2 Corinthians 3:13 Kommentar

The apostle makes an apology for his seeming to commend himself, and is careful not to assume too much to himself, but to ascribe all praise unto God (Co2 3:1-5). He then draws a comparison between the Old Testament and the New, and shows the excellency of the later above the former (Co2 3:6-11), whence he infers what is the duty of gospel ministers, and the advantage of those who live under the gospel above those who lived under the law (Co2 3:12 to the end).

INTRODUCTION TO 2 CORINTHIANS 3 In this chapter the apostle clears himself from the charge of arrogance and self-commendation, and ascribes both the virtue and efficacy of his ministry, and his qualifications for it, to the Lord; and forms a comparison between the ministration of the Gospel, and the ministration of the law, showing the preferableness of the one to the other; and consequently how much more happy and comfortable the state and condition of the saints under the Gospel dispensation is, than under the legal one: on account of what the apostle had said in the latter part of the preceding chapter, concerning the excellency, usefulness, and success of the Gospel ministry, he foresaw an objection would arise; that he and his fellow ministers were proud and arrogant, and commended themselves, which was unseemly, and not agreeably to the character they bore; which objection he obviates, Co2 3:1, by putting some questions, signifying that they were not guilty of vain boasting; nor did they need any commendations of their own, or others, nor any letters to recommend them, either from Corinth to other places, or thither: a practice which, he suggests, the false teachers made use of; and in Co2 3:2 he gives the reason why they did not stand in need of such letters, because the members of the church at Corinth were their epistle or letter, declaring to all men the efficacy and success of their ministry among men; but lest he should be charged with arrogating to himself and others, he declares, Co2 3:3 that though the Corinthians were their epistle, yet not so much theirs as Christ's; Christ was the author and subject, they only were instruments; the writing was not human, but the writing of the Spirit of God; and that not upon outward tables, such as the law was written upon, but upon the tables of men's hearts, which only God can reach; however, that they had been useful, successful, and instrumental in the conversion of souls, through the ministry of the word, that he was confident of, Co2 3:4 though the sufficiency and ability to think, study, and preach, were not of themselves, and still less to make the word effectual for conversion and comfort, but of God, Co2 3:5 wherefore he ascribes all fitness, worthiness, and ability to preach the Gospel, to the grace and power of God, by which they were made ministers of it; and hence he takes occasion to commend the excellency of the Gospel ministry above that of the law, which he does by observing their different names and effects; the Gospel is the New Testament or covenant, or an exhibition of the covenant of grace in a new form; the law is the Old Testament, or covenant, which is vanished away; which, though not expressed here, is in Co2 3:14 the Gospel is spirit, the law the letter; the one gives life, and the other kills, Co2 3:6 wherefore the apostle argues from the one to the other, that if there was a glory in the one which was only a ministration of death, as the law was, Co2 3:7 then the Gospel, which was a ministration of spiritual things, and of the Spirit of God himself, must be more glorious, Co2 3:8 and if that was glorious which was a ministration of condemnation, as the law was to guilty sinners; much more glorious must be the Gospel, which is a ministration of the righteousness of Christ, for the justification of them, Co2 3:9 yea, such is the surpassing glory of the Gospel to the law, that even the glory of the law is quite lost in that of the Gospel, and appears to have none in comparison of that, Co2 3:10 to which he adds another argument, taken from the abolition of the one, and the continuance of the other; that if there was a glory in that which is abolished, there must be a greater in that which continues, Co2 3:11 and from hence the apostle proceeds to take notice of another difference between the law and the Gospel, the clearness of the one, and the obscurity of the other; the former is signified by the plainness of speech used by the preachers of it, Co2 3:12 and the latter by the veil which was over Moses's face, when he delivered the law to the children of Israel; the end of which they could not look to, and which is a further proof of the obscurity of it, Co2 3:13 as well as of the darkness of their minds; which still continues with the Jews in reading the law, and will do until it is taken away by Christ, Co2 3:14 and that there is such a veil of darkness upon the hearts of the Jews, when reading the law of Moses; and that this continues to this day, is again asserted, Co2 3:15 and an intimation given that there will be a conversion of them to the Lord, and then it will be removed from them, Co2 3:16 and who that Lord is to whom they shall be turned, and by whom they shall have freedom from darkness and bondage, is declared, Co2 3:17 and the happy condition of the saints under the Gospel dispensation, through the bright and clear light of it, is observed, Co2 3:18 in which the Gospel is compared to a glass; the saints are represented as without a veil looking into it; through which an object is beheld, the glory of the Lord; the effect of which is a transformation of them into the same image by degrees; the author of which grace is the Spirit of the Lord.

