{"id":28790,"date":"2022-09-24T12:57:05","date_gmt":"2022-09-24T17:57:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-2-corinthians-31\/"},"modified":"2022-09-24T12:57:05","modified_gmt":"2022-09-24T17:57:05","slug":"exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-2-corinthians-31","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-2-corinthians-31\/","title":{"rendered":"Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Corinthians 3:1"},"content":{"rendered":"

Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some [others,] epistles of commendation to you, or [letters] of commendation from you? <\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n

Ch. 2Co 3:1-6<\/span>. St Paul’s Ministry no self-assumed task, but the communication of the Spirit<\/p>\n

1. Do we begin again to commend ourselves?<\/em> ] A charge had been apparently brought against St Paul that he had before (probably in 1Co 2:16<\/span>; 1Co 3:10 ; 1Co 4:11-14<\/span>; 1Co 9:20-27<\/span>; 1Co 14:18<\/span>) indulged in unseemly self-laudation. He supposes that the same charge will be brought against him for his language in ch. 2Co 2:14-17<\/span>.<\/p>\n

as some others<\/em> ] The opponents of St Paul had no doubt come armed with letters of commendation from some Apostle (as the Judaizers in Gal 2:12<\/span>) or Church, and some of them had received similar letters from the Corinthian Churches on their departure, with a view to their reception by some other Church. St Paul appeals to the nature of his work among them as rendering such a proceeding on his part not only unnecessary but absurd.<\/p>\n

epistles of commendation<\/em> ] Tyndale and Cranmer, better, letters of recommendation<\/strong>, the word from its derivation signifying rather introduction<\/em> than what we now understand by commendation<\/em>, i.e. praise, though it would seem to have come to this meaning in New Testament Greek. See last note but one. Instances of such letters commendatory are to be found in Act 15:25-27<\/span>; Act 18:27<\/span>; Rom 16:1<\/span>; Col 4:10<\/span>. They became a common, almost a necessary, feature in the life of the early Church, and were known as literae formatae<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Do we begin again – <\/B>This is designed evidently to meet an objection. He had been speaking of his triumph in the ministry 2Co 2:14<\/span>, and of his sincerity and honesty, as contrasted with the conduct of many who corrupted the Word of God, 2Co 2:17<\/span>. It might be objected that he was magnifying himself in these statements, and designed to commend himself in this manner to the Corinthians. To this he replies in the following verses.<\/P>

To commend ourselves? – <\/B>To recommend ourselves; do we speak this in our own praise, in order to obtain your favor.<\/P>

Or need we, as some others – <\/B>Probably some who had brought letters of recommendation to them from Judea. The false teachers at Corinth had been originally introduced there by commendatory letters from abroad. These were letters of introduction, and were common among the Greeks, the Romans, and the Jews, as they are now. They were usually given to persons who were about to travel, as there were no inns. and as travelers were dependent on the hospitality of those among whom they traveled.<\/P>

Of commendation from you – <\/B>To other congregations. It is implied here by Paul, that he sought no such letter; that he traveled without them; and that he depended on his zeal, and self-denial, and success to make him known, and to give him the affections of those to whom he ministered – a much better recommendation than mere introductory letters. Such letters were, however, sometimes given by Christians, and are by no means improper, Act 18:27<\/span>. Yet, they do not appear to have been sought or used by the apostles generally. They depended on their miraculous endowments, and on the attending grace of God to make them known.<\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1-5<\/span><\/p>\n

Do we begin again to commend ourselves?<\/em><\/p>\n

or need we epistles of commendation? <\/p>\n

A pastors claim<\/strong><\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. <\/em><\/strong>The voluntary relations of men are founded upon mutual confidence, and even those which are involuntary require reciprocal reliance. The parent who does not duly trust his children will soon ruin them, and the child who does not rely upon his parents will certainly become prodigal. Distrust in a master will make him a tyrant, and want of confidence in a servant will produce miserable eye-service. The suspicious prince is always cruel, and the distrustful subject is a revolutionist; and the functions of the ministry are nullified by distrust in the Churches and in the world.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>This confidence is easily disturbed and soon destroyed. A whisper on Change against the credit of the successful merchant will sometimes gather force and sweep him into ruin. A question addressed in an incredulous tone to a master about the fidelity of an honest servant will make him watch that servant with an eagles eye. In like manner may the confidence of the Churches of Christ in their chosen pastors be impaired or crushed. Of the danger to which confidence in this case is exposed, these Epistles to the Corinthians afford illustration. Note–<\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>The grounds of a Christian pastors claim upon the confidence of the Churches.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>There is a peculiar writing on the tablet of the Christians soul. The old covenant was engraven upon slabs of stone, but the new covenant is written upon the sensitive and everlasting tablet of the heart. On this is written the good news that God so loved the world and spared not His own Son. There is other writing. Science writes. But science, beautiful writer though she be, and wise and useful, cannot write about the highest subjects, nor can she reach by her pen the fairest tablets of the human soul.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>The writing on the tablets of the true Christians soul is effected for Christ by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>In writing, the Spirit employs men–pastors and teachers–as pens.<\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>Those upon whose hearts Christ has written are Christs chief means of communicating with the outlying world. In plain language, the works of the true pastor bear witness of him, and establish his claim to loving confidence. We ask, then, firm and loving confidence for the proved ministers of Christ. To require this from their own converts is to ask a small thing. To no creature on earth or in heaven is a man so largely indebted as to the instrument of his conversion. But say that you have no such personal obligations to the true ministers of Christ, they may claim confidence for their works sake. Give us your confidence for your own sake, for without it we cannot minister to your profit; for your childrens sake, for, if they detect distrust, in vain do we try to help you bring them up; for our works sake among the ungodly. I do not say that we cannot work without it, but I do say that we can work more hopefully with it.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>The ground of a pastors own confidence with respect to his work.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>The confidence of any worker with respect to his work is essential to his success. The basis of such confidence may be either his own independent resources or the help which he obtains from those stronger than himself. The latter is the foundation of the confidence of Christs ministers. Their sufficiency is of God. To say God is sufficient is only like saying God is God, but to declare our sufficiency is of God is to exhibit a spiritual fact which among the children of men is exceedingly rare. This is not to sit talking of the Almighty God, but to walk leaning upon Gods arm, and to work, God working with us. This is to take such advantage of the Divine resources as this special work demands. Without this, a man may be scholarly, eloquent, and popular, but in the sight of God he must be a failure. The work of the true pastor can only be done as God would have it be done, as our sufficiency is of God.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Why, then, are we not filled with the fulness of God? It may be that we prefer the cistern to the fountain, and that we cleave to it after it has become leaky, and it may be because of our many false gods. One thing is certain–we are always half mad about something which, however good, is not God. The organisations and associations, better psalmody, more ornate architecture, a denominational press, wealth, are the false gods after which we too often have gone a-whoring. Why are we not filled with the fulness of God? It may be that we do not sufficiently recognise the mediation of Jesus Christ and the ministry of the Holy Ghost; it may be because our sins have separated us from God. One thing is certain–we could do our work with God if everything external and circumstantial which now we have were taken clean away. The first preachers and teachers had none of our appliances, and yet succeeded, because their sufficiency was of God.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>And now let me entreat you to commend your pastors in ceaseless prayer to the help of God.<\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>Our sufficiency is also yours. (S. Martin, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men<\/strong>.<\/em><\/strong>—<\/p>\n

Sacred penmanship<\/strong><\/p>\n

Self-praise is no recommendation, and the sounding of ones own trumpet is not to be applauded. False teachers had entered into the Corinthian Church, and they had found it necessary to have letters of recommendation, but Paul needed no such introduction. Truth and righteousness recommend themselves in the work they accomplish. Our translation admits of another rendering–namely, Ye are our epistles written in your hearts, and this would imply that Paul had been enabled to pencil something in the hearts of others which could be read by all men; and it is with this idea I shall deal in speaking about sacred penmanship.<\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>Observe the requisites for writing. The accessories must be provided, however, for a letter to be written, and let us briefly notice these–pen, ink, and paper.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>In the third verse we have the pen: <\/strong>Forasmuch as ye are declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us. Here is the instrument in the hand of God. The Church was divided, for one said, I am of Paul, another, I am of Cephas; but these good men were only the pens whereby God, through His Spirit, had written upon the fleshy tables of their hearts. Among these instruments there must ever be a variety. The rough and rude can, however, be made to write well. Paul, though he was not eloquent of speech, but somewhat blunt, had power to get hold of mens hearts, and he wrote upon them, with dark, indelible lines, great truths. Apollos could speak with eloquence of diction, and finely pencil the Scripture, so that the Jews were mightily convinced that Jesus was the Christ. John was another such instrument. Soft in love, sketching in poetry the wonderful revelations he had of the better land, he would win hearts for Jesus.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Then there must be the ink. The sacred fluid is the Spirit of God. Written, not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God. The mysterious influence that flows through us is not of earthly manufacture.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>The next requisite is the paper. It is not written upon stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. A soft heart best absorbs the ink, a living tablet best retains impressions. Lord, write first in us, and then make us as the pen of the ready writer, to make our mark on others.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>The readers of the writing. Known and read of all men. The writing is real–no fiction, for the author is Christ. We are the autograph letters of our Lord, and bear His signature. The writing is clear, for we are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ. Now, this document is a public one. Believers are the library for the world; they are a Christian literature; each saint is a volume to expound the grace of God. Known and read of all men. We may consider the readers of this writing to be of three classes–<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>The intelligent. Many are real students of Christian character, desirous of gaining knowledge for their own good in spiritual attainments.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Then there are the interested readers–our friends who like to see if we make progress in Divine things. The first series of Christian experiences are interesting, and are studied with deep anxiety by those who love young converts.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>The last class I have called the inquisitive. They only peruse to find fault. Ours must be so correct an epistle that fault-finders shall find it difficult to gratify their morbid taste. The schoolmaster says to his boys, Be sure you dot your is and cross your ts; and we too must be mindful of little things. (Charles Spurgeon.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Pauls testimonials; their publicity<\/strong><\/p>\n

The conversion and new life of the Corinthians were Pauls certificate as an apostle. They were a certificate, he says, known and read by all men. Often there is a certain awkwardness in the presenting of credentials. It embarrasses a man when he has to put his hand into his heart pocket, and take out his character, and submit it for inspection. Paul was saved this embarrassment. There was a fine unsought publicity about his testimonials. Everybody knew what the Corinthians had been; everybody knew what they were; and the man to whom the change was due needed no other recommendation to a Christian society. (J. Denney,<\/em> B. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ.<\/strong>—<\/p>\n

Soul literature<\/strong><\/p>\n

Christianity written on the soul is Christianity–<\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>In the most legible form.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>In the most convincing form. Books have been written on the evidences of Christianity; but one life permeated by the <\/strong>Christian spirit furnishes an argument that baffles all controversy.<\/p>\n


III. <\/strong>In the most persuasive form. There is a magnetism in gospel truth embodied which you seek for in vain in any written work. When the Word is made flesh it is made mighty through God.<\/p>\n


IV. <\/strong>In the most enduring form. The tablet is imperishable. Paper will moulder, institutions will dissolve, marble or brass are corruptible.<\/p>\n


V. <\/strong>In the divinest form. The hand can inscribe it on parchment or stone, but only God can write it on the heart, (D. Thomas, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The epistle of Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>The designation of Christian people.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>An epistle is a fact of production. No epistle is self-produced. It must have a writer. Nor is it a creation; all the elements existed before. So with the epistle of Christ.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>An epistle is a production of intelligence. An epistle must have a direct intelligent end, must be worth reading and knowing.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>A letter is the expression of the <\/strong>thoughts and purposes of the writer. So Christians are the transcript of Christs design, morally impressed with the counterpart of His principles and character as their Exemplar.<\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>A letter is a medium of communication. So what is communicated to Christians must be communicated by them to others. It must be communicated as it is; it must not be obliterated or shown partially.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>The writing agent, and the manner in which the epistle is composed. The Spirit of the living God, etc., who–<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Works according to His own plan.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>By the use of suitable means, and according to established laws. The act is not a thing done in some rare instances, but in the heart of all good people.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>By the concurrence and co-operation of man himself–the object of His work. Man is an agent of his own culture and all which belongs to him in life. He is also the agent of his own salvation. If he neglects his work, no one can do it for him.<\/p>\n


III. <\/strong>The instrumental means ministered by us. The ministry of the gospel–<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Brings the materials of truth and salvation to men.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Prepares also the pages of the soul to receive true impressions and the blessings offered in the gospel. There are stains to be erased, misconceptions to be corrected, habits and prejudices to be destroyed, before clear and true writing can be made.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>Brings the human soul and Divine truth face to face, so by Divine light and love a photographic image is printed upon the whole soul. Whilst it is a Divine power it is a Divine art, printing upon the human heart and life a true image and right language.<\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>Perpetuates the means of truth and right life.<\/p>\n


IV. <\/strong>The tablet of record, the fleshy tables of the heart. As the heart is the centre of our natural life, it is also, in a moral sense, the centre and base of our spiritual life.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>The work of God in the heart is carried on quietly and secretly, but is powerful in its results, like the forces of God in nature. What more secret than thought, love, faith? but what more powerful and clear in their results? The letter is secret in the writing, but known in the reading.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Though unseen to sense, ii is nevertheless a matter of consciousness to the subject of it,<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>It is a process which purifies and develops human affection. The end is to make the heart belier and larger.<\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>It is a process intended to govern the springs of human life. Mankind is governed through its heart. It is a happy and high state when the sentiment of the heart is one with reason.<\/p>\n

5. <\/strong>Whatever is good and happy, if written on the heart, is an immediate source of life and comfort.<\/p>\n

6. <\/strong>It is a thing to be highly estimated and remembered. When we wish to gain esteem, we try to reach the heart; when we desire not to be forgotten, we try to print our name on the tablet of the heart. (T. Hughes.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The epistle of Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>The Christian is an epistle of Christ.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Its writer. Christ.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Its purport, Christ has blotted out guilty and written in no condemnation. He has erased earthly and supplied heavenly. Licentiousness has given place to purity, profanity to prayerfulness, selfishness to love, etc. We judge of the authorship of an epistle, not merely by the penmanship and signature, which a clever forger might imitate, but also by its contents. A hypocrite, a false professor, is like forged letter.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>Its design. To convey the mind of Christ to men. Men may refuse to listen to the gospel, but they cannel ignore the testimony of a consistent Christian life.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>The responsibility devolving on the Christian as an epistle of Christ.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>As a letter is written for the purpose of being seen, a Christian should let his Christianity be visible. We do not write letters merely for the sake of writing them, but that they may be read. So, if Christians do not let their Christianity be seen in their lives, they defeat one chief end which Christ had in view in making them what they are. Those who are Christians in name only are in no sense of the term epistles of Christ; ii were vain to exhort such to let what Christ has written in them be seen by men, for they have nothing to show.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>A letter being written for the purpose of being read should be legible. A letter may be so written that it is impossible to make out the writers meaning. Such a letter may be worse than useless, for, owing to its illegibility, it may convey a wrong meaning. When the letters of men are illegible ii is the fault of the writers, but this is not the case with Christs epistles. He never writes illegibly. The fault lies on the side of the epistles themselves. Note one or two things which render writing illegible.<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> Indistinctness of character. One word may be mistaken for another, and thus the whole meaning of a sentence may be altered. And Christians may be illegible as epistles of Christ through the wavering, unsteady character imparted to the writing that is in them by their want of decision for Christ and their compromises with the world. What we want is boldness on the part of Christians in testifying for Christ in their everyday lives.<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> Blots. Perhaps the most important word in a sentence is completely hidden by a blot. Alas! in how many cases is the testimony of a Christian for Christ made of none effect by the unsightly blot of some gross inconsistency, some dark sin, which the eye of the world rests continually on, and refuses to see anything else.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>A letter is written that it may be understood. What prevents letters from being intelligible?<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> Omissions. Were the little word not, e.g.,<\/em> left out, the meaning of a sentence would be entirely reversed. In like manner, the lack of one essential Christian grace-charity, e.g.<\/em>—if<\/em> it do not render the character of a Christian unintelligible, makes it less easily understood.<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> Contradictions. We cannot possibly make out the meaning if one sentence says one thing and the next the opposite. And haw can men understand our testimony for Christ if we have one kind of conduct for the Church and another for the world? (J. Bogue, M. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Epistles of Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>The epistle.<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>How it is written.<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> The apostle does not speak of a vague oral tradition, or of shifting impressions, but of a written epistle. The material on which this epistle is written is the heart of man. Not merely in his understanding, for he may know what is right and yet not do it; not merely in his conscience, for he may acknowledge his duty, yet neglect it; but in his heart, that it may be his desire and his delight, the very law and tendency of his being.<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> Like the pages of this book when they came from the hands of the manufacturer, the mind of man by nature is a perfect blank in regard to Christ, or rather like the material from which these pages were manufactured–filthy rags, foul, tattered, and discoloured. To become an epistle of Christ it must be prepared and written on. It must be purified, and characters traced on it.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Its contents. Christ is its grand and all-pervading theme. Observe–<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> Paul did not say of all the disciples, Ye are epistles of Christ, but, Ye are the<\/em> epistle of Christ. Collectively you constitute the one epistle, just as there are many copies of the Bible in many foreign languages, but only one Bible. Different as the Laplander and the Indian may be, yet, when taught by the Spirit, they testify the same things of Christ.<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> Nor did Paul say of any individual, Thou art the<\/em> epistle of Christ. As there are many imperfect or mutilated MSS. of the Bible, and as in all there are errors of the pen or the translator, so also there are imperfect and unfinished copies of the epistle of Christ. And as it is only by collating and comparing many versions that we can say, This is the Word of God, so also we must collate and compare many Christians ere we can say, This is the epistle,<\/em> the image, of Christ.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>Its purpose.<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> The salvation of those in whose hearts it is written.<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> To recommend Christ to men. As samples of His work, you will be either letters of commendation or of condemnation to Him.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>How we may so use this epistle that it may serve the purpose for which it was written. We may commend Christ–<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>With our lips. Our conversation may be an epistle to make known His praises. The circulation of the epistle written with ink–the printed Bible–is our duty. Even so it is our duty to publish the living epistle. It was intended to be an open letter, known and read of all men. How many are there with whom we daily associate who never read the written Bible, the only hope of whose salvation is that they may read or hear the living epistle! By our silence we conceal that epistle from them, and leave them to perish.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>By our lives. It is in vain that we speak of Christ with our lips if our lives belie our words. Our actions, like a pen full of ink, trace certain characters, leave certain impressions on the mind and memory of those who see them. In beholding our actions, have men been led to say of us, These men have been with Jesus?<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>By our character. A mans outward manner may be in direct opposition to his inward character. To be true epistles of Christ we must reflect His image, not in word only, or in action, but in our dispositions and desires. (W. Grant.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Epistles of Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n

