OIDA KAI PERISSEUEIN; EN PANTI KAI EN PASIN
MEMUHMAI, KAI CORTAZESQAI KAI PEINAN KAI PERISSEUEIN KAI hUSTEREISQAI.
This one I'm pretty sure that I do understand. Here we have EN PANTI
KAI EN PASIN construed with MEMUHMAI, a very of mystic initiation,
used figuratively of full grasp of a very important secret: "I have,
in each and every circumstance, come to an understanding (of
contentment)" (BDAG: "in any and all circumstances I have learned the
secret of being well fed and of going hungry"
b. [Eph. 4:6
εἷς θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ πάντων, ὁ ἐπὶ
πάντων καὶ διὰ πάντων καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν.
hEIS QEOS KAI PATHR PANTWN, hO EPI PANTWN KAI DIA PANTWN KAI EN PASIN.]
This is apparently part of a liturgical text; it goes easily into
English as "one God and Father of all, the one who is over all and
through all and in all" But I am less sure of exactly what the last
two prepositional phrases actually mean, unless it may be "all-
pervasive and omnipresent." Are PANTWN and PASIN here neuter plural
and intended to indicate all creatures or every single item of the
created universe? Perhaps so; my sense is that the phraseology here
is intended to give expression to much the same sense as Psalm
139:9-10 in the inimitable language of the KJV: "9 If I take the
wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;
10 Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me."
I turn now to the texts containing the two formulations about which
Kramer posed the question. Two of them involve textual questions:
whether PANTA is preceded by the article TA; I'm not sure that
resolution of the textual question is decisive for the meaning, which
is difficult enough in itself to grasp -- for me, at least.
c. PANTA EN PASIN
1. 1Cor. 15:28
ὅταν δὲ ὑποταγῇ αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα,
τότε [καὶ] αὐτὸς ὁ υἱὸς
ὑποταγήσεται τῷ ὑποτάξαντι αὐτῷ
τὰ πάντα, ἵνα ᾖ ὁ θεὸς [τὰ] πάντα
ἐν πᾶσιν.
hOTAN DE hUPOTAGHi AUTWi TA PANTA, TOTE [KAI] AUTOS hO hUIOS
hUPOTAGHSETAI TWi hUPOTAXANTI AUTWi TA PANTA, hINA Hi hO QEOS [TA]
PANTA EN PASIN.
The verse evidently describes the final consummatory event in an
eschatological sequence, when the supreme Orderer has "everything in
its place and a place for everything." But what does the hINA clause
actually mean? Is [TA] PANTA (a) a predicate nominative to hO QEOS
with the copula Hi? or (b) an adverbial expression, meaning
"completely, without exception." I think that (b) is more likely
because I don't think that the author -- Paul -- is likely to be
saying that the Father is IDENTICAL with all things. Rather, He is to
be fully present in all things, or so it seems to me.
2. Eph. 1:23
... ἐκκλησίᾳ, ἥτις ἐστὶν τὸ σῶμα
αὐτοῦ, τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ τὰ πάντα ἐν
πᾶσιν πληρουμένου.
... EKKLHSIA, hHTIS ESTIN TO SWMA AUTOU, TO PLHRWMA TOU TA PANTA EN
PASIN PLHROUMENOU.
I cannot with confidence draw any satisfying understanding of this
text. Eddie Mishoe has bombarded me belabored this verse in off-list
correspondence with me repeatedly in recent months, focusing
primarily upon the participle PLHROUMENOU which appears to be a
middle-voice usage, agentive with TA PANTA as direct object (although
PLHROW is otherwise transitive in either an active or passive sense):
"the fullness of the one who fills all things in all things." I don't
know what that means, if that's what the author intended, although
part of my problem is that there's a mystical notion of PLHRWMA and
PLHRWSIS that looms very large in the religious culture of the early
centuries of our era, and that notion, so far as my mind works, is
utterly arcane; I can't really fathom it. I'm somewhat amused at
NET's bald-faced "the fullness of him who fills all in all" along
with its notes suggesting that other possible understandings are --
perhaps -- to be considered.
An idea that is gathering plausibility in my eyes now is that perhaps
(a) PLHROUMENOU is really middle and intransitive in the sense of "be
full" or "fill up/out" and (b) TA PANTA is not object of an agentive
verb but rather is adverbial. If that's the case, then the phrase
might be "the fullness of the one is full altogether in all things."
IF that's right, it comes close, it seems to me, to saying the same
thing as the phrase in 1 Cor 15:28.
d. PANTA KAI EN PASIN
Col. 3:10-11
... κατ᾿ εἰκόνα τοῦ κτίσαντος
αὐτόν, ὅπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην καὶ
Ἰουδαῖος, περιτομὴ καὶ ἀκροβυστία,
βάρβαρος, Σκύθης, δοῦλος,
ἐλεύθερος, ἀλλὰ [τὰ] πάντα καὶ ἐν
πᾶσιν Χριστός.
... KAT' EIKONA TOU KTISANTOS AUTON, hOPOU OUK ENI hELLHN KAI
IOUDAIOS, PERITOMH KAI AKROBUSTIA, BARBAROS, SKUQHS, DOULOS,
ELEUQEROS, ALLA [TA] PANTA KAI EN PASIN CRISTOS.
This is pretty clearly related to the same notions finding expression
in Gal 3:28, the newly baptized believer whose ethnic, social,
gender, etc. distinctions from other human beings are no longer
relevant because Christ is present in him/her. Here [TA] PANTA does
seem to be predicate nominative to CRISTOS with an implicit ESTIN
copula, but PANTA must here refer not to "all things" bur rather all-
inclusively to the distinctions spelled out in the sequence, hELLHN
KAI IOUDAIOS, PERITOMH KAI AKROBUSTIA, BARBAROS, SKUQHS, DOULOS,
ELEUQEROS: "all those distinctions that mark off human beings from
each other." The image (EIKWN) of the creator is one lacking any such
distinctions as such, but it can stamp all human beings who are
marked by any one of those distinctions. The image of the creator is,
therefore, in the baptized believer as new creature, the presence of
Christ in the believer in a "one size fits all" wrapper: while
believers may still be Greek, or Judean, circumcised or not, free or
slave, yet even so Christ is in them all. Others may understand this
passage differently, but that's what I make of it. And I really think
that the phrase PANTA KAI EN PASIN here bears little or no
relationship to the phrase PANTA EN PASIN in (c) beyond being usages
of the adjective PAS.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Ret)
On Aug 29, 2007, at 12:37 PM, kramer kramer wrote:
> B-Greekers,
>
> Are these two phrases structurally and functionally identical?
> Does the addition of two connectives in PANTA KAI EN PASI add a
> meaning that is not conveyed by PANTA EN PASIN?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kramer
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not
> web links.
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list