And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face,.... This he did, because there was such a glory upon his face when he came down from the mount, that the Israelites could not bear to look upon him; and also to take off that dread of him which was upon them, for they were afraid to come nigh him; and that so they might be able to hearken and attend to the words of the law, he delivered to them: the account of Moses's putting on this veil is in Exo 34:33 where Onkelos renders it by , "the house of the face", or a "mask": and Jarchi on the place says it was a "garment", which he put before his face; and both the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem call it "a linen cloth": now this veil upon his face had a mystery in it; it was an emblem of the Gospel being veiled under the law, and of the darkness and obscurity of the law in the business of life and salvation; and also of the future blindness of the Jews, when the glory of the Gospel should break forth in the times of Christ and his apostles; and which was such, that the children of Israel, the Jews, as in the times of Moses, so in the times of Christ and his apostles, could not steadfastly look to; not upon the face of Moses, whose face was veiled; not that they might not look, but because they could not bear to look upon him; but they could not look to the end of that which is abolished; that is, to Christ, who is the end of the law, which is abrogated by him: to him they could not look, nor could they see him to be the fulfilling end of the law for righteousness; which being fulfilled, is done away by him; and this because of the blindness of their hearts, of which blindness the veil on Moses' face was typical: though the Alexandrian copy and the Vulgate Latin version read, "to the face of him which is abolished".

Now what he says is of this nature. There is no need for us to cover ourselves as Moses did; for ye are able to look upon this glory which we are encircled with, although it is far greater and brighter than the other. Seest thou the advance? For he that in the former Epistle said, "I have fed you with milk, not with meat;" saith here, "We use great boldness of speech." And he produces Moses before them, carrying forward the discourse by means of comparison, and thus leading his hearer upwards. And for the present he sets them above the Jews, saying that 'we have no need of a veil as he had with those he governed;' but in what comes afterwards he advances them even to the dignity itself of the Lawgiver, or even to a much greater.

The truth is that the Old Testament of Mount Sinai, “producing children of slavery,” now serves no purpose but to bear witness to the New. Otherwise, the words of St. Paul would not be true: “Yes, down to this very day when Moses is read, the veil covers their hearts”; but when any of them turn from the Old Testament to Christ, “the veil shall be taken away.” What happens is that the deepest aspirations of those who make the change are shifted from the Old Testament to the New, whereupon they begin to look for spiritual—rather than earthly—happiness.

Doubtless, there is a veil in the Old Testament, which will be removed as soon as one comes to Christ. At his crucifixion, “the veil of the temple was torn,” to signify what the apostle said about the veil of the Old Testament, “Because in Christ it is made void.”10.

It is not the Old Testament that is done away with in Christ but the concealing veil, so that it may be understood through Christ. That is, as it were, laid bare, which without Christ is hidden and obscure. The same apostle adds immediately: “When you shall turn to Christ, the veil shall be taken away.” He does not say: “The law or the Old Testament will be taken away.” It is not the case, therefore, that by the grace of the Lord that which was covered has been abolished as useless; rather the covering has been removed which concealed useful truth. This is what happens to those who earnestly and piously, not proudly and wickedly, seek the sense of the Scriptures. To them is carefully demonstrated the order of events, the reasons for words and deeds and the agreement of the Old Testament with the New, so that not a point remains where there is not complete harmony; and such secret truths are conveyed in figures. When they are brought to light by interpretation, they compel those who wished to condemn rather than to learn.

Paul says that the law was fading away, by which he means that it was coming to an end in Christ, whose coming was foretold by the law.

That is, we do not need to cover ourselves, like Moses. For you can look upon that glory which we have, I mean the glory of the Gospel, although it is far more radiant than that of Moses. That is, you can understand the mysteries of God, namely the Gospel, and we do not need to hide them from you with obscurity, as with a veil. The Israelites, being carnal, could not see that the law has an end and that it would be abolished; for the veil signifies their carnal mind, as you will learn below. Some, however, understood this as follows: the very fact that they could not gaze upon the face of Moses showed that this glory has an end. For as soon as they did not see the glory, it was no more, and by this it was shown that it was short-lived, because it did not manifest itself as glory.

Then as he preferred the one gift to the other, so he prefers the confidence of the New Testament to that of the Old (v. 13). In regard to this he does two things: first, he mentions a fact about the Old Testament; secondly, he explains it (v. 13b). The fact he proposes is mentioned in Exodus (34:33), where it says that when he spoke to the people, Moses veiled his face, because the children of Israel could not look upon him because of the splendor of his face. Hence he says, not like Moses, who put a veil over his face. As if to say: I say that we are very bold, and such as did not happen to us as Moses did to them, namely, not revealing his face to the people, because the time to reveal the splendor of truth had not yet come. Therefore, we have confidence without the veil. Then he explains what he had said about the veil, saying, which is made void, for that veil was the dimness of the figures, which was made void by Christ. In regard to this he does three things. First, he mentions the voiding of this veil; secondly, how this voiding still prevails among the Jews (v. 14); thirdly, how this has no place among the ministers of the New Testament (v. 18). He says, therefore, that Moses put a veil, namely, of the figure, over his face; this veil is made void, i.e., is taken away by Christ, namely, by fulfilling in truth what Moses delivered in figure, because all things happened to them in a figure. For thus Christ by his death removed the veil of the killing of the paschal lamb. Therefore, as soon as he gave up his spirit, the veil of the Temple was rent. Likewise by sending the Holy Spirit into the hearts of believers so that they might understand spiritually what the Jews understood carnally. He removed the veil, when he opened their mind to understand the Scriptures (Lk. 24:45).