From the example of the Master Paul had acquired the habit of gliding softly and quickly from a common object of nature to the deep things of grace. The practice of asking and obtaining certificates seems to have been introduced at a very early period into the Christian Church, and already some abuses had crept in along with it. We gather from this epistle that some very well recommended missionaries had been spoiling Pauls work at Corinth. Virtually challenged to exhibit his own certificates, he boldly appeals to those who had been converted through his ministry, and now he glides into a greater thing–Christians are an epistle of Christ. Regarding these epistles, consider–<\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>The material written on.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Many different substances have been employed in writing; but one feature is common to all–in their natural state they are not fit to be used as writing materials. They must undergo a process of preparation. Even the primitive material of stone must be polished ere the engraving begin. The reeds, and leaves, and skins, too, which were used by the ancients, all needed preparation. So with modern paper, of which rags are the raw material. These are torn into small pieces, washed, cast into a new form, and become a new creature. A similar process takes place in the preparation of the material for an epistle of Christ. You might as well try to write upon the rubbish from which paper is made as to impress legible evidence for the truth and divinity of the gospel on the life of one who is still of the earth, earthy.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>The paper manufacturer is not nice in the choice of his materials. The clean cannot be serviceable without passing through the process, and the unclean can be made serviceable with it. Let no man think he can go into heaven because he is good; but neither let any one fear he will be kept out of it because he is evil.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>The writing. It is not Christianity printed in the creed, but Christ written in the heart. A persons character may be gathered from his letters. How eagerly the public read those of a great man printed after his death! Our Lord left no letters, yet He has not left Himself without a witness. When He desires to let the world know what He is, He points to Christians. Nay, when He would have the Father to behold His glory, He refers Him to the saved: I am glorified in them. A Christian merchant goes to India or China. He sells manufactured goods; he buys silk and tea. But all the time he is a living epistle, sent by Christ to the heathen. A Christian boy becomes an apprentice, and is now, therefore, a letter from the Lord to all his shopmates.<\/p>\n


III. <\/strong>The writer. The Spirit of the living God. Some writings are easily rubbed off by rough usage or with age. Only fast colours are truly valuable. The flowers and figures painted upon porcelain are burned in, and therefore cannot be blotted out. No writing on a human spirit is certainly durable except that which the Spirit of God lays on. In conversion there is a sort of furnace through which the new-born pass. In the widespread religious activity of the day some marks are made on the people–not made by the Spirit of God–shown by the event to have been only marks on the surface made by some passing fear or nervous sympathy.<\/p>\n


IV. <\/strong>The pen. In photography it is the sun that makes the portrait; yet a human hand prepares the plate and adjusts the lens. A similar place is assigned to the ministry of men in the work of the Spirit. Printing nowadays is done by machines which work with a strength and regularity and silence that are enough to strike an onlooker with dismay. Yet even there a watchful human eye and alert human hand axe needed to introduce the paper into the proper place. Agents are needed even under the ministry of the Spirit–needed to watch for souls.<\/p>\n


V. <\/strong>The readers.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>The writing is not sealed or locked up in a desk, but exposed all the day to public view. Some who look on the letters are enemies, and some are friends. If an alien see Christ represented in a Christian, he may thereby be turned from darkness to light; but, if he see sin, self, and the world, he will probably be more hardened in his unbelief. Those who already know and love the truth are glad when they read it clearly written in a neighbours life, are grieved when they see a false image of the Lord held up before the eyes of men.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Many readers, however, fail to see the meaning of the plainest letters. None so blind as those who will not see. Considering how defective most readers are either in will or skill, or both, the living epistles should be written in characters both large and fair. Some MSS. are so defectively written that none but experts can decipher them. Skilled and practised men can piece them together, and gather the sense where, to ordinary eyes, only unconnected scrawls appear. Benevolent ingenuity has produced a kind of writing that even the blind can read. Such should be the writing of Christs mind on a Christians conversation. It should be raised in characters so large that even the blind, who cannot see, may be compelled, by contact with Christians, to feel that Christ is passing by. (W. Arnot, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Epistles of Christ: imperfect and spurious<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Bible is Gods book for the world, only it shuts it. But the world will read you.<\/em> Masters, your servants read you; servants, your masters read you; so will parents children, etc. Do they read in you what they ought to read? A Christian should be a Bible alive. Never mind though a man has not learned his letters; he will be able to read you fast enough. All men can read justice, mercy, and truth, or the opposite of them.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>One day a thought flashed into my mind that I did not want to lose, and, having no paper at hand except a letter from a friend, I just wrote between the lines of it; and when I had done that the fancy struck me to read through the writing as it stood, one line of my friends and one of my own, and you cannot think what nonsense it was! Ah! there are some characters like that. I dare not say there was nothing about them that Christ had written, but they have sadly allowed the devil and the world to underline them; there is no coherency or consistency in them.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>I remember, when I was a little boy at school, if I by any chance managed to make the smallest blot, as sure as I took the book up to my master, the first thing he looked at was the blot; and, as sure as I took it home, the first thing anybody looked at was the blot. My letters may have been made very gracefully, but nobody said a word about them; but everybody said something about the blot. Ah! I have known some people very good on the whole, but they have had sad blots–blots of temper, vanity, and worldliness. The sun himself is looked at more during the few minutes he has a black spot on his face than on all the days of the year besides. The world has an eagle glance for your spots, and if you have a spot on your character people will look more at it than at all the beautiful things that are there.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>I got a letter one day which had been sent to a committee. For the life of them they could not read it, and they sent it to me to try to make it out. It was a difficult task, and when I had made out the words I could scarcely make out the sense. It was a letter, but a very unintelligible one. I have known some characters like that, and if I preached to such I should have to take the text, I stand in doubt of you. These are not like the epistles spoken of in the text, known and read of all men, Endeavour to keep clear of such a character that nobody can tell what list to put you in: avoid being so quaint and difficult that nobody can tell what to make of you. May it be said of you, as it was said as I passed the door of a godly man who had lately died, If ever there was a Christian, that man was one.<\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>I remember, just before I left my last circuit, that I looked over a great number of old letters, some of which, at the time I received them, were so precious that I put them away to preserve them, and several of these had become so creased and dirty and illegible that I was obliged to throw them into the fire, though once they were so precious to me. I should not like that any of you who had been real letters of Christs own writing should become so careless and worldly that the writing became marred. I should not like that you should get into such a cold, backsliding state that all the beautiful letters that once were put upon you should become illegible, and that at the last Christ should say, Cast them into the fire.<\/p>\n

5. <\/strong>I was once in an assize court where a man was being tried for forgery. The individual whose writing, it was suspected, had been imitated, was dead, and so a large letter-book, full of what was known to be the writing of the deceased, was produced in court, to test the alleged forgery by it. If you are letters of Christ you will resemble His writing. The very name Christian implies that you profess to have Christs name written upon you. But it is no use to profess to be Christs epistle if you are not like Him. Suppose I picked up a letter which professed on the face of it to be a letter from Jesus Christ, but recommended this congregation to be worldly-minded, to love gold, to be fretful and peevish, and to be guilty of evil-speaking and slander. Of course I should know that it was no letter from Jesus Christ. I wonder whether all present who profess to be Christs epistles ever do that which Christ would not put His name to? Are you genuine letters? A friend of mine went to the bank to pay in some money. Amongst it there was a ten-pound note. The clerk looked at it carefully, and then stamped Forged right across it. What a sad thing it would be if any of you who profess to be epistles of Christ now should at the last be disowned of Him, and He should say, You are none of Mine–forged! (S. Coley.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Living epistles of Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>An Epistle of Christ is the title of every believer. In the N.T. Epistles we have the promised further revelation of Christ. We call them for convenience the epistles of Paul, or of Peter, etc.; but they are the epistles of Christ, from and concerning Him. So believers are a revelation of the Redeemer to the world; and as these apostolic letters carried light wherever they went, so the world is to read on the Christian the mind and grace of Jesus.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Christs work will necessarily witness to Him. The world cannot look on any true servant of Christ without receiving an impression of the Master.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Christs purpose concerning the world requires that every Christian be an epistle of Christ. With multitudes the gospel will be powerless until its truth is proved by its effects.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>Christs love to His people affords this usefulness to all of them. For to help others to Him is to enter into the joy of our Lord, and He would deprive none of His beloved of that. One of the Florentine princes commanded Michael Angelo to fashion a statue from the drifted snow before his palace, and the great artist, ignoring the scorn, wrought at the task as though he chiselled the enduring marble; and when it began to melt at the suns touch, and the contemptuous prince laughed at what he thought the vanity of the toil, the sculptor solaced himself with the reflection, The thought I threw into that snow shall stir this gazing people when their gaze is done. Our common tasks are fleeting, yet we may throw a piety into them whose memory will abide for good with those that saw it to distant years.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>Think of Christ writing this epistle.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>There must be the erasure of the old writing. In ancient monasteries the monks would take old parchments, and, removing the writing they bore, write sacred truth on them instead; so it happened that, where before men read annals of conquest, or heathen laws, or pagan blasphemies, then they read the Word of God. Till the old heathen writing on us be removed, there is no room for the new, nor would it stand much chance of being seen. So Christ removes it. We cannot; no human skill can cleanse the blotted page of an evil character.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>There must be the impression of His will on the character by fellowship with Him. In fellowship with Christ a subtle influence is exerted on us which must leave its mark; we cannot be with Him without acquiring a hatred of sin, without His peace possessing us, without our love and courage being inflamed, which must show themselves when we pass out to men again.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>When He has done that there may remain the bringing out of some of His deepest writings by fire. For as great secrets have been written on that prepared surface which conceals the writing till it is exposed to heat, and then line after line of unsuspected story appears, so some of Christs most sacred messages only steal out in the lives of His people in the hour of trial. The chamber of Christian sorrow has many a time been the place of Divine revelation.<\/p>\n


III. <\/strong>Then, surely, having written his epistle, he sends it. To write a letter without sending it were vain. The Bible is Gods letter to the world; we may think of His people as supplementary letters to individuals.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Then He will see it comes to them. This is the meaning of many of His providential dealings with us.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>We may expect Him to call their attention to us whom He means us to reach. He will not suffer that to be unread which He has written; His Spirit works with His providence, and turns mens eyes where He would have them look.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>And that shows Gods special mercy to some. When they have failed to read the Bible He has given them, He is so earnest for their redemption that He sends a letter to themselves.<\/p>\n


IV. <\/strong>He who writes and sends their waits the answer! (C. New.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Living epistles<\/strong><\/p>\n

This is one of those felicitous turns of expression which show the true genius; the sudden availing ones self of an adversarys argument against himself. Ask for my letter of commendation? Well, who has such a letter as I can show? Ye<\/em> are our epistle. Demosthenes uttered nothing finer than this, or so convincing.<\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>In what respects may men resemble an epistle, known and read of all?<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>The prime characteristic of a letter is its containing the mind of the writer. Can Christians represent the mind of Christ, as a letter contains your mind?<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> A perfect Church is not needed for this; for the Corinthian community, like a defaced epistle, was blotted with serious imperfections. Still their general conduct could exhibit such an approximation to the Spirit of Christ that the apostle could afford to spread it open before all men, asking them to read and know it. It is not, therefore, our infirmities and sins which disqualify us from being epistles of Christ. A good writer can, when pressed, write on very unpromising material. It is not the kind of paper, but the writing, which men are anxious to see.<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> The great difficulty with us all is the obstinate restlessness which keeps us from being written upon. But where this is overcome, and we present ourselves to the Lord, He will write His will concerning us so legibly that all shall acknowledge the finger of God–like the Pharisees, who took knowledge of Peter and John, that they had been with Jesus.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>When our Lord said, I call you not servants but friends, He implied that they would be an epistle, the contents of which would command their intelligent sympathy. Not like a letter-carrier, who knows nothing of what he carries, but like a friend charged with a message of reconciliation in which he is warmly interested.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>The great requisite of the epistle which we are considering is that it be manifestly from a living Writer. There are good letters whose authors are dead. Valuable; you keep them as curiosities. The religious life may present a faultless epistle of this kind–an evident regard to the will of Christ, but not to a living will. A conscientious executorship, but it is fulfilling the wishes of the dead! The life shows what Christ was, not what He is; what He said, not what He says. But we want to show letters of Christ of to-day. How different your manner when you bring me a letter on pressing business, and when you open a cabinet and produce a letter of Miltons! Now the former letter on business is what we want. Can I be the manifest epistle to others of a living Saviour? I know whether a man speaks to me as an antiquarian or as a believer, whether he comes to me with good news or to amuse me with information. You all know the difference between a lecture on Christianity and faith in a personal Redeemer; between a lecture on fire-escapes and making use of one when the house is burning. Let us speak, then, less of Christianity and more of Christ. Let Him show in us what He is. All sacrifice, all self-denial for His sake, is a most legible epistle of Christ. You know whether any one is repeating a lesson or speaking from his heart; whether he talks about business, or art, or science as from books or from experience or affection. Thus we shall show the hardly dry letter of Christ to men, or we shall show an old dry parchment copy, as we live day by day under the eye of our Lord and dwell in fellowship with Him by prayer and duty.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>The recommendation of things and persons contained in these living epistles. Ye are our epistle. Your conduct serves as a letter <\/strong>of commendation–yea, better than a thousand! Ye are my letter written in my heart. we can prove this man to have been sent of God; our lives show what God has wrought through him. Receive him. Every Christian, every Church, is intended to be a letter of commendation. Certainly a minister is highly honoured with a good letter of introduction of this kind. An ignorant or wicked man hears a minister preaching the gospel. He says, Why should I listen to that man? What recommends him to my confidence? Now it is a great thing for him to read of holiness, purity, and love in the people who are associated with that minister. On the other hand, every inconsistent hearer cripples the minister, and resembles one of those Bellerophons letters, where a person carries a letter of introduction containing a caution to beware of him. He is a public refutation of the preacher. He is a letter containing, Do not believe a word he says. Conclusion:<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>The apostle does not say that the individual Christian is an epistle of Christ, but they are collectively declared to be so. Each is a word or sentence; all make up the letter. Sentences which are unmeaning, often in their connection make a grand meaning. Christ often makes great use of one person, as tie often uses one word or verse to console or teach. But the force of that word depends very much on its being known to be part of an inspired book. Let us all try together to form the epistle of Christ.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Let people see and read the whole. Do not our passions, our selfishness, our indolence make us withhold it? Let us not incur the great sin of preventing poor sinners from seeing their Friends own handwriting! Who can tell the effect it might have upon them?<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>But for this end we must all be in our place, like the separate words of a letter; one word blotted or missing often makes a great difference to the meaning. Keep the end of Church life in view; not comfort, but the exhibition of the letter. (B. Kent, M. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The living epistle<\/strong><\/p>\n

A letter implies–<\/p>\n


I. <\/strong>An absent person who sends it; for in the actual presence of friend with friend letters become unnecessary. Now Christ is for a time absent, having gone into the heavens. In His absence He does not forget the world, but communicates with it by letters written on the hearts of His saints.<\/p>\n


II. <\/strong>A person or persons to whom it is sent. There is no class to whom Christs message is not addressed. It may be a message of warning to the unconverted, of caution to the careless, of guidance to the perplexed, of comfort to the saddened, of hope to the desponding. Shall we not take care that it is a full letter that Christ sends by us, written all over, and rich in instruction and encouragement? Shall we not see that it is a well-written and legible letter? Let the life, the character, the conduct, all be so plain and consistent that none shall doubt whose we are, and to whose grace we bear witness.<\/p>\n


III. <\/strong>Messages. What are those which should be read in the heart and life of a Christian?<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>The freedom of the Saviours love towards a sinner. The characters of converted men, and their histories before they were converted, may be infinitely various. But they are all alike in that they are sinners, and sinners saved, and all of grace, from the first moment of solemn conviction till the time that they found peace. Would we see Christs love to the sinner and His power to save?–Look at them. May it not be with many of them, as with St. Paul, that for this cause they obtained mercy, that in them first Christ Jesus might show forth a pattern of all long-suffering? Would we know that the love of Christ is free as the air we breathe, and broad as universal man? Would we know that there is no sin so deep as to be beyond the merits of the atonement, no spiritual ruin so absolute as to be beyond the power of grace? Learn it all here in these saved sinners; read the message of the Saviour in these loving epistles of Christ, written with the Spirit of the living God.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>The sufficiency of Divine grace–the power of the Spirit of Christ to regenerate the heart, and to turn the proud and stubborn will to God. What the strength of sin is we know in our personal experience only too well; but we never really know till we know it by experience, just as a mall may gaze long on a swollen river as it rolls its fall waters towards the cataract below, and yet may never know its fatal strength till he is himself upon the current, vainly struggling with all his might to stem the fatal force which is hurrying him onwards to his death. I fancy that there are none, not excepting the most reckless of men, without some experience of the power of evil over them. Where, then, shall be your hope but in the Spirit of God? But how shalt thou know that the unseen Spirit is willing to help thee, or, if willing, competent to make thee a conqueror? Why, here is the epistle of Christ to assure thee of it. Look at this saved man. The whole course of his nature is changed, and flows towards God. He now loves what once he hated, hates what once he loved. He was once just like thyself.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>The certainty of the promises and the deep inward peace and joy which are the inheritance of the children of God. Who has ever heard a Christian man say that he was disappointed in Christ, or did not find Him the precious and perfect Saviour he had believed Him to be? Ask the man of the world if he has found happiness in excitement, in wealth, iii honour and ambition, and he will frankly tell you, with a sigh, Vanity of vanities, all is vanity. (Canon Garbett.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The posted system in its beneficent and religious aspect<\/strong><\/p>\n

