Exegesis of 2 Cor. 3:6 - 18

[benherndon]

Here is 2Cor 3:6-18 from Berry's Interlinear Greek-English New Testament (the English part):

"v6 who also made competent us [as] servants of a new covenant; not of letter, but of Spirit; for the letter kills, but the

v7 Spirit quickens. But if the service of death in letters, having been engraven in stones, was produced with glory, so as not to be able to look intently the children of Israel into the face of Moses, on account of the glory of his face, which is being annulled;

v8 how not rather the service of the Spirit shall be in glory.

v9 For if the service of condemnation [be] glory, much rather abounds the service of righteousness in glory.

v10 For even neither has been made glorious that which has been made glorious in this respect, on account of the surpassing glory.

v11 For if that which is being annulled [was] through glory, much rather that which remains [is] in glory.

v12 Having therefore such hope, much boldness we use:

v13 and not according as Moses put a veil on the face of himself, for not to look intently the sons of Israel to the end

of that being annulled.

v14 But were hardened their thoughts for unto the present that same veil at the reading of the old covenant remains, not uncovered, which in Christ is being annulled.

v15 But unto this day, when is read Moses, a veil upon their heart lies.

v16 But when it shall have turned to [the]Lord, is taken away the veil.

v17 Now the Lord the Spirit is; and where the Spirit of [the]Lord [is], there [is] freedom.

v18 But we all with uncovered face the glory of [the] Lord beholding as in a mirror, [to]the same image are being transformed from glory to glory, even as from [the] Lord [the] Spirit."

[David Koot]

Okay, since we're talking interlinears, McReynolds interlinear puts it thusly, the 'old agreement' being abolished. No problem. The old agreement, the old covenant, was abolished. Without a doubt.

What was the old covenant or agreement? Where may it be found in the OT?

[benherndon]

I will get to commenting after John317 posts. I am not interested in getting into a long exchange. I know how it reads to me and I have been surprised in the past as to how this text seems to be rather lightly considered by SDAs and in their literature, when it is accompanied by may evidences in the NT that reveal, TO ME!, that, at least in my history with the SDA religious education system, was never approached or discussed.

I had, I'm sure read it many times....but didn't comprehend it until as we were going to Sabbath school one morning some several years ago, my Bunnie was reading the Phillips NT and she read that chapter. It was a 'watershed moment' for me, and I cannot treat it so 'lightly' as had been done previously.

After John317 comes in with his deep thoughts I may have enough courage to reveal my own. Then you'uns can take it apart! But no arguing, OK? All *believers* who are nice people have their assurance from Him! --whether or not they agree on the minors, IMO.

Ben

[David Koot]

my Bunnie was reading the Phillips NT and she read that chapter. It was a 'watershed moment' for me

Both the Phillips and the TEV include the doctrinal orientation of the editors. Phillips is interesting reading, but not on a par with "the Rock of Biblical Honesty," as the NASB is considered.

[benherndon]

David, please! All translations other than word for word are paraphrased to at least some extent and some, more or less than others.

No 'translation' or 'paraphrase' is perfect in every respect. I've told you before than I very much like the NASB *because* it is considered more authoritative. That reduces the opportunity for argument. So....? But... I've compared the NASB to others...and the essences are the same!!!!! Any religion that bases itself on ONE translation is probably going to be off center. So, people look at them all and draw perspectives and information and it helps to understand the closer probably truest meaning of the texts.

Enough about the merits of one translation or parapharse over the other, please. Lets get down to the meaning, the interpretation of 2Cor 3 and some other texts I have given in previous times....what do they, could they mean to SDAs in particular? I've started with 2Cor 3. More to come, maybe.

Ben

[bevin]

Let's see.

You take a book written in Greek by someone who is not Greek - so you have their imperfect thoughts written in incorrect Greek.

Then you translate it into some generation's version of some local variation of English by someone who doesn't understand its nuances.

Then you have two other someone elses in a different generations who have a different local variations.

And then they argue about subtle variations in meaning.

Just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

/Bevin

[Clio]

More than you can ever imagine.

[there buster]

Quote:

You take a book written in Greek by someone who is not Greek - so you have their imperfect thoughts written in incorrect Greek.

Wrong on two counts. Paul was in fact fluent in Greek, and he often used scribes, who were also proficient.

[David Koot]

All translations other than word for word are paraphrased to at least some extent and some, more or less than others.

Even the 'word for word' interlinears require a lot of judgment calls. There is the whole issue of choosing a word from the semantic range.