The apostle shows, in opposition to his detractors, that the faith and salvation of the Corinthians were sufficient testimony of his Divine mission; that he needed no letters of recommendation, the Christian converts at Corinth being a manifest proof that he was an apostle of Christ, Co2 3:1-3. He extols the Christian ministry, as being infinitely more excellent than that of Moses, Co2 3:4-12. Compares the different modes of announcing the truth under the law and under the Gospel: in the former it was obscurely delivered; and the veil of darkness, typified by the veil which Moses wore, is still on the hearts of the Jews; but when they turn to Christ this veil shall be taken away, Co2 3:13-16. On the contrary, the Gospel dispensation is spiritual; leads to the nearest views of heavenly things; and those who receive it are changed into the glorious likeness of God by the agency of his Spirit, Co2 3:17, Co2 3:18.

And not as Moses - The splendor of Moses' countenance was so great that the Israelites could not bear to look upon his face, and therefore he was obliged to veil his face: this, it appears, he did typically, to represent the types and shadows by which the whole dispensation of which he was the minister was covered. So that the Israelites could not steadfastly look - could not then have the full view or discernment of that in which the Mosaic dispensation should issue and terminate.

THE SOLE COMMENDATION HE NEEDS TO PROVE GOD'S SANCTION OF HIS MINISTRY HE HAS IN HIS CORINTHIAN CONVERTS: HIS MINISTRY EXCELS THE MOSAIC, AS THE GOSPEL OF LIFE AND LIBERTY EXCELS THE LAW OF CONDEMNATION. (2Co. 3:1-18) Are we beginning again to recommend ourselves (Co2 5:12) (as some of them might say he had done in his first Epistle; or, a reproof to "some" who had begun doing so)! commendation--recommendation. (Compare Co2 10:18). The "some" refers to particular persons of the "many" (Co2 2:17) teachers who opposed him, and who came to Corinth with letters of recommendation from other churches; and when leaving that city obtained similar letters from the Corinthians to other churches. The thirteenth canon of the Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451) ordained that "clergymen coming to a city where they were unknown, should not be allowed to officiate without letters commendatory from their own bishop." The history (Act 18:27) confirms the existence of the custom here alluded to in the Epistle: "When Apollos was disposed to pass into Achaia [Corinth], the brethren [of Ephesus] wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him." This was about two years before the Epistle,and is probably one of the instances to which Paul refers, as many at Corinth boasted of their being followers of Apollos (Co1 1:12).

We use no disguise, "as Moses put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel might not look steadfastly upon the end of that which was to be done away" [ELLICOTT and others]. The view of Exo 34:30-35, according to the Septuagint is adopted by Paul, that Moses in going in to speak to God removed the veil till he came out and had spoken to the people; and then when he had done speaking, he put on the veil that they might not look on the end, or the fading, of that transitory glory. The veil was the symbol of concealment, put on directly after Moses' speaking; so that God's revelations by him were interrupted by intervals of concealment [ALFORD]. But ALFORD'S view does not accord with Co2 3:7; the Israelites "could not look steadfastly on the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance." Plainly Moses' veil was put on because of their not having been able to "look steadfastly at him." Paul here (Co2 3:13) passes from the literal fact to the truth symbolized by it, the blindness of Jews and Judaizers to the ultimate end of the law: stating that Moses put on the veil that they might not look steadfastly at (Christ, Rom 10:4) the end of that (law) which (like Moses' glory) is done away. Not that Moses had this purpose; but often God attributes to His prophets the purpose which He has Himself. Because the Jews would not see, God judicially gave them up so as not to see. The glory of Moses' face is antitypically Christ s glory shining behind the veil of legal ordinances. The veil which has been taken off to the believer is left on to the unbelieving Jew, so that he should not see (Isa 6:10; Act 28:26-27). He stops short at the letter of the law, not seeing the end of it. The evangelical glory of the law, like the shining of Moses' face, cannot be borne by a carnal people, and therefore remains veiled to them until the Spirit comes to take away the veil (Co2 3:14-17) [CAMERON].