An epistle is a letter. Epistle is a word formed from the Greek; letter from the Latin. Epistle does not occur in the English Old Testament; there is always letter, or (quite as often and quite as correctly), in the plural form, letters. An epistle of Christ, then, is a letter of (from) Christ. We do not possess any letter of Jesus Christs. There was a spurious correspondence, known to the early Church, between Christ and a prince of Mesopotamia, who applied to Him for help in sickness, but it was a forgery. Indeed, by the nature of the case it must have been so, for there were no Christians in Mesopotamia till Christ Himself was gone back to heaven. The nearest approach to an actual epistle of Christ is found in the addresses to the seven Churches in the Book of Revelation. The text was suggested to me by the occasion. We are welcoming this afternoon to the mother church of the diocese a large company of men whose every-day life connects them with the postal service of the country. It seems natural to inquire whether there is anything about your work in the Bible. There is more about it there than you might suppose. A Concordance will present a somewhat full record under the heads of Epistle, Letter, and Letters. Many of the entries are sad and sorrowful ones. The first (I think) of all is that fatal letter of King David to his unworthy confidant, Joab, about Uriah. See there what a letter may have in it–a cruel and treacherous edict of murder. And the next in order is like it. It is the letter of the wicked queen Jezebel to the elders of Jezreel about Naboth. But let it just show us what you may be carrying in that sacred budget of the daily letters. Let it give an element of awe, of solemnity, to the daily ministration. There may be corruption in that bundle, and you may be innocent of it. Soon after we come to the threatening letter of Sennacherib. Momentous issues hang upon that daily stamping, sorting, delivering. Issues, not all of evil-some of eternal good, to give an expected, a blessed end. Three centuries ago there was no post-office in England. Why, indeed, should there be, when so few people could write? People dwelt apart, managed their own little dwellings, cared not for news of their countrys welfare or their countrys relations with foreign countries, bought and sold in their own little hamlets. London and Edinburgh were a week apart as to tidings of battles or revolutions. Thus the world vegetated, thus the world slept. I will bid you to think but of three of the departments of life to which you, in the exercise of a laborious and often depressing service, minister.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Think of it in its business aspect. What would happen if that daily sorting and stamping and carrying were but for one day intermitted? Why, the wheels of the world would be stopped by its stoppage.<\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Think of it in its family aspect. Communications passing week by week between the home and the schoolboy son, or the servant son, or the sailor or soldier son, or the colonist son, or the exile son for fault or no fault of his. You, you are ministering to these sweetest and most beautiful instincts of nature as you tread your weary round.<\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>Its business aspect and its family aspect. Has not your work yet one more–its religious, its Christian, its Christlike aspect? Oh, the influence breathed by letters upon solitary, straying, tempted lives! I do not think it is always the religious letter–strictly so called and ostentatiously so labelled–which does this work of works. No; there are letters–from mother, from sister, from brother, from friend–which even name not the name of God, and yet do Him service in the hearts heart of the receiver. I need not here warn any one against corrupting by letters. A curious thought strikes me, Dr. Johnson said, a century and more ago, to his biographer–a curious thought strikes me–we shall receive no letters in the grave. Yes, this is one of the thoughts which make the state beyond death so bare and blank to our conception. No letters? Then no information (is it so?) as to the state of the survivors–their health and wealth, their prosperity or adversity, their marriages and deaths, their joys and sorrows, their falls and risings again. We shall receive no letters in the grave. Then let us so live as not to miss them. Let us have a life quite within and above, quite independent of, and extraneous to, the life of earth and time. Let us have so read and so written our letters, while we can, as to have no remorse for them in the world beyond death. (Dean<\/em> Vaughan.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

An epistle of Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n

A missionary in India was so feeble mentally that he could not learn the language, After some years he asked to be recalled, frankly saying that he had not sufficient intellect for the work. A dozen missionaries, however, petitioned his <\/strong>Board not to grant his request, saying that his goodness gave him a wider influence among the heathen than any other missionary at the station. A convert, when asked, What is it to be a Christian? replied, It is to be like Mr.<\/p>\n

, naming the good missionary. He was kept in India. He never preached a sermon, but when he died hundreds of heathen, as well as many Christians, mourned him, and testified to his holy life and character. (S. S. Chronicle.<\/em>)<\/p>\n

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

CHAPTER III. <\/P>

The apostle shows, in opposition to his detractors, that the<\/I><\/P>

faith and salvation of the Corinthians were sufficient<\/I><\/P>

testimony of his Divine mission; that he needed no letters of<\/I><\/P>

recommendation, the Christian converts at Corinth being a<\/I><\/P>

manifest proof that he was an apostle of Christ<\/I>, 1-3.<\/P>

He extols the Christian ministry, as being infinitely more<\/I><\/P>

excellent than that of Moses<\/I>, 4-12.<\/P>

Compares the different modes of announcing the truth under the<\/I><\/P>

law and under the Gospel: in the former it was obscurely<\/I><\/P>

delivered; and the veil of darkness, typified by the veil which<\/I><\/P>

Moses wore, is still on the hearts of the Jews; but when they<\/I><\/P>

turn to Christ this veil shall be taken away<\/I>, 13-16.<\/P>

On the contrary, the Gospel dispensation is spiritual; leads to<\/I><\/P>

the nearest views of heavenly things; and those who receive it<\/I><\/P>

are changed into the glorious likeness of God by the agency of<\/I><\/P>

his Spirit<\/I>, 17, 18. <\/P>

NOTES ON CHAP. III.<\/P>

<\/P>

Verse 1<\/span>. Do we begin again to commend ourselves<\/B><\/I>] By speaking thus of our sincerity, Divine mission, c., is it with a design to conciliate your esteem, or ingratiate ourselves in your affections? By no means.<\/P>

<\/P>

Or need we – epistles of commendation<\/B><\/I>] Are we so destitute of ministerial abilities and Divine influence that we need, in order to be received in different Churches, to have letters of recommendation? Certainly not. God causes us to triumph through Christ in every place<\/I> and your conversion is such an evident seal<\/I> to our ministry as leaves no doubt that God is with us.<\/P>

<\/P>

Letters <\/B>of commendation<\/B><\/I>] Were frequent in the primitive<\/I> Church; and were also in use in the apostolic<\/I> Church, as we learn from this place. But these were, in all probability, not used by the apostles<\/I>; their helpers, successors, and those who had not the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, needed such letters and they were necessary to prevent the Churches from being imposed on by false teachers. But when apostles<\/I> came, they brought their own testimonials, the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit.<\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

The apostle, in the former Epistle, had spoken much in the vindication of himself and of his office; he seeth reason to return again to something of the like discourse, being provoked by the many imputations which the false apostles and teachers, in this church, had laid upon him: therefore he saith: <\/P>

Do we begin again?<\/B> Or else these words may have a special reference to the last verse of the former chapter; where he had commended himself, as being none of those who corrupted the word of God, but had preached as of God, and in the sight of God. No, (saith the apostle), though some others stand in need of commendatory letters, and are very careful to procure them, (by which others<\/I> he very probably means the false apostles and teachers, which were Pauls great enemies), yet I trust I need not any letters commendatory to recommend me to you, any more than letters of recommendation from you to commend me unto any other churches of Christ. <\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

1.<\/B> Are we beginning again torecommend ourselves (2Co 5:12<\/span>)(as some of them might say he had done in his first Epistle; or, areproof to “some” who had begun<\/I> doing so)! <\/P>

commendation<\/B>recommendation.(Compare 2Co 10:18<\/span>). The”some” refers to particular persons of the “many”(2Co 2:17<\/span>) teachers who opposedhim, and who came to Corinth with letters of recommendation fromother churches; and when leaving that city obtained similar lettersfrom the Corinthians to other churches. The thirteenth canon of theCouncil of Chalcedon (A.D.451) ordained that “clergymen coming to a city where they wereunknown, should not be allowed to officiate without letterscommendatory from their own bishop.” The history (Ac18:27<\/span>) confirms the existence of the custom here alluded to inthe Epistle: “When Apollos was disposed to pass into Achaia[Corinth], the brethren<\/I> [of Ephesus] wrote,<\/I> exhortingthe disciples to receive him.” This was about two years beforethe Epistle,and is probably one<\/I> of the instances to which Paulrefers, as many at Corinth boasted of their being followers ofApollos (1Co 1:12<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Do we begin again to commend ourselves<\/strong>?…. The apostle having asserted that he and his fellow ministers always triumphed in Christ, and made manifest the savour of his knowledge in every place; were a sweet savour of Christ to God, did not corrupt the word of God, as some did, but sincerely and faithfully preached Christ; some might insinuate from hence, that he was guilty of arrogance and vain glory; wherefore to remove such a charge, or prevent its being brought, he asks, “do we begin again to commend ourselves?” we do not; what we say, we say honestly, sincerely, in the simplicity of our hearts, without any view to our own glory and applause among men, or for any worldly profit and advantage, or to ingratiate ourselves into your affections; we have no such views: some read these words without an interrogation, “we do begin again to commend ourselves”; as we have done already, in this and the former epistles; and as it is but just and right that we should vindicate our characters, support our good name and reputation, and secure and maintain our credit, which some would maliciously deprive us of:<\/p>\n

though we have no need, as some others, of epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you<\/strong>; our persons, characters, and usefulness are too well known, to require commendatory letters front others to you, or from you to others. The false apostles are here struck at, whose practice it was to get letters of commendation from place to place; which they carried about and made use of for their temporal advantage, having nothing truly good and excellent in them to recommend them to others. The apostle does not hereby condemn letters of recommendation, which in proper cases may be very lawfully given, and a good use be made of them; only that he and other Gospel ministers were so well known, as to stand in no need of them.<\/p>\n

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Apology for Seeming Self-Commendation.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/I><\/span><\/P> <\/TD>

A. D.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN> 57.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> <\/TABLE>

      1 Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others,<\/I> epistles of commendation to you, or letters<\/I> of commendation from you?   2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:   3 Forasmuch as ye are<\/I> manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.   4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:   5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is<\/I> of God;<\/P>

      In these verses,<\/P>

      I. The apostle makes an apology for seeming to commend himself. He thought it convenient to protest his sincerity to them, because there were some at Corinth who endeavoured to blast his reputation; yet he was not desirous of vain-glory. And he tells them, 1. That he neither needed nor desired any verbal commendation to them, nor letters testimonial from them, as some others did, meaning the false apostles or teachers, v.<\/I><\/span> 1<\/span>. His ministry among them had, without controversy, been truly great and honourable, how little soever his person was in reality, or how contemptible soever some would have him thought to be. 2. The Corinthians themselves were his real commendation, and a good testimonial for him, that God was with him of a truth, that he was sent of God: You are our epistle,<\/I> v.<\/span> 2<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. This was the testimonial he most delighted in, and what was most dear to him–they were written in his heart;<\/I> and this he could appeal to upon occasion, for it was, or might be, known and read of all men.<\/I> Note, There is nothing more delightful to faithful ministers, nor more to their commendation, than the success of their ministry, evidenced in the hearts and lives of those among whom they labour.<\/P>

      II. The apostle is careful not to assume too much to himself, but to ascribe all the praise to God. Therefore, 1. He says they were the epistle of Christ,<\/I> v.<\/span> 3<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. The apostle and others were but instruments, Christ was the author of all the good that was in them. The law of Christ was written in their hearts, and the love of Christ shed abroad in their hearts. This epistle was not written with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God;<\/I> nor was it written in tables of stone,<\/I> as the law of God given to Moses, but on the heart;<\/I> and that heart not a stony one, but a heart of flesh, upon the fleshy<\/I> (not fleshly,<\/I> as fleshliness denotes sensuality) tables of the heart,<\/I> that is, upon hearts that are softened and renewed by divine grace, according to that gracious promise, I will take away the stony heart, and I will give you a heart of flesh,<\/I> Ezek. xxxvi. 26<\/I><\/span>. This was the good hope the apostle had concerning these Corinthians (v.<\/I><\/span> 4<\/span>) that their hearts were like the ark of the covenant, containing the tables of the law and the gospel, written with the finger, that is, by the Spirit, of the living God. 2. He utterly disclaims the taking of any praise to themselves, and ascribes all the glory to God: “We are not sufficient of ourselves,<\/I> v.<\/span> 5<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. We could never have made such good impressions on your hearts, nor upon our own. Such are our weakness and inability that we cannot of ourselves think a good thought, much less raise any good thoughts or affections in other men. All our sufficiency is of God;<\/I> to him therefore are owing all the praise and glory of that good which is done, and from him we must receive grace and strength to do more.” This is true concerning ministers and all Christians; the best are no more than what the grace of God makes them. Our hands are not sufficient for us, but our sufficiency is of God; and his grace is sufficient for us, to furnish us for every good word and work.<\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

To commend ourselves? <\/B> ( ?<\/SPAN><\/span>). Late (Koine<\/I>) form of <\/SPAN><\/span>, to place one with another, to introduce, to commend. Paul is sensitive over praising himself, though his enemies compelled him to do it.<\/P>

Epistles of commendation <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Late verbal adjective from <\/SPAN><\/span> and often in the papyri and in just this sense. In the genitive case here after <\/SPAN><\/span>. Such letters were common as seen in the papyri (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East<\/I>, p. 226). N.T. examples of commending individuals by letters occur in Acts 15:25<\/span>; Acts 18:27<\/span> (Apollos), 1Co 16:10f.<\/span> (Timothy); Ro 16:1<\/span> (Phoebe with the verb <\/SPAN><\/span>); Col 4:10<\/span> (Mark); 2Co 8:22f.<\/span> (Titus and his companion). <\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Do we begin again. Rev., are we beginning. As if anticipating, the taunt so often repeated, that he had no commendatory letters, and therefore was forced to commend himself by self – laudation and by dishonest means. See ch. 2Co 4:2<\/span>; 2Co 10:12<\/span>. You will say, “You are beginning again the old strain of self – commendation as in the first epistle.” See 1Co 9:15 – 21<\/span>. <\/P>

To commend [] <\/SPAN><\/span>. See on Rom 3:5<\/span>. <\/P>

Some others. Others is superfluous. The reference is to certain false teachers accredited by churches or by other well – known teachers.<\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

ACCREDITATION OF THE MINISTRY<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

1) “Do we begin again to commend ourselves? <\/strong>(archometha palin heautous sunistanein) “Do we begin again to commend or prove ourselves to you?” as in 1Co 9:15<\/span>; 1Co 14:18<\/span>; 1Co 15:10<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2) “Or need we, as some others,”<\/strong> (e me chrezomen hos tines) “or we do not need as certain others, do we?” this is a rhetoric question, assuming a “surely not” reply. Only unknown or little-known people need letters of certification, commendation, or introduction, to you all.<\/p>\n

3) “Epistles of commendation,”<\/strong> (sustatipon epistolon) “Commendatory or endorsement letters,” letters of favorable introduction, certifying our character and reputation, among you all?<\/p>\n

4) “To you, or letters of commendation from you:”<\/strong> (pros humas e eks) “to you or to approach you” or “to (go out) from you,” do we? Surely not, for he and his missionary helpers had been eminently accepted among them, 2Co 1:12<\/span>; 2Co 5:12<\/span>; 2Co 10:12<\/span>; 2Co 10:18<\/span>; 2Co 12:11<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Such letters were written by New Testament churches to introduce:<\/p>\n

1) Silas and Judas to Antioch, Act 15:25<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2) Apollos to Corinth, Act 18:27<\/span>.<\/p>\n

3) Phoebe to the church at Rome, Rom 16:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n

4) Titus and his companions to Corinth, 2Co 8:16-24<\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

1. Do we begin It appears that this objection also was brought forward against him — that he was excessively fond of publishing his own exploits, and brought against him, too, by those who were grieved to find that the fame, which they were eagerly desirous to obtain, was effectually obstructed in consequence of his superior excellence. They had already, in my opinion, found fault with the former Epistle, on this ground, that he indulged immoderately in commendations of himself. To commend here means to boast foolishly and beyond measure, or at least to recount one’s own praises in a spirit of ambition. Paul’s calumniators had a plausible pretext — that it is a disgusting (359) and odious thing in itself for one to be the trumpeter of his own praises. Paul, however, had an excuse on the ground of necessity, inasmuch as he gloried, only because he was shut up to it. His design also raised him above all calumny, as he had nothing in view but that the honor of his apostleship might remain unimpaired for the edification of the Church; for had not Christ’s honor been infringed upon, he would readily have allowed to pass unnoticed what tended to detract from his own reputation. Besides, he saw that it was very much against the Corinthians, that his authority was lessened among them. In the first place, therefore, he brings forward their calumny, letting them know that he is not altogether ignorant as to the kind of talk, that was current among them. <\/p>\n

Have we need? The answer is suited (to use a common expression) to the person rather than to the thing, though we shall find him afterwards saying as much as was required in reference to the thing itself. At present, however, he reproves their malignity, inasmuch as they were displeased, if he at any time reluctantly, nay even when they themselves constrained him, made mention of the grace that God had bestowed upon him, while they were themselves begging in all quarters for epistles, that were stuffed entirely with flattering commendations. He says that he has no need of commendation in words, while he is abundantly commended by his deeds. On the other hand, he convicts them of a greedy desire for glory, inasmuch as they endeavored to acquire favor through the suffrages of men. (360) In this manner, he gracefully and appropriately repels their calumny. We must not, however, infer from this, that it is absolutely and in itself wrong to receive recommendations, (361) provided you make use of them for a good purpose. For Paul himself recommends many; and this he would not have done had it been unlawful. Two things, however, are required here — first, that it be not a recommendation that is elicited by flattery, but an altogether unbiassed testimony; (362) and secondly, that it be not given for the purpose of procuring advancement for the individual, but simply that it may be the means of promoting the advancement of Christ’s kingdom. For this reason, I have observed, that Paul has an eye to those who had assailed him with calumnies. <\/p>\n

(359) “ Mal sonnante aux aureilles;” — “Sounding offensively to the ears.” <\/p>\n

(360) “ Par la faueur et recommandation des hommes;” — “By the favor and recommendation of men.” <\/p>\n

(361) “ Letres recommandatoires;” — “Recommendatory letters.” <\/p>\n

(362) “ Enucleatum testimonium;” — “ Vn vray tesmoignage rendu d’vn iugement entier auec prudence et en verite;” — “A true testimony, given with solid judgment, with prudence, and with truth.” Cicero makes use of a similar expression, which Calvin very probably had in his eye — “ Enucleata suffragia;” — “Votes given judiciously, and with an unbiassed judgment.” — (Cic. Planc. 4.) — Ed. <\/p>\n