Dave

[benherndon]

I have to cut this short, now, because of problems with my spinal stenosis of age, caregiving my lovely Bunnie and her infirmitives, AND, that we are getting ready to pack and move....but I want to conclude now by saying that from my observation all Christian denominations and all such churches have been started by people who have varying views and focus upon what Jesus and His disciples and apostles wrote in the NT. We all pretty much agree on what the OT says, and said, to the Jews. And, We Christians believe the Jews failed... as well as the OT system itself... and many of its authors emphasize how the Jews *and that system of religion, that priesthood failed*....both the OT and the NT say that. The book of Hebrews takes everybody who reads it through, showing the failure of the 'old' system and the promise of eternal success-to-salvation through the 'new Way'....the way of unmerited Grace by the "Way" of the sacrifice, resurrection and reconciliation brought about by our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God Who was raised from the grave back to life---thus conquering man's greatest enemy, the Devil and the 'devil' of the first death.

So, 2Cor 3 points out allegorically that the 'glory' that was in the Ten Commandments, specifically, the 'proxy'(IMO) for the whole Law of Moses, that glory that shone on the face of Moses as well as the glory of the Ten Commandments and all its contained laws, rules, covenants, statutes---whatever you want to call them----they are all commanded to be kept by the Israelites and all their generations to follow....BUT, The Glory of the Ten Cs refected as it were on the face of Moses was doomed to fade away, pass away into nothingness, be 'abolished in authority' and be replaced 'authoritatively', totally, by the Grace of Christ, the Lord. What then took the place of the Ten Cs in 'authority' over all Christians? It was, AGAIN!, the Gospel of Christ, to wit: His free Gift of forgiveness for all the sins of our lives by His Grace WHEN we believe in Him, that He was the Son of God Who was raised to life reconciling you and me, while we were and are yet sinners, to the Father. That Old Covenant Law, the Law of MOses and All the prophets have lost their authority over us and our behavior and it has been totally replaced by Christ, His Grace and His instructions in the NT about how to live...plus the elaborations (On the meanings and applications of His Life) He has chosen to be written in the NT part of the Bible...by His chosen writers... (The NT contains all the intructions any Christian needs about how to carry on the Christian life!!)....assuring us that even though we are sinners, His Grace, HIs Gift of unmerited forgiveness, past, present and future...assures us of salvation. [Just because you have a 'BandAid' doesn't mean you should go cut yourself!!!!So don't deliberately do some sin because you have had forgiveness!! Who would do that anyhow? That's silly!].... We sin because we can't help being human....Humans are born to be like they are..Humans do what humans do...Like all other genera do like they do! Humans know inherently the last 6 of the Ten Cs commands (those come naturally & never required a written law like the last parts of the Ten Cs!!)....you have Christ as your continuing "HOLY BandAid" even though you are a sinner. The BIG sin that loses the Christian His salvation is not believing and confesing with the mouth that Jesus is Lord, and, love Him for what He has done for your sinning state of affairs. He has promised us eternal life after this death--- with Him in heavenly circles and affairs throughout enternity.

Neither you nor I can eliminate all the little "sins" (that are not real sins!) from our lives....we don't even need to try. Its the Big sin of not loving and respecting the God of the Universe and that His son came, died and was resurrected overlooking all the sins we've ever done which He has forgiven and forgotten.....Is HE, the Son, or the Father, going to resurrect all our sins and burn 'the Hell' out of us because we were just human and weak of character and will? He can't remember our sins because He has 'forgotten' them!! Those that will be in the 'lake of fire' are listed in Rev 21 and I don't know of a single SDA right now that would even come close to being so bad a person as to deserve the 'lake of fire'...do you?

We might differ on this or that....but, relax,....because you are a believer and you're nice people and you do good deeds for others, your family, your friends and strangers you see needing your help. You do the best you can with what you've got. Just don't hurt other people intentionally or otherwise.....but just be a 'good neighbor', worship God and live like it....you will be OK as far as the Bible, specially the NT is concerned.

Back off of building any human(s) up as ideal instructors to follow about this life.....Build up the Lord who has Gifted you with what you will never deserve....FORGIVENESS and LOVE that comes from Him and to your eventual eternal life in heaven with Him...no sins, no sorrow, peace and love with each other there.

Relax....all of you, including those who oppose whatever little or all I say....you are OK! The Lord has saved you from eternal death in the "Lake of Fire", the second death.

Carry on in faith and trust in Him. From a human point of view, do extend your present life and witness by being 'safe' from harm much as possible, forgive all who have sinned against you, and live in mental assurance that WHATEVER this life brings upon you, you are loved by God and He will save you for eternity.