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

CRITICAL NOTES<\/em><\/p>\n

N.B. A continuous outpour<\/em> of argument and appeal, all alive, and quivering, thrilling, with quick emotion, from<\/em> 2Co. 2:17<\/span> to<\/em> 2Co. 6:10<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:1<\/span>.Q.d<\/em>. There, he is at it again! [2Co. 2:17<\/span>, or perhaps cf. 1Co. 9:1-6<\/span>; 1Co. 9:15<\/span>; 1Co. 9:21<\/span>; or something he had said at Corinth, known to his readers]. Praising himself<\/em>! [Familiarly, Blowing his own trumpet, since no one else will do it for him.] Am I?<\/em> (q.d<\/em>. in 2Co. 2:17<\/span>). Letters of commendation<\/strong>.Such as Apollos brought to Corinth (Act. 18:27<\/span>); or such as this very letter became to Titus (2Co. 8:17-19<\/span>). Rom. 16:1<\/span> is a good example; for Phbe. These Christians travelling from Church to Church appear in 2Jn. 1:10-11<\/span>, 3Jn. 1:5-9<\/span> [I wrote<\/em> unto the Church]. Seen also in the Didache<\/em>, xii., xiii. Perhaps such as came from James to Antioch (Gal. 2:12<\/span>) carried such letters. These became a very common institution in the early Church. N.B., Paul himself had once asked the authority and commission of such letters to the synagogue of Damascus (Act. 26:12<\/span>). Note the shorter reading<\/em>.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:2<\/span>.Certainly, to you<\/em> we<\/em> need none. We, who know what place yon occupy in our hearts<\/em>, know that we do not; youall<\/em> of you<\/em>can<\/em> read<\/em> our love to you, and you know<\/em> that we do not. In our hearts<\/strong>.Others carry theirs in their hands.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:3<\/span>.New turn<\/em> given here to the figure<\/em>. The Corinthians are a letter of commendation for him, not to themselves only, but to other Churches and the world. The Christians at Corinth are a credential for him so conspicuous that it is known and read of all men<\/em>. Notice the adroit, courteous, ad homines<\/em> argument. In 1 Corinthians 15<\/span> he urges that they cannot deny Christs resurrection without abandoning all hope of their own, and all reality in their salvation from sin. So here, they cannot deny his apostleship without also denying the work of the Spirit of God in their own heart. Ministered<\/strong>.Carried about<\/em> as his rivals did their letters. An epistle of Christ<\/strong>.I.e. written by<\/em>, and given<\/em> to His servant Paul by, Christ Himself<\/em>. The argument is that of 1Co. 9:2-3<\/span>. In the phraseology, rather than in the thought, are reminiscences of such Old Testament passages as Pro. 3:3<\/span>; Pro. 7:3<\/span>; Eze. 11:19<\/span>; Eze. 36:26<\/span>. So also the application of the metaphor, like the use of the original figure of letters of commendation, is modified almost from sentence to sentence. Thus a letter written with ink<\/em> passes over into the tables of stone<\/em> at Sinai (Jer. 31:33<\/span>). Flesh stone<\/strong>.Plainly not<\/em> here in any moral<\/em> sense: fleshen<\/em> [analogous to wooden<\/em>] would exactly represent the thought. By the Spirit<\/strong>.Note the capital letter rightly in the; His work, the new creation of 2Co. 5:17<\/span>, the experiences of their new life,these are the writing of the Living God<\/em>. Note the name, Living<\/strong> God<\/em>, in 2Co. 6:16<\/span>; was Paul in Ephesus, as once he had been in Athens, stirred when he saw the city full of idols? [Another impressively used Old Testament name in 2Co. 6:18<\/span>, the Lord God Almighty<\/em>.]<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:4<\/span>.See Appended Note from Stanley. Such confidence, etc<\/strong>.A real answer to the cry of 2Co. 2:16<\/span>, Who is sufficient? etc. The word sufficient<\/em> and its cognates is here resumed in 2Co. 3:5-6<\/span>. [Say, adequate to, competent to, up to the level (measure) of.] He looks toward God<\/em>, the source of his commission, the giver of adequate grace to fulfil it, the giver of his success at Corinth or elsewhere; he expects all from God, the source, through Christ<\/em>, the channel.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:5<\/span>. To think of ourselves<\/strong>.Misleading to our modern English ears; clearer in Q.d<\/em>. to give ourselves any such confident encouragement, drawing our confidence of sufficiency from<\/em> any presumed resources within ourselves<\/em>.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:6<\/span>.Proof that this competency comes from God. God gave him a further and a greater competency<\/em>, which involves the less. God made him competent (2Co. 1:22<\/span>) to be a minister of a dispensation, which from its very nature must produce, when it took effect, exactly such a result as he counts the Corinthian Church to be (Waite, in Speaker<\/em>). Ministers<\/strong>.Reverts to the word of 2Co. 3:3<\/span>; but the personal purpose of that ministration<\/em> is gone from his thought; he is carrying about and dispensingadministeringsomething far greater and of more importance than any personal credentials, even of the best. A New Covenant<\/strong>N.B. this in, correctly. To be studied with Mat. 26:28<\/span> [and this with Exo. 24:8<\/span>]; Jer. 31:33-34<\/span>. [This last in Hebrews 10<\/span> is the pivot around which turns an exposition of the first and the second (2Co. 3:9<\/span>), and in Hebrews 8<\/span> clenches the discussion as between the new and the old; both of which comparisons should themselves be compared with this of letter<\/em> and spirit<\/em>, which is also found in Rom. 2:27-29<\/span>; Rom. 7:6<\/span>.] The letter<\/strong>.The Law of Moses, graven in so many letters and words on the tables of stone. [The Decalogue is, then, practically the<\/em> Law, throwing light on Pauls frequent discussions of the law, as affecting Christian thought and life.] The Spirit<\/strong>.Capital<\/em><\/strong> S;<\/em> the Holy Ghost, Who is the characteristic and crowning glory of the Gospel order. In the argument of Gal. 3:2<\/span>; Gal. 5:5<\/span>, the Spirit<\/em> is the summary gift of that whole continuous covenant of which believers, pre- and post-Pentecostal both, are Abrahams heirs. Killeth<\/strong>.He explains how, in Rom. 3:19<\/span>; Rom. 5:20<\/span>, and, particularly, Rom. 7:9-24<\/span>. [See especially Rom. 7:9<\/span>; Rom. 7:11<\/span>; Rom. 7:24<\/span>, and Rom. 8:2<\/span>,] of which this versethis wordis a summary. Giveth life<\/strong>.Joh. 6:63<\/span>; 1Co. 15:45<\/span> (very interesting), Gal. 6:8<\/span>, cast light on this; as does Rom. 8:11<\/span>, where the action of the life-giving Holy Ghost is carried further.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:7<\/span>. Of death<\/strong>.Though this was not its purpose (Rom. 7:10<\/span>), but its incidental result. Keep written<\/em> distinct from graven on stones<\/em>; not<\/em> written on stones. Written<\/em> is opposed to glorious<\/em>; lit. in letters, in glory, respectively. From this point<\/em> the chapter is framed on the lines of the narrative of Exo. 34:28-35<\/span>; many words and terms of expression being borrowed from the LXX.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:8<\/span>. Glorious<\/strong>.With<\/em> glory, slightly changed from 2Co. 3:7<\/span>. Shall be<\/strong>.Beet carries this forward into a future revelation of a glory for believers analogous to that which clothed Moses face. But is the glory in the second case anything but spiritual, and analogous<\/em> to that in the first? Shall be<\/em> occupies the (mental) point of time just before the advent of the glorified<\/em> order which was just then becoming actual.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:9<\/span>.Moses was a dispenser, administrator<\/em>, of condemnation<\/em>, in that he brought a Law to men which in issue, if not purpose, condemned them.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:10<\/span>.The phraseology here is full of reminiscences of the LXX. In this respect<\/strong>.Stanley: In this instance of Moses: In this particular instance was fulfilled the general rule, that a greater glory throws a lesser glory into the shade. Beet: In this matter;<\/em> in the comparison of the two Covenants. Waite: In this particular<\/em> of comparative or relative glory. Conybeare [and Howson]: Literally, For that which has been glorified in this particular, has not been glorified, because of the glory which surpasses it<\/em>. The moon is as bright after sunrise as before, but, practically, its brightness is set aside by that of the sun (Beet).<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:11<\/span>. Is done away<\/strong>.Is being done<\/em> away, now, historically, in that Pauline age. Prepositions changed; see how tries to show this. The two prepositions do not necessarily express the difference between transitoriness and duration [? permanence, as Farrar and others], but they may<\/em> do so as matter of language, and the distinction is too much in accordance with the context to be set aside (Waite, in Speaker<\/em>). Beet says well: In the history of the world, as in the experience of each individual, God speaks first in the form of Law, Do this or die. When we hear the good news, He that believes shall not die, the voice of condemnation loses its dread power, and comes to nought<\/em>. But the good news of life will remain sounding in our ears for ever.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:12<\/span>.Returns to 2Co. 3:4<\/span>, but confidence<\/em> is now filled out into hope<\/em>. Also he was charged with insincerity; he repudiates the charge, I speak openly, plainly, confidently; there is no concealment, nothing underneath.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:13<\/span>.Note that the A.V. of Exo. 34:33<\/span> inserts till<\/em>; reading the story as that Moses hid the refulgence of the glory whilst<\/em> he was speaking. The LXX. and Vulgate translate Exo. 34:33<\/span> otherwise. Paul follows for his purpose their account, that Moses put on the veil after<\/em> he had finished speaking, to hide, not the unbearable refulgence of the glory, but its waning brightness. In 2Co. 3:13<\/span> that which was passing away<\/em> (R.V.) does not very definitely go beyond the literal glory mentioned in the narrative. But the further application to which the words so aptly lend themselves, is beginning to come into view.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:14<\/span>.Like the letters of commendation, or the triumph and the incense bearers (2Co. 2:14<\/span>), the figure of the veil<\/em>, even whilst he is using it, suggests to Paul another distinct, but related, use of it. Like the Talliththe curious fringed scarf which to this day every born Israelite wears on head or shoulders at public worshipthere is a veil on the heart of Israel as they read even the Law. Not merely is its waning glory concealed from them, but even its real Secret, the Lord<\/em>.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:15<\/span>. Moses<\/strong>.As in Act. 15:21<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:16<\/span>. Shall turn<\/strong>.Turn in<\/em>, as Moses did (Exo. 34:34<\/span>). What is the nominative? Choose between <\/p>\n

(1) it<\/em> [=their heart]; <\/p>\n

(2) a man<\/em>, margin; <\/p>\n

(3) Moses<\/em> [=The Old Covenant, or the people of Israel]. <\/p>\n

(1) most in favour;
(2) and
(3) are of course true, whether expressed here or not. Note: But whensoever<\/em>, etc. (R.V.).<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:17<\/span>.The Lord<\/em> in the passage and story from the Pentateuch is<\/em>, practically, the Spirit<\/em>. [Query, corresponds to the Spirit in my allegory. Thus, accepting <\/p>\n

(3), As Moses turns in to the Lord (in the narrative), so the Old Covenant turns in to the Spirit<\/em> (=the New Covenant, symbolised by its characteristic blessing, as in 2Co. 3:6<\/span>). So is<\/em> (Gal. 4:25<\/span>).] To Christians the Lord [=Jehovah]<\/strong> of the Old Testament is Christ. He who turns to Christ, finds that he has met with, and received, the Spirit. Remember the deep unity of Son and Spirit in the undivided Trinity; so that, e.g<\/em>. in Rom. 8:9-10<\/span>in redemption language and in regard to redemption facts, the one may often be interchanged with the other. An administrative, not a personal, identity (Beet). Liberty<\/strong>.Once more, in a word a paragraph of another letter is condensed: here Gal. 4:1<\/span> to Gal. 5:1<\/span> are thus packed away into a single phrase.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:18<\/span>.Note again the changing phrases; The Spirit of the Lord<\/em> Christ is also Himself the Lord the Spirit<\/em>. The name Lord belongs to Him also, equally with Father and Son. Observe unveiled<\/em>, keeping up the story of Exodus. Also notice the face<\/em> not the heart<\/em>, is in this instance without the veil. Difficult, on lexical or grammatical grounds only, to decide between beholding<\/em> and reflecting<\/em>. Each is supported. [Winer (Moulton), p. 318, thinks that the middle voice fixes the sense as Beholding (for ourselves) the glory of the Lord (as in a mirror).]. Both are needed for the facts of Christian experience; we must first, like Moses, go in and behold, before we can come forth and reflect<\/em>. Paul is, however, insisting that he (=we<\/em>) has nothing to conceal, as Moses had; that, in fact, he had used great boldness of speech<\/em>. Without a veil he had let what glory of the New Covenant he had received, and had to communicate, shine forth; reflecting<\/em> it as Moses did, but not veiling<\/em> it, as did Moses. On the other hand, Farrar, carrying on the thought into 2Co. 4:3<\/span>; 2Co. 4:6<\/span> : For God had shone in the hearts of His ministers only in order that the bright knowledge which they had caught from gazing, with no intervening veil, on the glory of Christ, might glow for the illumination of the world. In favour of beholding<\/em> is the progressive transformation, by assimilation, into conformity to the glory of Christ. [Stanley makes from glory<\/em> the terminus a quo<\/em> of the process; to glory<\/em> the terminus ad quem<\/em>; the completeness rather than the progressive character of it being in view.] 2Co. 4:6<\/span> fixes, and expounds, the glory of the Lord<\/em>.<\/p>\n

HOMILETIC ANALYSISChap<\/em>. 2Co. 3:1<\/span> to 2Co. 4:6<\/span><\/p>\n

This section has as the unifying thought, Openness<\/em>.We find<\/p>\n

I. Open letters<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

II. A law now open [unveiled]<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

III. An open [unveiled] Gospel<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

IV. Open character and conduct of the ministers of the Gospel<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

I. <\/p>\n

1. The Corinthians are<\/em> letters patent for Paul<\/em>.Not credentials merely to themselves, assuring them of his true Apostolic standing. [Nor are they merely a letter for his own personal reassurance, in any moment of faintness or discouragement.] They are carried about by him unsealed, open, to be his credentials to all who will take pains to examine them. [When Sanballat sent an open letter to Nehemiah (Neh. 6:5<\/span>), the privacy of its contents unsecured by a seal, it was, and was meant to be, an insult. Paul is glad that, as part of the issues of his work, men should read the epistle from Christ with which his Divine Master has accredited him.] Happy that ministry whose fruit guarantees that there has been no mistake as to the call. Happy that people whose personal experience of blessing and life received through the human messenger, and whose joyful observation that newly quickened souls are by his words ever being added to the Church, agree to assure them that his letters of ordination, his commission of apostleship, still run in unabated validity. No need, as between them and him, that he should continually be vindicating his true ministerial status<\/em>. We know what he has done for us; we can no more doubt that he is a true minister, than that through him we have a place in Christ ourselves. Our Paul no true apostle? Nonsense! Look at us! Read us! You who depreciate him may bring your letters from Jerusalem and James, [from Rome or Lambeth, or Conference, or College]; his credentials are sufficient for us. We are his seals.<\/p>\n

2. A real reason<\/em>, though not the strongest, for an open profession of Christ<\/em>.Secret discipleship, if such a thing were long possible, would be of no service as a letter of commendation. Something is due to the man, and to the Church, by whose instrumentality the life-giving Spirit has been ministered<\/em> to a Christian man. [Very much is due, for the sake of those whom the preacher has still to quicken by his ministry. Let your minister be manifestly, and to the gaze of all, a many-lettered man<\/em>. They will hear him the more attentively, if your quickened life in the Spirit accredit him to their heart. For their salvations sake, be ye an unsealed letter<\/em>, which all may peruse, if they will.] Something is due to Christ Who sends him. He<\/em> also needs accrediting to the unsaved. [Though the words do not<\/em> mean a letter of commendation for Christ (2Co. 3:3<\/span>).] A mans changed life should be an open<\/strong> lettter.<\/p>\n

3. It should be legibly and beautifully written<\/em>.[Drunken man, rolling up against a bishop: You<\/em> converted me. Yes, it looks like my<\/em> work, not my Masters.] Too many Christians are at their best badly written letters; often the writingthough true enoughneeds some discovering and deciphering. [Like the shabby, thumbed, torn references which the professional beggar brings out of his dirty pocket.] Some of these open letters accredit nobody, with any satisfactory evidence. [Poor credentials of the Gospel itself. When Gods Love first came to men, with what a perfect Open Letter it came commended! (Rom. 5:8<\/span>).] Because they are a letter not for Pauls sake only, he<\/em> might read fairly the most faulty Corinthian and understand him and do him justice, recognising in him a real work of the quickening Spirit<\/em>. But others need to read these letters, and will not always do it with favourable eyes.<\/p>\n

4. Moses came down from Sinai bearing two God-inscribed slabs of granite<\/em>, as the tokens that he had been with God, Who made him His Mediator for Israel; he bore them in his hands. [As Pauls rivals so bore their imposing credentials, perhaps from James.] Look in my heart<\/em>, Corinthians. See yourselves written there, deeply graven in my affection. I have you in my heart (Php. 1:7<\/span>), in my heart, to die and live with you (2Co. 7:3<\/span>). My love writes you there, on fleshen tables. Your witness, indeed, is not for me only, or chiefly. The tables of Sinai accredited Moses; but they were also Jehovahs testimonies to His own holy nature and will, and the standard of the holiness required of His people. Your quickened<\/em> lifequickened<\/em> by no mere letter<\/em> of my message, but by the Spirit<\/em> who infused Himself into itnot only accredits me, but is a witness for Christ, of His mind and good pleasure towards His people. It is an exposition, it ought to be a standard of measurement, of the blessed purpose and contents of the new Covenant<\/em>. What is this purpose? To give life; to give the Spirit Who gives that life. The embodiment for the new Order is no mere formal, external Code of rules for conduct, but a Life, with a new Life principle in it. [A which is the outgrowth of a , as Gal. 5:25<\/span>.] The letter<\/em> of the code will have its office and its necessary place in such a life, at least in that lifes earlier, weaker, formative stages. But the glory<\/em> of the new life, and of the new Order to which it belongs, will be realised, partly in the very independence of such helps because of the better, higher, all-comprehending Law of the life within,the life of the Spirit Who quickens.<\/p>\n

II. The very Law itself was now unveiled<\/strong>.Paul and his readers were living in one of the transition times of the worlds history. Ceaseless change, death and birth, the New springing out of the Old,such are the invariable characteristics of the life story of Man and his World. But these were times of specially rapid and significant change. [There are times and seasons (Act. 1:7<\/span>), periods<\/em> of time, and points<\/em> of time; the stretches of duration wherein the great clock is quietly, surely ticking on, and the marked moments when It strikes. Paul lived in a season; at one of the points when the striking of the clock proclaimed a new time begun.] One of those complete, but not violently, openly, cataclysmatic abolishings of the Old was taking place. [At the cession of Corfu by England to the Greeks, a large and costly and important fortification had first to be demolished. Gun-cotton, then a somewhat new thing in such use, was the agent employed; much curiosity to know what its action would be Fired by electricity. A dull, deep rumbling heard, but no great, earth-heaving convulsion seen or felt; no masonry flying into the air. But after a few moments it was seen that the immense fortification had quietly disappeared. The destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, the historic cessation of the sacrifices and the Jewish polity, were more really an end visible and catastrophic; but these had not yet taken place. Paul knew that on Calvary and at Pentecost the spark had been fired. He saw the old System disappearing; his Jewish-Christian brethren would not see, and so could not. Their eyes were blinded<\/em>. Such critical periods always have men with clearer vision than their fellows; before the rest they discern the times.] The Old System, with its Shekinah-glory, its Sacrificial routine, its laws of clean and unclean, its separate nation physically sealed by circumcision, was fading away, dissolving before mens eyes, becoming plainly a shadowy thing. There was appearing [projected like a new Image, a new picture, on Times great screen] a New System, in which the one conspicuous thing was a Person, Christ: the end of the Law<\/strong>. The old system was coming to an end, because its various lines of suggestion and teaching had arrived at Christ. The streams of history, prophecy, type, had found their way to the Sea, the end of their journey. The very Decalogue itself had arrived at<\/em> Christ, to stand henceforth by His side, with a John Baptist voice and office, pointing, sending the guilty souls whom it condemned<\/em> and killed<\/em>, to the Lamb of God with a Behold! Moreover, it had reached One in Whose Day the Spirit was to secure for it a new glory, a fulfilment such as it had never received while itself was the distinctive, central fact of the old order.<\/p>\n

2. The old had been a glorious system. The new was to surpass it<\/em>.In no other had God been so clearly revealed to men; as much as Mahometanism is vaunted as an advance upon African fetishism and idolatry, so much was Judaism more gloriously in advance of every other system, past, present, to come, except Christianity. No nation was so great, or had God so near<\/em> to them, as Israel (Deu. 4:7<\/span>), until in Christ God created a Church, a new Israel, and came nearer still. Sin and Holiness had hardly any meaning outside the Old Order of the Law; holiness had hardly any existence. Gods character, Gods will, Gods redeeming purpose, His remedy for the ruin which even the heathen saw, but did not understand,the light in Israel, at its most dim, had on all these points been a glory<\/em> for the old Covenant, with which there was nothing in the world to compare. It is not Christian<\/em> thought, to depreciate the Old Testament. It had been a moon and stars ruling and illuminating the deep night of earth. Now the Sun was arisen, and moon and stars were to lose their lustre in competition with His. [It had been a glorious illuminant for earths night; now one still better had come. The gas-jet shows as a dull silhouette, when seen projected upon the white, electric-lighted globe.] The revelation of God, of Sin and its Remedy, of the significance and the true goal of mans Life, given to the world in Christ, has no serious competitor amongst the religions of the world. All this was dramatically<\/em> told upon the top of Hermon. For a few brief moments human eyes saw Law, Prophets, Christ, side by side, speaking together of His decease. Men saw and heard the transfer of testimony and office from the lesser to the Greater. The Shekinah-cloud enveloped all three in its glory; it belonged to them all. When it was past, Moses was gone, and Elijah. The day of the Law and the Prophets was past. Jesus only<\/strong> with themselves. Something of this had been dramatically told at Sinai. Moses had veiled his resplendent face; the glory had waned and waned away beneath the veil; if men might have been permitted to see, they would have seen an ending of the glory caught on the Mount of the Law; though even then it would not have been given to them to see the End of that which was revealed. His day was not yet. And the Old, though God-given and made glorious<\/em>, became a bondage, became an idol. Men gazed upon it, and saw nothing in it but itself. Men studied it; they had to defend it, to die for it; they began to pique themselves upon being its faithful guardians. They hugged the dying or dead thing the closer to their hearts, when the life was departing or gone. Their affection became mechanically rigid in its grasp. Their eye grew accustomed to the moonlight night; they resented and refused the day. Their devotion became a slavery; it fettered thought; it blinded the eye; it wove a veil for the very heart. [All partial truth may<\/em>. (To be remembered that Gods partial truth is absolutely true so far as it goes. Unlike our partial truth, nothing in it needs unlearning before the new, complementary truth can be added. Our partial truth is often false because only relative, and is out of proportion, needing much adjustment before it can be made to fit into a new discovery.) The eye must not lose its power to receive new light, must not fill its vision with the familiar and precious thing so fully that it can see no new object.] How had Paul and his Christian readers escaped? With unveiled face<\/em> they beheld with equanimity the glory fading fast from an unveiled Law; nay, with a new sense of liberty<\/em> and a larger life. Why? The Spirit had led them into the presence of the Lord<\/em> Christ. [Shall He one day so lead Israel in, into the Holy Place where the Lord dwells? (2Co. 3:16<\/span>).] They have come forth again, transformed into the same image, each of them a Moses with resplendent face; [albeit many of them know not how resplendent. See Separate Homily on Unconscious Goodness.] Their heart has a strange new sense of freedom. The old is still interesting, precious, glorious, not lightly to be cast away; but they have grown into something larger. [The man remembers vividly the day when the youth found himself to have grown past running after his boyish hoop; the woman the day when, with a little shock, she found herself grown too big to play with her splendid doll.] Liberty has come with the manhood of the days of the Spirit.<\/p>\n

3. They see the ending of the Old, because they see that it has reached its End and has lost itself in its Fulfilments<\/em>.Now they see and understand the Law, indeed the entire Old Testament, and see it full of Christ. Familiar experience to every Christian reader of Old Testament. In it he (say) reads some passage, and passes on into the New Testament. Returning to the Old Testament, with his mind and his vision filled with the Christ he has seen there, he comes across his passage again, and finds himself saying, Why, this might be written of Christ. It is truer of Christ than of the man to whom it originally belongs. Truer of Christ than of any man besides. Or, it is an incident of the narrative; he rubs his eyes and looks wonderingly, Is this Davids history, or Jonahs, that I am reading,or Christs? Or, it is a priest, a prophet, a man, a child; familiar enough; yet, again and again, when, with eyes and heart full of the Christ into Whose presence he has<\/em> turned<\/em>, he reads the Old Testament, he finds the familiar features somehow transfigured. The same, yet somehow different. As if the Old Testament face had become tenanted, possessed, by another personality; as if Another looked out of the eyes of the Old Testament man. And this happens so often, and with such consistency of system and harmony, that a principle establishes itself, The Old Testament is full of Christ<\/em>. A tentative, working hypothesis at first, each added fact that falls in with it strengthens the probability of its truth, till it rises to a practical certainty. In the end, the man whose unveiled heart has been in and gazed upon the glory of Christ in the New Covenant revelationa glory which does not wane and die away as we are gazing on itfinds the presence of Christ, so constantly and so clearly, in the unveiled Law; sees so often the glory of the Old fade away, and almost the very Old itself, until only Christ, the Lord<\/em> in His glory, is left visible; that he wonders how any heart can miss Him in the Old Testament, in its reading and its search. [The man who has the key is almost ashamed of proposing the riddle to another man, it seems so obvious. The hidden face once discovered in the puzzle pictures which amuse childhood, it is then impossible not to see it.] Sometimes language so obviously adapted to contain a larger meaning than was contemplated by the first who used or wrote it,a vessel so obviously adapted for something larger and fuller than its Old Testament contents; sometimes a staringly like anticipation of Christs person, or work, or Sacrifice, unexpectedly flashing out upon the New Testament reader of the Old Testament; sometimes a real, but fitful, flash of resemblance [like those seen in a family likeness], seen, and then disappearing when looked for with closer purpose to discover it; sometimes highways, sometimes byways, of history or suggestion, leading with surprising and unlooked-for directness to Christ;these things so continually occur and recur, that one cannot turn in unto<\/em> even the Old Testament without at every turn meeting Him Who is its End, and therefore its Ending. All this pre-eminently true of The Law in its narrower sense. Its ritual system, the very details of its Sanctuary, so persistently, so consistently, lend themselves to suggest Christ and the Gospel; and often with such minuteness of complete suggestion; that, as the instances accumulate, it becomes, even mathematically calculated, almost as 2Co. 8:1<\/span>, that they should merely be coincidences; that the correspondences should be accident, and not Divine design. But to see the Christ there, in the midst of the passing away of the glory of the unveiled Law needs the unveiled heart, which as yet Israel does not possess. Such a heart is a gift, part of the life given by the quickening Holy Spirit, Who is the<\/em> characteristic of the New Covenant.<\/p>\n

[III. and IV. belong to chap. 4.]<\/p>\n

HOMILETIC ANALYSIS.<\/em>2Co. 3:4-6<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

Responsibility and Sufficiency<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I. The responsibility of ministering the New Testament.<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. The Responsibility of ministering the Old was great<\/em>. It was a sacred deposit from God; with real, if incomplete, truth in it. It had a glory of origin, of history, of office, and above all it was the root from which sprung Christ and the Gospel (Rom. 9:4-5<\/span>). Judaism was the providential nidus<\/em> of Christianity. When the Virgin Israel had brought forth a Son, born under the Law, then she had done her greatest work. The Old Covenant had not existed in vain when it yielded up its life in giving historic birth to the New. The librarians of the world had had a weighty charge upon them in that age after age they ministered<\/em> the written Truth and Law of God. Mosaism had been an episodic fact; for a special purpose it had been grafted on to the main stem of Gods redeeming purpose and work (Gal. 3:19<\/span>). It had run its course by the side of that main purpose; an after-thought, a by-thought, providing for a special emergency which had arisen, so far as we may speak thus of any work and thought of God. Yet intrinsically it had been a great, a glorious system, and the responsibility of its ministers<\/em>, from Moses onward, had been great. And because of the deeper issue which lay in the Lawits condemning effectdoes every Christian preacher feel a new responsibility of being in any degree a minister of the killing letter<\/em>. That it issued in death was a disparagement to the Law, only as this stood compared with the Gospel. Intrinsically it was an honour to the Law that it bore such clear, unflinching testimony to Gods holiness of nature and requirement, and also, indirectly, to the honourable possibilities of human nature. (Man was made to live, then, up to that standard! Man can be commanded to live up to that, and the command have the reasonableness of possibility!) It was no real disparagement to the Law that it could only guard and train and correct growth, and not give life. Law per se<\/em> can do no more, under any conditions. It is itself a real forerunner, preparing the way of the Lord Christ, when it condemns and kills. The Gospel preacher of the Spirit needs to build upon the work of the Law. Just in proportion as he knows how, evangelically, to minister the letter<\/em>, is his work thorough. And no part of his work presses more heavily upon the worthy minister than that of so preaching as to bring the sense of sin home to the conscience. Nothing needs more a sanctified judgment; some consciences are abnormally indurated, some morbidly tender; under the Gospel the demand of the Law must not be overpressed, any more than it must be understated. If his words may not only kill self-righteousness, but may even slay hope, who is sufficient<\/em>? Whether to preach Law or Gospel, mans sin or Gods grace, we feel keenly: not sufficient of ourselves<\/em>, etc. Much greater, then,<\/p>\n

2. The responsibility of ministering the New is greater<\/em>.The treasure entrusted to him for distribution is more precious than the former. If the Old order had many goodly pearls, yet the New has the one pearl, of great price. Is it not easier to misrepresent the Gospel of life than the Law of death? Is there not more liability to make the Gospel too easy than to make the Law too stern? If a man needs wisdom and strength above his own, to preach the Law and to bring men to a sense of sin, how much more to awaken their death into life! To know that men are dead; that they must live again in the Spirit, or must abide in death eternally; that upon his skill and fidelity, in some one instance, or upon some one occasion, life<\/em> (or death) may depend,brings him back to Pauls burdened sense of inadequateness for such a task. A responsibility so great becomes to some men a real temptation not to use great plainness of speech<\/em>, to soften their tongue, to conciliate their hearers, to modify their message.<\/p>\n

3. There is a<\/em> sufficiency<\/em>, however, even for this<\/em>. Through Christ<\/em>, To Godward<\/em>.Very graphic. He stands in the presence of God. All the ministers work is done as though He were seen looking on. At every point the worker offers his work to God, with a perpetually renewed devotion of it to His glory and service. He has himself been converted to God<\/em> (Act. 15:19<\/span>), turned about, and set Godward. He does his work, facing Godward<\/em> always. Sets the Lord always before him, and so is not moved even by a sense of personal inadequateness to his task, or by the fear of man, or by the consideration of the fateful issues which hang upon his ministry. He turns all his work toward God; seeks to give it a Godward direction. There is a supply of strength, in this realisation of Him Who is invisible. The man whose life and thought are filled with, and lifted up to the level of, the powers of the world to come, feels little force, whether deterrent or alluring, in the opinion of man, be it favourable or unfavourable. His soul is liberated from the slavery to which regard for mans favour subjects the heart. He speaks out fearlessly, clearly, without diminishing or admixture, with great boldness of speech, the message he has first heard from God. [He who sanctifies Christ as Lord in his heart will not fear mens fear (1Pe. 3:14-15<\/span>).] That man has laid hold of the secret of steadfastness in opinion, of courage in utterance, of stability of character, of unwearying continuance in labour, who has come into, and abides in, the presence of God, and who directs himself and his every act Godward. He sees God; he is blind to man. The Master praises; what are men? And this is through Christ<\/em>. Paul comes in nowhere! All communication between God and man has from the first been mediatorial, through Christ<\/em>. All Gods advances toward man have been made along that path of approach; man has notnever has hadany way to a Father but this. Christ has all along been the great underlying Condition, the great Presupposition, in all intercourse between God and man. Pauls strength, his endowment of adequacy for his responsible task,he expects it, and receives it through this one, only Channel. He is<\/p>\n

Strong in the strength which God supplies<\/p>\n

Through His Eternal Son.<\/p>\n

This alone ever makes a man able<\/em> as a minister of the new covenant<\/em>. This may co-exist with, and be the infused life and efficiency of, great natural fitness,of gift, temperament, education, social position, sacred office; it can make all these its vehicles and organs, and in so doing puts on them their highest honour. But it is independent of these; and whether with or without them is the essential requisite. There is no sufficiency<\/em>, where this is not found. The regard steadfastly directed Godward, the ceaselessly renewed supply of grace through the one Channel, Christ,these alone will enable a man to bear the burden of the ministration, whether of Law or Gospel; certainly of the Gospel, and of an ambassadorship wherein his words force men upon sharp, decisive verdicts and issues; this alone will sustain a man who bears about a Gospel in whose words are certainly inherent a power to kill, or to quicken with the fulness of the life of the Spirit.<\/p>\n

HOMILETIC ANALYSIS.<\/em>2Co. 3:7-11<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

Glorious and More Glorious<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Introduction<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1. The Infinite Father has made a special revelation of Himself to His human offspring.
2. This has mainly<\/em> come through two great general channelsMoses and Christ. <\/p>\n

3. The special revelation of Himself, as it came through Christ, far transcends in glory the form it assumed as it came through Moses.<\/p>\n

I. Glorious as it came through Moses<\/strong>.Evidenced by four things. <\/p>\n

1. The wonderful display of Divinity attending the expression of it on Mount Sinai.
2. The magnificence of its religious scenes and celebrations.
3. The stupendous miracles that stand in connection with it.
4. The splendid intellects which were employed in connection with it.<\/p>\n

II. More glorious as it appears in connection with Christ<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The Christian form of revelation is more adapted to give life<\/em> than is the Mosaic. Millions, I will hope, were quickened by the Mosaic. But men frequently died spiritually<\/em> under it. Cf. the effect of an address from an ancient prophet, with the words of Christ, spoken through Peter on the Day of Pentecost. <\/p>\n

2. The Christian form of revelation is more emphatically spirit<\/em> than the Mosaic. In the Mosaic there was spirit; the elements of eternal truth, ethical and religious, were there, but nearly overlaid with ceremonial. In Christianity only Baptism and the Supper; and it throbs through every sentence with the eternal spirit of truth. [This is all very inadequate and inexact exegesis. It should be Spirit.] <\/p>\n

3. Is more restorative<\/em>. <\/p>\n

4. Is more lasting<\/em>. Moses is no longer our Master. Christianity is the permanent system; the final revelation of God to our world. There is nothing to succeed it.<\/p>\n

Application<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1. Do not go to Moses to expound Christ.
2. Nor to support opinions (e.g<\/em>. war, slavery, etc.) which cannot be supported from Christs Gospel. <\/p>\n

3. The immense responsibility of men who have the Gospel.
4. The glorious position of a true Gospel minister.In abstract, from<\/em> Homilist<\/em>, New Series<\/em>, ii. 421.<\/p>\n

SEPARATE HOMILIES<\/em><\/p>\n

2Co. 3:6<\/span>. The Deadly Letter; the Life-giving Spirit<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I. What this does mean<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

II. What it does not mean<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

I. <\/p>\n

1. Like many another phrase in this chapter, this particular saying is a summary of an extended paragraph found elsewhere in the pages of St. Paul. Romans 7<\/span> is concentrated into it. Not that this is a germ afterwards deliberately expanded into a paragraph. The truth which underlies germ and expansion, is habitual, fundamental, to all Pauls thinking about Christian experience. Here it crops up at the surface in a phrase; there it lies, of set purpose all laid bare and exposed to examination. <\/p>\n

2. Pauls own experience is concentrated into it. Acts 9<\/span>, with its companion, complementary, accounts in 22 and 26, give the externals of Pauls conversion. In Php. 3:4-11<\/span> (particularly 2Co. 3:7<\/span>) he analyses the inner process, and in 2Co. 3:7<\/span> precisely fixes the critical point around which his new relation to God and the outflowing new life turn. In Rom. 7:7<\/span> to Rom. 8:4<\/span>, whilst no doubt sketching a universal programme of the moral revolution culminating in Regeneration, and stating a universal formula of the conversion process, he is nevertheless drawing upon his memories of the heart-searchings of the three days darkness in Damascus, and of the earlier days when he felt the prick of the Masters goad and kicked against it. Every mans conversion is universal. <\/p>\n