Ben

[John317]

Interest has been expressed to me today, in exegeting 2 Corinthians 3:6 - 18 on the forum. I would request the involvement of John317, who has far more study tools at hand than I do. But, I, too, shall give a whack at at--deferring to him if he has time to get involved. For starters, here is the passage, NASB:

"6who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

7But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was,

8how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?

9For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory.

10For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses it.

11For if that which fades away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.

12Therefore having such a hope, we use great boldness in our speech,

13and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away.

14But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ.

15But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart;

16but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

17Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

18But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit."

I expect this project to take some time. It is already a bit late, so perhaps posting the passage itself would be a good start for the initial post. Am looking forward to response.

Dave

I'd like to start out by making three important points that I believe we need to keep in mind as we study this passage:

1) 2 Cor. 3 must be read in the context of everything Paul (and indeed Christ, John, Peter, James, etc.) said about the same subject. Scripture is its own best expositor or interpretor. See 2 Peter 3: 15, 16.

2) 2 Cor. 3: 7-16 is a parenthesis between 3:6 and 3: 17 and is an explanation of what Paul said in 3:6. It is best to see the passage we are studying in the context of 1 Cor. 1:12 to 7:16. That entire section has to do with Paul's defense of his gospel ministry. Paul is defending his ministry against certain Jews who are claiming to have some special connection to Moses and who are claiming that the Old Covenant was far more glorious than any so-called "glory" in Paul or in his ministry. 2 Cor. 3: 4-18 is only a small part of Paul's defense, and it deals with the glory of Paul's apostolic commission.

3) The moral law of God, or the Ten Commandments, is the legal basis of both the Old and the New covenants. Under the New Covenant, God is not doing away with the Ten Commandments. This bears repeating and emphasis because it is a common misunderstanding that many people have.

Under the New Covenant, the relationship to the Ten Commandments is quite different than it is under the Old Covenant. Under the Old, the law stands completely outside of us. It condemns us as sinners but offers no power and no forgiveness. On the other hand, under the New Covenant, the law of God is written by the Holy Spirit on our minds and hearts, and there is forgiveness, reconciliation, justification, and power to obey.

Under both covenants , the law points out and defines sin. If the Ten Commandments were abolished, as some believe, there would be no more sin, for the Ten Commandments tell us what sin is and make us realize our desperate need of a Savior.

It is a mistake to believe that the Old Covenant has to do only with time before Christ's death. It's more helpful and accurate to consider the Old Covenant in terms of our state of mind or our spiritual development. Anyone at any time can be under the Old Covenant. As proof of this, we might remember that some Old Testament believers were justified by faith just as we are under the New Covenant. In fact, that is the very point Saint Paul makes in 2 Cor. 3: 14 to 4:4.

As for the text itself, there are no significant variants in 2 Corinthians 3, so we don't need to be concerned (as we often do) with the differences among the ancient Greek manuscripts. The only variants that are reflected in the translations occur at verses 2 and 14; and as you can see below, they are relatively unimportant.

Those variants are: (1) verse 2-- "our hearts" [KJV; NASB; NRSV; NIV]; or "your hearts" [RSV];

(2) verse 14-- "for until this day" [KJV; NKJV; NIV; RSV]; or "for until the present day" [NRSV; New American Bible (Catholic)].

On a technical note: the last two translations, the NRSV and the New American Bible, are the most accurate in following the critical Greek text, 4th edition, published by the United Bible Society. The UBS's fourth edition (corrected or revised) is identical to the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, Novum Testamentum Graece. The apparatus (or notes) in the Nestle-Aland edition is far superior to those printed in the UBS's fourth edition. I myself constantly compare the Majority Text, the Traditional text, and the Critical texts.

In the case of 2 Cor. 3, I prefer the New American Bible's translation.

(The notes that are usually included in the NAB at 2 Corinthians 3 are also well done, though incomplete.)

I read over 50 different translations and paraphrases of 2 Cor. 3, and I didn't see any that I would classify as illigitimate or false, although of course some are more accurate/literal than others. I found that almost all of them help the reader gain insight into what Paul is telling us. Naturally, it's always a good idea to read them along with a literal translation such as the NASB or NKJV.

I'll continue this on additional posts.

[David Koot]

Absolutely outstanding, John317!!! We have been waiting for this, and I am not disappointed! Thank you! Looking forward to your additional posts! What a treat! A treatise worthy of a theology journal! Thanks again! Have you thought of sharing this study on the B-Greek digest?

Dave

[olger]

According to Jeremiah, a distinguishing feature of the New Covenant was the writing of the Law upon the hearts of men. This places God's moral government into a much more intimate setting within the Believer.