3. He had profited in the Jews religion above many his equals (Gal. 1:14<\/span>). He had lived a Pharisee, and that, we may believe, of the best type. Christs charges of hypocrisy by no means lay against all Pharisees. These were not all whited sepulchres. Yet blameless as he was in all the righteousness of the Law,and, let it be noted, it is with a Christian<\/em> conscience reviewing these days, that he thus pronounces upon his Jewish life,the Talmud and the New Testament, with fullest agreement in their evidence enable us to appreciate how almost entirely external was the righteousness he thus recalls; how very largely it amounted to a minutely faithful fulfilment of Rabbinical refinements upon the original legislation of Moses, which were childishly frivolous, when they were not an actual offence to the Divinity of that sacred code. <\/p>\n

4. There arrived a day when the commandment came, particularly the Tenth of the Words of the Decalogue, which in effect sums up all the prohibitive enactments of the Divine Law; laying its forbiding hand upon every coveting of the natural heart for that which is against the mind and will of God, and the beneficent moral order of His world. For the first time, any adequate knowledge of sin awoke within the heart of Paul; it came by the law. He had hardly known that such a thing as sin was in him; he had done it so naturally that it excited no notice. Now the Law had been the revealer of sin. In the light of this new discovery the robe of his own righteousness showed seamy, shabby, utterly unfit for a garment in which a man might present himself before God. He discovered that whilst he had been busy in fulfilling a round of minuti<\/em> of ordinances, even to learn which was an exercise and a study to fill a long and laborious lifetime, he had missed altogether the reality of obedience; that sin and righteousness lay quite apart from any mere mechanical fulfilment of such a code, or of any code, as such; that the very motives of the fulfilment, and the complacent satisfaction into which it was reviewed, were self<\/em>-centered,gains to me<\/em>;pride! Saul the Pharisee fell slain at the feet, and by the stroke, of the Law, as it stood before him for the first time spiritual, holy, just, and good. All self-complacency was gone from, and was from that moment impossible to, the man who now learned, I am carnal, sold under sin. <\/p>\n

5. And a further stage was reached immediately. To attempt to set things right was the death of hope; the discovery of the wrong had been the death of peace. The man discovered himself helpless and a slave. Sin held him under its power. Resolve as he might, hate himself for his moral impotence as he might, bewail the moral division within him as he might, struggle as he might, he seemed to have no power but to sin. The discrepancy between the holy Law of God and his own unholy life and heart grew more and more glaring as the light came more clear and full. A new sinfulness was added to sinful acts, in that they were now done in the full light of a known command. And the deepest depth of self-slaying discovery was touched when he found the very commandment, whether precept or prohibition, arousing an innate opposition to its holy requirement; adding a new attractiveness to the forbidden<\/em> fruit; and with a consuming intensity inflaming desire for it. And such sinfulness stood out clearly as death, in the new light of the unveiled Law. What had he ever done but sin! What could he hope to do but sin! What could he promise or purpose or perform,he whose very heart found a new desireableness given to prohibited action! [No bread so pleasant as that eaten in secret. (But you often want to change your baker! said Jackson Wray.) No liquor so good as that which was smuggled. No garden so fair as that which is over the fence!] <\/p>\n

6. This a universal experience. Even moralists, who are only half serious, like Gay in his fable of the young cock, or whose society verse lapses into occasional earnestness like his who cried, Meliora video proboque, deteriora sequor<\/em>. But all noble souls feel it. I certainly have two souls, for if there were only one, it surely could not be at the same time good and bad, nor could it at the same time love good and base actions, and also at the very same time wish the very same thing, and not desire to put the wish into action; but evidently there are two souls, and if the good soul gets the upper hand, then good will be done, and if the evil than shameful actions will be perpetrated (Xenophon, Cyropedia<\/em>, vi.). Action is always lower than knowledge, in the noblest heathen. I should have lived better than I have done, if I had always followed the monitions of the gods (Marcus Aurelius, Conf<\/em>.). The wages<\/em> of sin is death. And not that only, but, To be carnally minded<\/em> is death. <\/p>\n

7. Why could there not have been a commandment given bringing life? (a<\/em>) Partly from the very nature and office of Law. It is directory, educational, not enabling. It is the model which trains the artistic sense; but the artistic sense and faculty cannot be given<\/em> by the most perfect model. It is the standard which enables the student to measure his progress and to set before him the goal at which he is to aim. But the real conforming power, the real source of effort and endeavour, are within himself. Truth, beautyat all events, moral truth, moral beautyare external to the man, external to all<\/em> men; and are altogether independent of personal, or racial, or interested estimate and approbation. They are of no school, of no age, of no one heart or intellect; they are universal, and of God. The Law is the fingerpost which points out, the wall of definition and of defence on either side of, the one Way of Life, as the Creator understands Life and designed Life for man. But the will and power to walk in the Way are within the man himself. The Law declares with authority what is Obedience, but only in a secondary sense does it offer any help to Obedience; just in that it makes the path definite, and would at once indicate divergence. The actual, concrete, Jewish Law said little about forgiveness, and offered no direct help to holiness. (b<\/em>) But the more effectual reason why not, is found in the morally perverted heart and will of man. What was in design educational, for that reason became in fact condemnatory. The directorial rule<\/em> reveals and convicts the discrepancies of the actually irregular line of life. The rebellion of the heart against restraint makes the Law irksome instead of helpful. The hedge which marks out the path for the willing traveller must pierce with its sharp thorns the man who is bent upon breaking through into the wide spacethe libertyon either hand beyond. The silly bird which will take its cage for a prison instead of a home; which will dash itself, perhaps even to its death, against bars which were intended for a protection, but in which it will only see a restriction upon its freedom; must hurt itself. If the letter kills, it is because the evil heart in man will not accept and use it as the guide of wise, safe, happy living, the guide to Life; because the heart resents its attempt to support inexperience and weakness, and to educate the moral sense, and its necessary exposure of moral immaturity, or failure, or revolt. <\/p>\n

8. To be spiritually mindedto mind the things of the Spiritis Life. It is the Spirit that quickeneth. He Who said so, and also that the Flesh profiteth nothing, is Himself the High Priest of a system, a new Law, not of a carnal<\/em> commandment, but of an endless life<\/em> (Heb. 7:16<\/span>). Who shall deliver me from the body of this death? [The cry of the shipwrecked man straining his eyes for the token of a sail, or for the breaking of the day. It is the eager longing of Wellington at Waterloo for the promised Prussian help.] The answer comes, Through<\/em> Jesus Christ our Lord! which is expounded further on (2Co. 8:2<\/span>). The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. In Christ Jesus; the secret of Life and of the unity between Law and Life is there. (More of this under 2Co. 3:17<\/span>.) A new motive springs up in the heart where the love of God is shed abroad by the Spirit which He hath given (Rom. 5:5<\/span>). We love Him becauseas on that Spirits authority we are made to knowHe first loved us. And there is a new hope; for the same Spirit who brings peace, brings also power. The will is enabled with a new force. Sin no longer has dominion; the man is no longer sold under sin. A new direction to thought; a new attraction for the affections; a new bias and bent to the will. All the life, all the natural life, obeys a new directing principle, and becomes interfused with that yet truer life which is Life indeed. Peace, hope, liberty, victory,all by the indwelling of the quickening Spirit. Deep problems of mental science underlie the method by which the fact of the adopting love of God towards the penitent, pardoned sinner is communicated to the heart; or by which the will is reinforced as with a power coming distinctly ab extra<\/em>. But the fact is abundantly verified. Experience in every Church and age, and in thousands of cases of every variety of type and temperament, lights up the Scripture declaration. The Scripture declarations guard, in their turn, from the vagaries of unregulated, extravagant, or merely viciously personal, experience. And that a new idea should be a new motive, transforming a man, transfiguring his life, begetting a new life, is but a particular instance of a widely obtaining law. The new idea, the new power, are the gift and work of the Spirit Who is in the man who is in Christ. The Spirit giveth life<\/em>.<\/p>\n

II. <\/p>\n

1. Kingsley wrote to one of his curatesa very new curatewhat has an applicability far beyond its original occasion: Let not Swedenborg, or any other man, argue you out of the scientific canon that to understand the spirit of Scripture or any other words, you must first understand the letter. If the spirit is to be found anywhere, it is to be found by putting yourself in the place of the listeners, and seeing what the words would have meant to them. Then take that meaning as an instance (possibly a lower one) of a universal spiritual law, true for all men, and may God give you wisdom for the process of induction by which the law is to be discovered (Life<\/em>, ii. 95). Allegorising has run mad, and has in some quarters given a bad name to everything but the barest, most meagre, historical, naturalistic reading of what are indeed ancient books, but are very much besides. The Philonian method dealt with the Old Testament, the Origenic dealt with New and Old, in a fashion which made the stories of the Book very little more than so much convenient framework, and the persons so many happily serviceable starting-points, for fine theorising or fanciful moralising, whose value in no way depended upon the historicity or otherwise of the story or the saying which gave form and colour to the teaching. Sound allegorising is nothing but the sober, Spirit-guided development of the general principles which are carried by particular instances. The Scripture teaches by the concretethe story, the biographyrather than by the abstract. [E.g<\/em>. we need, and might have had, a chapter in A Treatise of Christian Ethics<\/em> headed, The Relation between Ignorance and Responsibility, and between Conscientiousness and Guilt. Instead, we have the conscientious chief of sinners, Saul of Tarsus, and the prayer of the Redeemer on His cross for those who knew not what they did.] There are widening circles of application, all starting from the one central fact or truth, with a widening radius. The mischievous, untrue allegorising forsakes the centre, or disdains and denies it. The letter is the merely accidental, and more or less convenient, literary vehicle; the spirit, so called, the truth to be taught, is the alone really valuable and important. The erroneous thing is, so to say, a literary Gnosticism which refines away, or denies, the historic Word, hoping to retain the Idea; as the theologic Gnosticism refined away, or denied, the real humanity of the Divine Christ, and tried to retain a Divinity whose manifestation to man was but a phantom. Yet, as the Divinity of the Incarnate One must not be denied, and the humanity overprized; so the Letter is not all.<\/p>\n

2. Loyalty to the written Word<\/em>.There is a spirit which has become incarnate in the letter. Whatever be the philosophic decision of the question whether or not words are, to the man himself, indispensable to thought; as a fact Gods thoughts have come to us in words. They have come to us in a Book. The experiment of the race all goes to show that outside this Book there is no certain, no clear knowledge, of the mind and will of God. Nature speaks with a stammer, and is intelligible, to any practical effect, only to those who have heard from the Book what it is she has to say. As indistinct, as variable, as scanty, of as little practical service, are the utterances of the natural conscience. Its truths, innate ideas, need interpreting and checking by the external Word. The witness of no two consciences agrees long together. God, duty, right, the hereafter of man,if on these topics men forsake the written Word, there is no verifiable truth, none authoritative except to the man who propounds itif even to him. It is not slavery to the letter, to refuse to go beyond the distinct teaching of the Bible, either by direct statement or by fair and necessary inference. That Book certainly gives but a narrow standing ground of dry land amidst a far-stretching, surrounding ocean of mystery. It is but a question of a step or two more beyond his fellows, when, forsaking this, the tallest man amongst them wades out into the depths, and finds himself out of his depth, and progress impossible. Or, to change the figure, there is no sure, safe walking out into these depths, except so far as the inquirer keeps hold of the rope which is fast to the Bible. Practically all the facts upon which religion can base itself, have for all the Christian centuries been long complete; all lie within the area of the completed letter. No new facts can be looked for; all that can be done is to examine these with ever fresh scrutiny, to see whether there may be in them anything which has hitherto escaped discovery. No such supplement, no such corrective appendix, is from time to time issued, whether in the larger knowledge of the universe, or in the intuitions of mans heart, as may yield us something, or all, of the original Work. Christianity can never dispense with its foundation documents. The Christian speculator, during his excursions into the regions of the mysterious or the unknown, must never lose touch with his base, as the soldiers say. To be loyal to the Word is not to kill, but to assist, to nourish, to protect, knowledge. Not, What do I think? what do my intuitions, my moral sense, teach me. Not, What do I feel<\/em> must be true? But, What does Godnot merely a Booksay?<\/p>\n

3. The historical Christ and<\/em> the Christian idea<\/em>.Schelling (quoted in Luthardt, Saving Truths<\/em>, p. 252), on the analogous hope to preserve the ideas of Christianity, whether or not the historical Christ be believed in and retained, says: How frequently has not the historical character of Christianity been declared to be heathenish (not its external, but its higher facts, e.g<\/em>., the pre-existence, the pre-mundane being of Christ, His position as Son of God), and on that account, as that which is no longer compatible with modern thought? The very essence of Christianity is, however, its historical character<\/em>, not the ordinary part of its history, as, e.g<\/em>., that its Founder was born under Augustus, died under Tiberius, but that higher history on which it properly rests, and which is its peculiar matter. I call it a higher history, for the true subject-matter of Christianity is a history in which divinity is implicateda Divine history. That would be but a poor explanation, and entirely destructive of the peculiarity of Christianity, which should distinguish between the doctrinal<\/em> and the historical, and consider the former the essential and special matter, and the latter as mere form and clothing. The history is not merely incidental to the doctrine, it is the doctrine itself. The doctrinal matter, which might perhaps remain after the excision of the historical, as, e.g<\/em>., the general doctrine of a personal God, such as even rational theology sometimes admits, or the morality of Christianity would be nothing peculiar, nothing distinctive; the history is the distinctive feature of Christianity. It is altogether incongruous to speak only of the teaching of Christ. The chief matter of Christianity is Christ Himself; not what He says, but what He is, what He did. Christianity is not directly a body of doctrine<\/em>, it is a thing, an object; doctrine is but the expression of the thing<\/em>. [Schelling in some degree thus meets by anticipation the position of Ritschl. Luthardt goes on to speak of a so-called liberal theology, which really sees nothing more in Christianity than a certain general religious feeling, or the mere force of civilisation.]<\/p>\n

4. Dogma and religion<\/em>.There is an embodiment of truth in formal statements of doctrinal confessions and creeds which is sometimes regarded as not helpful to, but as the death of, religious life, and indeed of the interests of truth itself. And in this connection the text is often quoted. [The use of this verse sometimes made, with that application, is a flagrant instance of the employment of the mere words of Scripture, apart from the context and connection, and without regard to the rule which requires some real analogy between the primary meaning of the passage and the matter to which it is sought to apply it. It was not because<\/em> the Law of Moses was written<\/em>, and so was fixed in unchanging record upon the tables of Sinai, that it wrought death; the Spirit which works life uses as His instrument a written Word.] It is, in reply, pointed out that what is known of any truth, can be stated inexact form, and demands to be so stated, and that the mind inevitably seeks to systematise its knowledgeto unify it. It is pointed out that if truth be objective, if, e.g<\/em>., it be a real disclosure of a fact of Gods government of mankind in Christ, then once made, once ascertained to man, it abides true, and that putting it into formal shape and statement, or embodying it in a creed, is no more than Science does with its accumulating corpus<\/em> of ascertained truth. It endeavours unceasingly to put into exact expression, and to co-ordinate into systematic relationship and statement, the results at which, from its own data<\/em>, and by its own proper methods, it from time to time definitely arrives. It is urged that if Theology too be a science, if it deals with a section of the whole universe of facts which is capable of exact study, with its own appropriate methods, then results once arrived at abide valid, and not less so that formal, or confessional, expression has been given to them. If Justification by faith be really the method of a sinners acceptance with God, then it is of no age or Church; and if that formulation of Gods method be Scriptural, it is not to be challenged or set aside as a passing, or only relatively true, form of statement. If between the death of Christ and the pardon of sin there once be revealed or ascertained a relation which is independent of any act or feeling or change in the sinner himself, then true once this is true always. In this instance well appears what gives occasion to, and such justification as there may be found for, the revolt against the letter. In endeavouring to state this relation between the death of Christ and sin, it has been forgotten that all the phraseology, even though borrowed from Scripture, is analogical, drawing from the relations between man and man, a mutually corrective, mutually expository, and complementary series of illustrations for the relation between the sinner and God. It has been forgotten how imperfectly the whole scheme of the Atonement is revealed or comprehensible. There has been an unwise insistence on some particular mode of statement; there has above all been a zeal for ones own particular phraseology and confessional form which has made the form everything, or at least has made it overshadow altogether the truth which this was designed to express or guard. But to remember this is far removed from any demand that all creeds, and the very statements of Scripture themselves, should be thrown afresh into the melting-pot, and be continually in a state of flux, nothing ever cast into permanent mould; and this only lest instead of the living, growing thing, there should come out the dead cult, to be the object of a truth-dishonouring, God-dishonouring idolatry of the letter. The letter is the body of the spirit. Can the spirit exist without a body? Without its own body? Is the identity of the body part of the unchanging identity of the truth? [As in the case of the ceaseless change of the component particles of the human body, whose ceaseless flux does not affect the identity, so in this case the essential form remains; the changing body does clothe the same truth; and receives its shape from the same informing<\/em> truth. A spirit freed from, and independent of, the letteris it parallel to the grotesque idea of Carroll in Alice in Wonderland<\/em>, who imagines a grin<\/em> which remains when the cat<\/em> has faded away?]<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:6<\/span>. Letter and spirit<\/em>.Able ministers<\/em> misleading, to our ears. Connect closely with sufficient, sufficiency. Killeth cannot have so inadequate a reference as to the frequency of the death penalty under the Law.<\/p>\n

I. Divine commands alone cannot produce obedience<\/strong>.Owing to an imperfection not in the Law, but in human nature, which does not yield to the obligation: Conscience<\/em> is on the side of the Law, but is overborne by the baser nature<\/em>. The habitual failure of conscience produces habitual disquiet and misery, a constant sense of discord, a consciousness of powerlessness against evil;Death<\/strong>. The Law<\/em> even became the occasion of sin. Prohibition pro vokes the natural heart<\/em> and irritates it to impatience of restraint. The restive horse rears against the bridle; at last throws off its rider. Then follows the licence of self-will,Death<\/strong>. Christianity has a quickening power<\/em>. The Law was inaugurated by the code of the Ten Words; Christianity by the code of a Perfect Human Life exhibited in Christ [written out on the fleshen tables of His heart and blameless life]. Christ not only obeyed the Law with an absolutely perfect obedience, but showed its new and sublimer meaning. Thus the code of human duty is presented in a form most intimate and intelligible and affecting. Christianity quickens by a secret influence on the heart<\/em>. The higher nature receives an increase of power. Conscience is afresh enthroned, and governs; the Law is obeyed not so much because it is obligatory, but because it is loved. As natural weakness requires aid it turns ever anew to the Divine Source of strength, till the lower nature becomes subjugated, and the higher triumphant.<\/p>\n

II. The intellectual deficiency and mischievousness of mere writing as a means of instruction<\/strong>.Correspondence is at best a poor comfort in separation; is often obscure, and open to misinterpretation; the writer cannot be appealed to. An ancient writing, a holy writing, and that in translation, leaves many openings for misunderstanding and consequent mistake. Technical theological terms sometimes hinder spiritual life and growth, or kill them. <\/p>\n

1. They were perhaps originally only imperfectly correspondent to the truth, and may come to be regarded with a reverence which belongs only to the words of Scripture, a reverence often innocent of their real sense. Hearers do not recognise old truth in new phraseology, and crucify the preacher.
2. Knowledge of, and sympathy with, the writer is indispensable to the understanding of his writings. So the knowledge of the Divine Author and the inspiration of His Spirit, are necessary to the interpretation of the Bible. The Christian man, and he only, is in a position to understand, and live by, the Scriptures. In constant contact with the Spirit, he is a constant recipient of moral and intellectual life.
3. Paul is not only the trustee of a Book, but the dispenser of the Spirit. What a noble view of the Christian ministry!From<\/em> Homilist<\/em>, Third Series<\/em>, ii. 101 sqq<\/em>.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:6<\/span>. Ministers of the New Covenant<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I. Not of Naturalism<\/strong>.Christianity is the grand subject of all true modern ministries, the one primary text<\/em> of religious discourses the world over, the ages through. Had man retained primitive innocence, Nature would have been that grand text; budding earth, sparkling skies, murmuring brook, booming billow, beasts of the forest, fowls of heaven. Men would have seen in Nature what they cannot see now, true ideas of God; they would have found there food for souls. All the parts of material nature would have been regarded as embodiments of Divine thought and symbols of eternal truth. But, as it is, they cannot reach the spiritual significance of nature; if they could, it would not meet their spiritual exigencies or improve their spiritual condition. [How many sermons have nothing distinctively Christian<\/em>,in the topics they discuss; in their method of discussing even topics derived from Scripture; in their standards of judgment of men and conduct; in their lessons inculcated! Sermons<\/em> to<\/strong> the Natural Man<\/em> is a good and worthy book; but it is by a spiritual man. There are Sermons by<\/strong> the Natural Man to the Natural Man. The natural man does not mind natural preaching. They who preach thus are sure of a clientle<\/em>. Such preachers at least rouse no antagonism in the natural heart. Anybody<\/strong> is sufficient for these<\/strong> things! (Cf. 2Co. 2:16<\/span>).]<\/p>\n

II. Not of Judaism<\/strong>.It flamed, a grand torch for Truth, breaking the moral darkness of successive generations, and lighted great multitudes of souls into the calm heaven of eternity. But it is done away. [No man formally preaches Judaism. But there is a style of experience and a scale of enjoyment in the Divine life which is JewishOld Testamentnot Christian. The man who is righteous only by shaping his course and character according to external commands, who can do nothing, and decide nothing, without a text, a positive plain rule, is a Jew, not a Christian, in the principle of his holiness. He who is hoping to sin and repent and find pardon, only then to sin and repent again, is living in the Jewish order, whilst the Christian covenant has now brought a larger, victorious grace. He who is only a penitent, and has not found or expected a peace which is a matter of consciousness, has not passed the John Baptist stage of the order of the dispensations. Much current, conventional, respectable morality is Jewish, the morality rebuked and superseded in the Sermon on the Mount by, I<\/em> say, unto you<\/em>. The thinker who only sees a Jesus of Nazareth, is a Jew (perhaps only a Pilate), not a Christian. He who calls the Spirit it, not He (John 15, 16<\/span>), who speaks of, and prays for, the Spirit to be poured out, and the like, should at least remember that this is Old Testament thought and language, still employed although Christ, the Introducer of the personal Holy Ghost to the Church, has spoken and done His work. Preachers in their doctrine, their people in their experience, need still to beware of making up their bread, or feeding upon a spiritual staff of life, with the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. It is still on active sale in the worlds religious bread-shops.]Founded upon a paragraph in<\/em> Homilist<\/em>, Third Series<\/em>, ix. 122.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:17<\/span>. The Liberty of the Spirit. Where the Spirit, etc<\/em>.The Spirit<\/em> is the Holy Spirit; the characteristic, crowning privilege of the Christian dispensation. The Lord<\/em> is the Lord Christ. The verse is another of the incidental, compressed embodiments of the habitual thought of Paul. We see it expounded by him in two leading passages.<\/p>\n

I. The Law of Moses is a system of bondage; the Gospel is a system of liberty<\/strong> (Gal. 3:1<\/span> to Gal. 5:6<\/span>).<\/p>\n

1. Peter on the Mount of Transfiguration would have kept Moses and<\/em> Elijah and<\/em> Christ! Law and Prophets and Gospel! Daybreak, Dawn, Day, all together. Moon and stars in all their number and glory, after the Sun was risen. He knew not what he said, indeed. And the Conservative, old-school, Jewish Christians who followed Paul into Galatia, would have tried the same impossible combination also. They were representatives of a large class who, in all times of revolutionary change, are not indeed insensible to the value and truth of the new order, but who are also, from long habit and honest appreciation, reluctant to part with the old, and are slow to take in the fact that the old is hopelessly past as to its form, whilst all that was really valuable in it is taken up by and into the new. The first time we hear of them, their line was definitely stated: Except ye [Gentiles] be circumcised ye cannot be saved (Act. 15:1<\/span>; Act. 15:5<\/span>). After a long conference, Peter turned the vote upon the question by a speech in which he declaredand appealed to the confirmatory knowledge of all his hearersthe old system a yoke which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear. Paul will have none of it for his Galatians. It is a different gospel; a true hetero<\/em>doxy. <\/p>\n

2. The case has its analogies to-day, wherever the externals of religion are so emphasised as to become for their own sake matters whose observance is righteousness, and their neglect sin. There are still consciences greatly distressed if one tittle of a cumbersome round of external ordinances has by any chance been forgotten, or has for any reason gone (blamelessly) unfulfilled. It is, moreover, easier to perform a round of duties, catalogued and prescribed and ticked off in the days list as each is accomplished, than to cultivate the holy life within, to wage the unceasing warfare there and to keep up the incessant guard over ones own spirit. A piece of external asceticism is easier than an act of merely inward self-denial. To keep the Galatian converts at such a round of externalism was to keep them at a low level, and to make their life one of only an elementary type. For Galatians to assume the burden of the Mosaic ritual, was for men to put themselves into the position of children learning their A B C; it was for the heir who has come of age to put himself again under the tutors and governors and school-slave. These things had had their meaning, but the Gospel had evacuated them of meaning; even the sacred sign and seal, circumcision, was now nothing but a mutilation or a piece of surgery. For the man to tie himself to the go-cart which had supported the childs tottering steps into steady walking, is not only folly; the man feels it a bondage.
3. And these Jewish teachers made the bondage a more serious one still. Except ye cannot be saved.<\/strong> That the tedious, burdensome, often frivolously minute, Rabbinical glosses upon the original Law, as well as that Original itself, should be matters on which salvation hinged, was as serious as that it should be supposed (say) that sin can with us be atoned for by any round of external or ascetic actions. Serious, because it seemed to imply that the work of Christ was Dot by itself the sufficient ground of the sinners safety; that He needed a co-ordinate ground of acceptance with God to complement His work. And serious because the impossibility, too often most sadly verified by the most earnest souls, of keeping the Law, made salvation on this basis and condition impossible. Away with it all! Stand fast in your liberty. Be not entangled again (Gal. 5:1<\/span>). The dispensation of the Spirit knows nothing of such parallel requirements in addition to, in competition with, the simple ones of Repentance and Faith, which He will also help you to fulfil. Under the dispensation of the Spirit there must be no entangling of the soul with a system of externalisms or ceremonial, presumed in any sense to have merit attached to their fulfilment. Ye are called unto Liberty! <\/p>\n

4. Under another aspect the Galatian controversy raised a wider, a universal, question. There are always two conceivable waystwo onlyof finding for oneself a standing before a holy God. The one is by doing<\/em>, by our own acts and their merit; the other by believing<\/em>, by resting alone on the act and merit of Another. The Jewish and the Gospel plan respectively. Faith and Works is no stock theological topic of discussion. It is no academic issue which is raised. It is the vitally and perennially interesting one, always raised so soon as a man understands Sin, and himself, as a Sinner. The natural heart always propounds Salvation by Works, even when it has never heard of the term. For the acceptance of a guilty sinnerhis justification before Godthe way is now shorter. The Spirit teaches every man who will learn, that he need not encumber himselfas it is quite useless to dowith any fancied store of things he has doneor has not doneof things he has beenor has not been. As regards the past and its guilt before God, he is now free to find mercy and acceptance forthwith in the merit of Christ.<\/p>\n

II. A larger, more generalised, thoroughly universal treatment of bondage and liberty<\/strong> appears in Rom. 8:14-16<\/span>. The antithesis between servant and son appears in the Galatian passage. But in the Roman letter the local colouring, the temporary shape, of the question is gone. Nothing is left but the sinner, whether Jew or Gentile, passing from the status and experiences of a servant, a bond-servant, of God into that of a son of God. There is a new name for the man, child; a new name for God, Abba. It is the summation in the life-history of the individual of the moral education of the race. Paul and his readers stood historically at the meeting-place of two stages in Gods leading of the world. Until the Day of the Spirit all Gods most holy and devoted people had been His servants. No most favoured one ever ventured, under that earlier order, to apply the name Father to God. The name Father rarely occurs at all, and never as the appellation of God habitually on the lips of an individual. Like as a father, etc., Doubtless Thou art our Father, are rare expressions in the Old Testament, and are far beneath the privileged common use of the name Abba, which is for those who are no longer servants, but sons. David never said, as every Christian does, Father. And the converted man has his Old Testament stage too. Too many earnest people of God stop there, in these days of New Testament grace. They have received the Spirit, indeed. In their heart is many a good thing towards the Lord their God. They serve with a dutiful devotion, that after all is only duty. They ought to serve; they must serve. These many years do I serve<\/em> thee. The son who talks and feels thus, is a servant still. The Spirit is in them a Spirit of bondage. And preeminently such is He to the awakened man, whose unavailing struggle with himself and the sin of his flesh is so graphically portrayed in chap. 7. The first impulse of the man to whom for the first time comes the knowledge of sin to any practical purpose, is to reformto set himself to do right for the future. And his first and speedy discovery is that he cannot. He is not his own master. He must<\/em> serve sin. He once neither knew nor fought against sin. Now he knows and fights and falls. Habits are iron bonds which he cannot<\/em> break. Temptations are assaults to which he is dragged into yielding, as if by a power of evil within him. It is no law of Moses only, or chiefly. It is a law of sin in his members. Sin is known by every awakened man as not only a guilt and a defilement, but as a power, a bondage. The new life of the Spirit, the new life in Christ, brings a new power and a new liberty. The bondage is broken, that henceforth he should not serve sin. The Spirit Who witnesses that he is a child<\/em> of God, and not a servant in his relation to God any longer, Who puts into his lips the newthe childs<\/em>name for God, Father, and makes his heart and love those of a child towards God, releases him and energises him for the childs life and service. The service is not less faithful and devoted than before, now that he is a child of God; but the bondage is gone out of it. In a perfect family life, in perfect filial love, the dutiful bondage and respectful fear of the servants are not found in the children. They have a larger, freer life, one which, sure of itself in the happy instinct of a loving heart, has not even an overshadowing, haunting, fettering fear of displeasing the father. The Spirit of the Lord is a Spirit of adoptionof sonship. Not only are the limbs free from the fetters of habit and from sins power. The heart is free, with the natural, unconscious, perfect liberty of the child in the home. This leads up to<\/p>\n

III. Liberty from Law in the Christian life<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1. James gives us, The perfect Law of Liberty<\/em>. There is an ideal of Christian life in which the soul is filled with the knowledge of Gods will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding [Col. 1:9<\/span>, followed up by the happy consequences in life and practice enumerated in 2Co. 3:10<\/span>]; in which an unction from the Holy One so teaches all things that the man of God needeth not that any man should teach him; in which the very instincts of the heart renewed in knowledge<\/em>, after the image of God would be a sufficient directory for all Christian living, passing continually the enactments of a perfect legislation within the parliament house of the inner man; when the heart knows and loves, always, and to the last degree of detail, what God wills; when the law of God without, and the heart and will within, coincide in their promptings; when the law and the love lie perfectly, closely, side by side; when the heart runs in the way of Gods commandments. It is clear that such a life in ideal needs no external direction, and feels no restraint. [The law-abiding citizen goes through life ignorant of very much of the legislation of his country, and finding nothing irksome or ungrateful about obedience to it; so perfectly obeying that obedience or law not are adverted to.] <\/p>\n

2. But that is ideal, though approached more and more nearly as the life of the sonnot the servantis cultivated, and educated and developed. The positive, ab extra<\/em>, legislation still has its value and office, and its necessity. The early days of the new life are days of childhood, with its ignorance and its weakness. The law trains and refines the newly awakened perception of what is sin and what is holiness. It may serve, or be needed, like the stake which supports the sapling, until this rises in established, self-supporting, self-guarding strength. Its witness is a defence against the peril of heedlessness or of declining watchfulness; its warning voice may arrest the very beginnings of divergence from the perfect way. It is needed as an absolute standard, to which the subjective pronouncements may be continually referred for confirmation, for revision, for the illumination of unsuspected error. There is an ever recurrent need that it should be made clear that Obedience and Right are objective, and are obligatory because of the Legislators will. No most intense love, no most utter trust in Christ, can dispense with the need of holiness in heart and life. If the Law of Moses do not now bind, there is a Law of Christ (Gal. 6:2<\/span>) which does. Indeed, in regard to all the abiding principles which in the old Code appear in local, national, temporary dress, the Christian man is under the law to Christ (1Co. 9:21<\/span>). <\/p>\n

3. Against the lawless freedom which is licence and even licentiousness, the Apostles instinctive recoiling, God forbid, is argument good enough. For it, Whose damnation is just, is the unerringly, instinctively, just verdict of the healthy life, rejoicing in the most abundant freedom of the Spirit.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:17<\/span>. The Freedom of the Spirit<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I. General statement of this truth<\/strong>.The glory of the Old Covenant, symbolised by the glowing face of Moses, was of an inferior order to that of the New. As a rule of life<\/em>, without the Atoning Blood to pardon sin and without the grace of the Spirit to make obedience possible, the Law had been but a ministration of condemnation. As a typical system<\/em>, it had been destined to pass away on the appearance of the Antitype which fulfilled it. The Gospel was, in marked contrast, endowed with perpetuity and was a ministration of spiritual righteousness. Symbolically, and really, the early dispensation was protected from a too searching scrutiny, which might have revealed at the very moment of its introduction a Higher Object beyond itself which was yet to come. Those who are converted to Jesus Christ have escaped from the veil which darkened the spiritual intelligence of Israel. The converting Spirit is the source of positive illumination; but before He thus enlightens, He must give freedom from the veil of prejudice which denies to Jewish thought any real insight into the deeper sense of Scripture. The Christian student of the ancient Law seizes that sense, because he possesses the Spirit, and He gives liberty, and faculty, for inquiry. The specific liberty here is not merely liberty from the yoke of the Law; but liberty from the tyranny of obstacles which cloud the spiritual sight of truth; liberty from spiritual rather than from intellectual dulness; from a state of soul which cannot apprehend truth. The Spirit still gives this liberty. This is the enunciation of a master-feature of the Gospel. This liberty is the invariable accompaniment of His true action, the very atmosphere of His presence. Nor is the freedom which He sheds abroad a poor reproduction of the restless, volatile, self-asserting, sceptical temper of Pagan Greek life, adapted to the forms and thoughts of modern civilisation, and awkwardly expressing itself in Christian phraseology. He gives liberty in the broad, deep sense of that word. He gives freedom from error for the reason; freedom from constraint for the affections; freedom-for the will from the tyranny of sinful and human wills. Human nature has imagined such a freedom, but has sighed in vain for the reality. It is, in fact, a creation; the sons of God alone enjoy it. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.<\/p>\n

II. In more of detail<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1. Mental liberty<\/em>.God has from the first consecrated liberty of thought. He has so ordered the framework of human social order that society cannot force the sanctuary of our thought. Without our consent society cannot enter within us (1Co. 2:11<\/span>). So, in the martyrdoms of the first three centuries, the strength of those who to the death bore their witness for not merely moral, but mental liberty, was strength given by the Spirit. Their testimony was His under whose illumination Christians became conscious of a new power, almost a new sense for the supernatural. To-day it is supposed that the Churches and their creeds, their dogmas, are enemies of religious freedom. To value dogma is invidiously contrasted with setting a value on Christian character and life; as though he who cares for the one must by some necessity neglect the other. The Church of the Future will dispense with dogma. In such talk, dogma is assumed, rather than stated in words, to be untrue<\/em>. The leaven of Hegelian philosophy is in the current talking and thinking. There is no recognised rule for reason; in human opinion all is true, and yet nothing is true. All truth is partial, limited; all statements of truth are true and false at once. And the like. Further, the prevalence of experimental methods of inquiry leads many minds tacitly to assume that nothing is real, the truth of which cannot be established and tested by [physical] observation. Yet Dogma is a neutral, innocent word, suggesting lexically or by its history nothing untrustworthy or discreditable. The philosophers who denounce Christian dogma have their own dogmas, in the true sense, [and are sometimes dogmatic enough, in the accidental, evil sense]. Dogma is essential Christian truth thrown by authority<\/em> [N.B. this] into a form which admits of its permanently passing into the understanding and being treasured by the heart of the people. Accordingly it is found abundantly in the New Testament; 1 Corinthians 15<\/span> is largely pure dogma. The Divine Spirit, speaking through the clear utterances of Scripture, and<\/em> [N.B.] the illuminated and consenting thought of Christendom<\/em>, is the real Author of essential dogma. Dogma is a restraint upon thought, only where liberty is mischievous or impossible. He who believes that revealed truths are true should not dislike their being stated dogmatically. To admit the truth of a position of course takes away the liberty to deny it. Every new discovery of ascertained truth takes something from freedom to think otherwise. The freest and most exact science known to the human mind has at its base axioms which cannot be demonstrated, yet cannot be rejected. Euclid begins by demanding a sacrifice of mental liberty. Refuse to submit to, accept, use, these dogmas; a man can go no further, and arrive at nothing. True or false, the dogmas of Christian truth are not discredited by being stated in dogmatic form. Submission to revealed truth [whether at the end of a personal investigation of its claim, or at the bidding of a Church, or in acquiescent following of the custom of a mans circle] does involve some limitation of intellectual licence. The lamps in the streets do trench upon space where the passenger might walk. In English public and private life the supremacy of law curtails, whilst it gives and protects, personal freedom. The free intelligence of the Church bows before the language of the Creeds, because that language guards a truth which the faith of the Church recognises as of heavenly origin. Dogma stimulates thought, provokes it, sustains it at an elevation otherwise impossible. Dogma stimulates in its earlier, but petrifies into uselessness in its later, stage. No Christian who seriously believes that Jesus is God, that His Death is a World-redeeming Sacrifice, that the Eternal Spirit sanctifies the redeemed, that Scripture is the inspired Word of God, that the Sacraments are the appointed channels whereby we partake of the Life of Jesus, can say that in himself these truths have petrified, arrested, stifled thought.<\/p>\n