No longer external, it motivates from within through the principle power of love.

olger

[David Koot]

2) 2 Cor. 3: 7-16 is a parenthesis between 3:6 and 3: 17 and is an explanation of what Paul said in 3:6.

Very interesting, John317. Could you elaborate? In what way are those verses parenthetical?

Dave

[there buster]

Here's a syntactical display or "block diagram" of 2 Cor 3:1-11 I did a couple of years ago.

"^" is "up arrow" and indicates a phrase modifies a phrase or word above it

"v" is "down arrow" and indicates a phrase modifies a phrase or word below it

"|" is an "arrow stem" indicating a whole series of units of meaning that modify something above or below, depending on the "arrow head."

Verse #'s left intact so that the order of the words can be followed

"/ . . ./" indicates a phrase which has been moved for clarity.

1Are we beginning to commend ourselves again?

Or do we/ /like some people,//need,/

...............................^letters of recommendation [font:Courier New]

...................................^to you or

...................................|from you?

.........v2You yourselves

are our letter,

.........^written on our hearts,

.........|known and read by everybody.

...........v3You show that

you are a letter

............^from Christ,

............|....^the result of our ministry,

............|written not with ink

..............^......^but with the Spirit of the living God,

..............|not on tablets of stone

..............|but on tablets of human hearts.

........|4Such confidence as this is ours

........|..........................^through Christ before God.

........|5Not that we are competent

........|..................^in ourselves

........|..................|to claim anything

........|..................|for ourselves, but

........v

our competence comes from God.

............................^6He has made us competent

..............................................^as ministers of a new covenant–

..................................<-[new covenant–]

.........__________________________________^________________________

.........^not of the letter ......................^but of the Spirit;

.........|for the letter kills,...................|but the Spirit gives life.

............^.......................................^

............|7Now if the ministry...................|8will not the ministry of the Spirit

..............^that brought death,..................|..^be even more glorious?

..............|which was engraved ..................|

..............|..^in letters on stone,..............|

..............|came with glory,.....................|

..............|..^so that the Israelites............|

..............|..|could not look steadily...........|

..............|..|at the face of Moses..............|

..............|because of its glory,................|

..............|.^fading though it was,..............|

..............|.....................................|

..............|9If the ministry.....................|..vhow much more glorious

..............|..^that condemns men.................|is the ministry that

..............|..|is glorious,......................| ..^brings righteousness!

..............|.....................................|

..............|10For what was glorious..............|

..............|..^has no glory now..................|

..............|..|<------------in comparison with-->| the surpassing glory.

..............|.....................................|

..............|11And if what was fading away........|..vhow much greater is the glory

..................^came with glory,.................|of that which lasts!

syntactical display ©2005 by Ed Dickerson, all rights reserved

[David Koot]

Very interesting indeed, Ed. Thank-you for sharing it. I will look forward to carefully perusing it.

Dave

[John317]

I have no preference for the NEB, David. I have many versions and just began to pick them up and show some variety of versions on that chapter. I like the NASB a lot....but I find that virtually all the peer reviewed versions say the same thing, really. I'm not highly picky about how it has to be 'said'...I look at the context mostly. However, being SDA trained and knowing SDAs pretty well, when I saw, yesterday, the NEB, I thought to myself, that ought to be pretty plain to any SDA.

Let's see what the few SDAs that will 'deal' with this chapter, how they 'deal' with it. Not to argue...just to learn!

Ben

I'm sorry I wasn't able to write anything online for so long, but I have been sick the last several weeks.

As I said in a previous post, I've read 2 Cor. 3 in over 50 different translations, and although I see some differences in them, most of the differences are slight and do not change the overall meaning of the text. I haven't seen any translations of 2 Cor. 3 that I wouldn't be able to accept as helping us to understand Paul's teaching. It doesn't mean, however, that all the dynamic translations are equally accurate in terms of showing the most likely significance of the original words. It means that while 2 Cor. 3 contains concepts and ideas that are truly profound, yet they are conveyed in a way that makes those concepts fairly easy to grasp. There are only a few points in this passage that offer challanges to the interpreter. Some of those points are:

1) What exactly is the nature of the ministry of death and condemnation vs. that of the spirit, which Paul refers to in 2 Cor. 3: 6-9?

2) What is taken away, or set aside, in Christ-- the veil or the Old Covenant-- in verse 14? And what difference, if any, does it make?

3) What is the "freedom" referred to in verse 17? Does this freedom mean freedom from God's moral law? Many believe that this freedom means the church was free to change the Sabbath, or to ignore the Sabbath, commandment. On this view, then, Sunday becomes the symbol of Christian liberty. Do any of Paul's writings, and particularly what Paul wrote in 2 Cor. 3, offer a legitimate justification for this viewpoint?

[John317]

Let's see.

You take a book written in Greek by someone who is not Greek - so you have their imperfect thoughts written in incorrect Greek.../Bevin

Saul of Tarsus was born into and brought up in a Greek-speaking society. His primary Bible text was the Greek translation, as we can tell from the way he quoted from the Old Testament and from what the book of Acts tells us about Paul's ministry. Paul was truly "at home" among both Greeks and Hebrews. He doubtless also knew Latin. He shows that he was very familiar with Greek literature and thought of his day. For instance, you get the impression that when he was in Athens, Paul had no trouble whatever making himself understood in very complex philosphical discussions. Paul's Greek shows that his grasp of that language was as good as we would expect from anyone having been reared and educated in it.

[David Koot]

I'm sorry I wasn't able to write anything online for so long, but I have been sick the last several weeks.

[John317]

... We all pretty much agree on what the OT says, and said, to the Jews. And, We Christians believe the Jews failed... as well as the OT system itself... and many of its authors emphasize how the Jews *and that system of religion, that priesthood failed*....both the OT and the NT say that. The book of Hebrews takes everybody who reads it through, showing the failure of the 'old' system and the promise of eternal success-to-salvation through the 'new Way'....the way of unmerited Grace by the "Way" of the sacrifice, resurrection and reconciliation brought about by our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God Who was raised from the grave back to life---thus conquering man's greatest enemy, the Devil and the 'devil' of the first death.

The Old System didn't fail in the sense of not accomplishing its purpose. It fulfilled its purpose, or goal. It was never meant to do anything but point to Jesus Christ. The Old Covenant itself was never intended by God to be the means of saving anyone. It never did have any power to save. We can go back under the Old Covenant at any time in our experience, even though it has been almost 2000 years since the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Old Covenant is where we are when we need commandments in order to obey God and when we need to see our need of a Savior. That is where ancient Israel was when they came out of Egypt. They were not prepared for the liberty of true sons of God but were still living as slaves-- slaves of sin. God had to teach them lessons about what it means to belong to Him. But most of them never learned the lesson He wanted them to learn. Instead they died in the wilderness.

What they failed to learn is that to belong to God means being like God. That's Paul's main point both in First and Second Corinthians. To be loving is to be like God. We're to be imitators of Paul as Paul imitates Christ. The whole purpose of seeing the Lord as He is, in His glory, is for us to be changed into His likeness.

[Robert]

The Old Covenant itself was never intended by God to be the means of saving anyone.

Right! God gave it not because He thought the Jews could keep it, but because they thought they could keep it....It was designed to humble them so they could accept grace and usher in the Messiah.

[Clio]

Originally Posted By: John317

The Old Covenant itself was never intended by God to be the means of saving anyone.

Right! God gave it not because He thought the Jews could keep it, but because they thought they could keep it....It was designed to humble them so they could accept grace and usher in the Messiah.

by this logic then, all those who were faithful under the OC are lost because it could not save.

It was a proxy... Proxy's were and are binding.

[David Koot]

by this logic then, all those who were faithful under the OC are lost because it could not save. It was a proxy... Proxy's were and are binding.

I submit that the sacrifices were independent of the OC. With or without the OC, the sacrifices were needed, pre-dating the OC by nearly 3,000 years. The sacrifices were needed as a remedy for breach of the OC. They pointed forward to Christ's sacrifice, thus, to use your word, were a 'proxy' for His sacrifice and, as such were expiatory by virtue of the Divine mandate.

[benherndon]

There was no salvation via the Old Testament teaching alone....the blood of animals had no saving power whatever...and they were not proxy but they were emblems of the future. Had Christ not come....nobody could or would be saved.

"These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. God had planned something better for us to that only together with us would they be made perfect." Heb 11:39-40

"Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." Heb 10:11-14

"And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile: you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men." 1Cor 15:17-19

ETC.

Ben

[David Koot]

There was no salvation via the Old Testament teaching alone....the blood of animals had no saving power whatever...and they were not proxy but they were emblems of the future. Had Christ not come....nobody could or would be saved.

Obviously, their efficacy was dependent upon Christ's prospective sacrifice. However, the sacrifices were mandated by God, and in order to be saved, the sinner HAD to offer them. If he failed or refused to offer them, he could not be saved. The saving power was by virtue of Christ's sacrifice to come, but the sacrifices themselves were essential for the salvation of OT believers.