2. Moral liberty<\/em>.In the kingdom of the Spirit alone is the will free. Naturally we are bound with fetters of habit, passion, prejudice; we hug our chains; even dare to promise men liberty, etc. (2Pe. 2:19<\/span>). There is no such thing as a resurrection from moral slavery, except for the soul which has laid hold on a fixed objective truth. When at the breath of the Divine Spirit upon the soul heaven is opened to the eye of faith, and man looks up from his misery and his weakness to the Everlasting Christ upon His throne; then freedom is possible, for the Son has taken flesh, and died, and risen again, and interceded with the Father, and given us His Spirit and His Sacraments, expressly that we might enjoy it. On the condition of submission? Yes; but in obeying God, a man acquires not only freedom, but royalty, in its highest exercise of empire,command over himself, a thing he best learns by voluntary submission. Bend the knee to that Christ of Bethlehem and Calvary, listen to the New Commandment as the Charter of freedom,rise a king and priest to God and the Father! You have free access to the courts of heaven: you serve One Whose service alone is perfect freedom! Liberty of conscience and will is the greatest blessing of all freedoms. It is freedom from a sense of sin, when all is known to have been pardoned through the atoning blood; freedom from a slavish fear of our Father in Heaven, when conscience is offered to His unerring Eye morning and evening by that penitent love which fixes its eye upon the Crucified; freedom from current prejudice and false human opinion, when the soul gazes by intuitive faith upon the actual truth; freedom from the depressing yoke of feeble health or narrow circumstances, since the soul cannot be crushed which rests consciously upon the Everlasting Arms; freedom from that haunting fear of death, which holds all who really think upon death all their lifetime subject to bondage, unless they are His true friends and clients, Who by the sharpness of His own death has led the way and opened the kingdom of heaven to all believers. It is freedom in time also, and beyond, freedom in eternity. In that blessed world, in the unclouded Presence of the Emancipator, the brand of slavery is inconceivable. In that world there is a perpetual service; yet, since it is the source of love made perfect, it is only and by necessity the service of the free. For where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty<\/strong>.Adapted from Lid-don<\/em>, University Sermons<\/em>, iv. This last paragraph may itself suggest a Homily.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:17<\/span>. Christian Liberty and the Law<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I. The bondage<\/strong>.The condition of believers under the past dispensation is spoken of as a certain species of restraint or bondage,not the bondage, indeed, of slaves [?], and mercenaries, which belonged only to the carnal as opposed to the believing portion of the Church; but the bondage of those who, though free-born children, are still in nonage, and must be kept under the restraint and discipline of an external law. This, however, could in no case be the whole of the agency with which the believer was plied, for then his yoke must have been literally the galling bondage of the slave. He must<\/em> have had more or less the Spirit of life within, begetting and prompting him to do the things which the law outwardly enjoined, making the pulse of life in the heart beat in harmony with the rule of life prescribed in the law; so that, while he still felt as under tutors and governors, it was not as one needing to be held in with bit and bridle, but rather as one disposed readily and cheerfully to keep to the appointed course. So it unquestionably was with the Psalmist; the law was not a mere outward yoke, nor in any proper sense a burden: it was within their heart, they delighted in its precepts, and meditated therein day and night: to listen to its instructions was sweeter to them than honey, and to obey its dictates was better than thousands of gold and silver [Fairbairn, Typology<\/em>, ii. 193, 194. Does this do justice as to Act. 15:10<\/span>? He says admirably as to]<\/p>\n

II. The liberty<\/strong>.When the believer receives Christ as the Lord his righteousness, he is not only justified by grace, but he comes into a state of grace, or gets grace into his heart as a living, reigning, governing principle of life. What, however, is this grace but the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus? And this Spirit is emphatically the Holy Spirit; holiness is the very element of His being, and the essential law of His working; every desire He breathes, every feeling He awakens, every action He disposes and enables us to perform, is according to godliness. And if only we are sufficiently possessed of this Spirit, and yield ourselves to His direction and control, we no longer need the restraint and discipline of the law; we are free from it<\/em>, because we are superior to it. Quickened and led by the Spirit, we of ourselves love and do the things which the law requires. [As in an adult son] the mind<\/em> has become his from which the parental law proceeded, and he has consequently become independent of its outward prescriptions. [Strictly this last is only true in proportion as<\/em> he has become possessed of the mind<\/em>.] And what is it to be under the grace of Gods Spirit but to have the mind of God<\/em>?the mind of Him who gave the law simply as a revelation of what was in His heart respecting the holiness of His people. So that the more they have of the one, the less, obviously, they need of the other; and if only they were complete<\/em> in the grace of the Spirit, they would be wholly independent of the bonds<\/em> and restrictions of the law<\/em>. (Ib<\/em>., p. 190.) The law was not made for a good man who stands in a right relation to the law of his country. So to one who has become a partaker of the Spirit of God the law, considered as an outward discipline placing him under a yoke of manifold commands and prohibitions, has for him ceased to exist. But it has ceased in that respect only by taking possession of him in another (Ib<\/em>., p. 191).<\/p>\n

[Fairbairn adds (ib<\/em>., p. 201):<\/p>\n

III. From the law in its strict and proper sensethe law of the ten commandmentsthe freedom enjoyed by the Christian is not absolute, but relative only, just as the Israelites want of the Spirit was relative only. But in regard to what is called the ceremonial law the freedom is<\/em> absolute; and to keep up the observance of its symbolical institutions and services after the new despensation entered was not only to retain a yoke that might be dispensed with, but also an incongruity to be avoided, and even a danger to be shunned. For, viewed simply as teaching<\/em> ordinances they were superseded by the appointment of other means more suitable as instruments in the hand of the Spirit<\/em> for ministering instruction to men. The change then brought into the Divine administration was characterised throughout by a more immediate and direct handling of the things of God<\/em>. They were now things no longer hid under a veil<\/em>, but openly disclosed to the eye of the mind. Ordinances which were adapted to the state of the Church when neither was the Spirit fully given<\/em>, nor were the things of God [by Him] clearly revealed, could not possibly be adapted to the Church of the New Testament. The<\/em> grand ordinance here must be the free and open manifestation of the truthwritten first in the word of inspiration, and thenceforth continually proclaimed anew by the preaching of the Gospel; and such symbolical institutions as might yet be needed must be founded upon the clear revelations of the wordnot like those of the former dispensation, spreading a veil over the truth, or affording only a dim shadow of better things to come. (Ib<\/em>., p. 201.)]<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:17<\/span>. Liberty from Law under the Dispensation of the Spirit<\/em>.The Christian religion as the Perfect Law of Liberty<\/em> finds its perfection in the bestowment through the Holy Spirit<\/em> of an internal freedom from the restraint of law<\/em> which is quite consistent with subjection to external law as a directory of the life.<\/p>\n

I. There is nothing more characteristic of the Christian economy of ethics than that it sets up an internal rule<\/strong> (Rom. 8:2<\/span>).This interior rule responds to the exterior, and in a certain sense supersedes it. The external law ceases as a law of death; it has vanished with the conscience of sin removed in pardon. And in contrast to the Law which was against and over the soul in its impossibility of fulfilment, the Spirit of life within gives strength for all obedience; and the law to be obeyed is set up within us (Heb. 8:10<\/span>). This is more than the restoration of the almost effaced traces of the law engraven on the heart of universal man. This internal law is supernatural; it is nature still, but nature restored and more than restored; a supernatural nature. This is the interior polity of holy government of which St. James speaks (Jas. 1:25<\/span>); perfect law becomes perfect liberty from external obligation. The nearer obedience is to the uniformity of the ordinances of naturebeing conscious and willing obedience, though in its perfection not conscious of its willingthe nearer it approaches the Creators end. In all the economy of the physical universe His law works from within outwardly, and there is no need of any outward statute to be registered for the guidance of His unintelligent creatures. The Divine Spirit in the heart of the regenerate man seeks to work out in a similar way a perfect obedience to the law of love.<\/p>\n

II. In a loose and general way this may be called the rule of conscience<\/strong> (Act. 24:13<\/span>; but this is pre-Christian). We may speak of the internal law as that of Self-government restored. The rule of Gods Spirit in the spirit of the regenerate, is the administration of conscience or the renewed self, according to the normal idea of the Creator. Men thus trustedunder authority to that Holy Ghost, yet having their own souls under themare in the highest and purest sense a law unto themselves<\/em> (Rom. 2:4<\/span>). Yet this is only as under the law to Christ<\/em> (1Co. 9:21<\/span>), Who is the common Lord of all.<\/p>\n

III. For there is still an external law which is continued by reason of the weakness of the new nature<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1. The external standard still maintains the dignity of law. We are delivered from the law of sin and death<\/em>, not from the law that directs to holiness and life. Written on the fleshly tables of the heart<\/em>, the commandments are deposited also in an ark on tables of stone<\/em> for common appeal amongst probationary mortals. The eternal morals of the old economy have not passed away. They are re-enacted under other forms, and re-written in the pages of the New Testament as [a<\/em>] the Standard of requirement, [b<\/em>] the Condition of the Charter of privileges, and [c<\/em>] a Testimony against those who offend. [A good Homily in germ.] <\/p>\n

2. The outward enactments are still the directory of individual duty. The best Christians need a remembrancer; they obey the law within, but are not always independent of the teaching of the law without. <\/p>\n

3. The external is the safeguard of the internal law: against its only or chief enemy, Antinomianism, which regards the law as abolished in Christ, or treats it as if it were so. Theoretical or theological Antinomianism makes a Christians salvation eternally independent of any other obedience than that of the Gospel offer of grace. There is a teaching which holds that the Substitute of man has not only paid the penalty of human offence, but has fulfilled the law also for the sinner; thus making the salvation of the elect secure. The believer has in this doctrine [call it Vicarious Holiness?] no more to do with a legal rule save as a subordinate teacher of morality. He will never to all eternity stand before any bar to be judged by the law. This is the very truth of the Gospel so far as concerns the demand of the law for eternal and unbroken conformity with its precepts, but there is only a step between precious truth and perilous error here. There is also a prevalent practical Antinomianism (Gal. 5:13<\/span>), sometimes connected with the theoretical renunciation of law. [It is] found in all communities, the disgrace of all creeds and confessions. The written commandments are a safeguard. If Christian people recite their Creed to keep in memory the things they surely believe, not less necessary is it that they should also recite the Commandments to keep in memory what they must do to enter into life.Adapted<\/em>. See also under 1Co. 9:21<\/span>.<\/p>\n

HOMILETIC SUGGESTIONS<\/em><\/p>\n

2Co. 3:2<\/span>. Living epistles<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I. What they contain<\/strong>.The record of ministerial faithfulnessand success.<\/p>\n

II. Where they are written<\/strong>.In the heart, as a testimony of Divine approval, as a certain proof of a Divine call.<\/p>\n

III. By whom they are read<\/strong>.By all meneasily with intelligent conviction.[J. L<\/em>.]<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:4-11<\/span>. The Glory of the Christian Ministry<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I. Its foundation<\/strong>.Trust in God through Christ. Divine sufficiency. Suitable qualifications.<\/p>\n

II. Its function<\/strong>.The ministration not of the letter, but of the Spirit.<\/p>\n

III. Its means<\/strong>.Not external, that dazzle and then vanish away. But the co-operation of the Holy Ghost.<\/p>\n

IV. Its object<\/strong>.Not condemnation and death, but righteousness and life.<\/p>\n

V. Its reward<\/strong>.Even now a more excellent glory. Hereafter a glory everlasting.[J. L<\/em>.]<\/p>\n

Or thus:<\/p>\n

The New Testament Ministry<\/em><\/p>\n

I. Has the vastest resources.
II. Effects the greatest wonders.
III. Secures the most enduring results.[J. L<\/em>.]<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:8<\/span>. The ministration of the Spirit<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I. Deals with the spirit in man.
II. Is effectual only when in the power of the Holy Spirit.
III. Has for its great purpose the communication of the Holy Spirit, the characteristic, distinctive glory, and privilege of the Christian dispensation.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:9<\/span>. The Ministration of<\/em><\/p>\n

I. Condemnation<\/strong>.Reveals and enforces law. Convinces of sin. Brings condemnation.<\/p>\n

II. Righteousness<\/strong>.Satisfies the law. Teaches faith. Brings pardon and holiness.<\/p>\n

III. II. therefore exceeds <\/strong><\/p>\n

I. in glory<\/strong> in that it perfects the work of the latter. Saves the sinner. Secures greater glory to God.[J. L<\/em>.]<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:18<\/span>. Conformity by gazing<\/em>.Foundation and building not identical, yet related. So Judaism and Christianity. Judaism contained not the completeness of Christianity; Christianity halted not at the beginnings of Judaism. <\/p>\n

1. They agree<\/em>, in source<\/em>, God; in purpose<\/em>, to preserve the knowledge of the true God; in matter<\/em>, a revelation of Gods will; Judaism, coarse, rude; Christianity, a life-inspired system. <\/p>\n

2. They differ<\/em>, in their method of revelation, by the Mediator and the Master; in their expositors; in the perpetuity of Christianity. After Adamism, Noachism; after Noachism, Abrahamism; after Abrahamism, Judaism; after Judaism, Christianity; after Christianity,Eternity!<\/em> Judaism limited; Christianity universal. Judaism veiled the light; in Christ the veil is gone. Text shows:<\/p>\n

I. Religion in its sanctity of nature<\/strong>.Its one object is to change man into the imageof whom? Of God? Of Christ? No matter. God inconceivable and unconceived. The study of His works and even of His words alone only introduces man to a Voice in the dark. All we can know, or need to know, is embodied in Christ. Christ removes the two barriersmans incapacity, Gods invisibility. And Christ did not come to teach Dogma or merely create a religious guild, but to conform man to Himself<\/em>. Look at Him in His many-sided, symmetrical, pure spirituality. See Him crystalline-translucent in conscience. See His deliberate, undeflected devotedness. His mind, Divine.<\/p>\n

II. Manner of attaining conformity<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1. Beholding<\/em>. Not merely staring at. There must be the unveiled glass, and the unclosed eye. <\/p>\n

2. Once more, neither is the study of His works and words enough. May read the New Testament once a year; may study critically, with audacious freedom. Men, acute enough, saw His works: their verdict was Beelzebub, Blasphemer, enthusiast, traitor.
3. Must bring Christ to study of Christ. May not repudiate His teaching and yet hope to understand Him.
4. This only by the Spirit of the Lord<\/em>, taking of the things of Christ, etc. Unveiling the mirror; opening the eye.<\/p>\n

III. Progressive conformity<\/strong>.No hurry in Gods working. If a young Christian begin young, the conformity shall fill a life of many years. Even God cannot create growth.Notes of sermon by John Burton, penes H. J. F<\/em>.<\/p>\n

[On the Old Testament passage underlying 2Co. 3:7<\/span> to 2Co. 4:6<\/span>, particularly. Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone<\/em>, the suggestion may be useful:]<\/p>\n

A Picture of True Glory<\/em>. [Unconscious Goodness<\/em>.]<\/p>\n

I. Involves fellowship with the Eternal<\/strong>.Character is formed on the principle of imitation<\/em>. This process perfected needs: a perfect model; the love of a perfect model; the knowledge of a perfect model<\/em>.<\/p>\n

II. Has an external manifestation<\/strong>.Was it not a reflection of the moral glory of his soul, glorified by communion with God? The heart doesnotwithstanding the possibility and the fact of successful hypocrisystamp itself upon the face<\/em>. Stephens face. And upon the language<\/em> yet more certainly. Upon our lives:<\/em> as the man thinketh in his heart so is he. [A pregnant saying, capable of many readings: What he means<\/em>, though he expresses himself badly in word or act, that is the man to be recognised; what his hearts bent and love are, that surely the man becomes; a man will let slip a word, or do instinctively some action, which reveals the evil man of the heart under the plausible mask of the face.]<\/p>\n

III. Is never self-conscious<\/strong>.But greatness drowns egotism. The standard of judgment is outside the mans self. He lives amongst a circle of persons and things which forms a true standard of measurement. Christian love, above all, casts out egotism; too eager about others to serve, or even think about, itself.<\/p>\n

IV. Commands the reverence of society<\/strong>.Conscience will instinctively respect true, unconscious greatness. Guilt will bow the wrong-doer in homage before it.More fully in<\/em> Homilist<\/em>, Third Series<\/em>, vi. 343.<\/p>\n

APPENDED NOTES<\/em><\/p>\n

Chap. 3. Openness of Apostolical Service<\/em>.The whole argument of this passage is so interwoven with personal allusions, and with illustrations from a particular interpretation of a single passage in the Old Testament, that there is a difficulty in deducing any general truth from it directly. It may be worth while to go through the various images which the Apostle has called up. First, there is the commendatory Epistle of the Corinthian Church, written on his heart. Next, the same Epistle written on their hearts and lives, read and re-read by the wayfarers to and fro, through the thoroughfare of Greece. Thirdly, the contrast between this Epistle, written on the tender human feelings, on the vibrations of the wind, by the breath of the Spirit; carrying its tidings backwards and forwards, whithersoever it will, with no limits of time or space, like the sweep of the wind on the olian harp, like an electric spark of light,and the Ten Commandments graven in the granite blocks of Sinai, hard, speechless, lifeless. Fourthly, there rises into view the figure of Moses, as he is known to us in the statue of Michael Angelo, the light streaming from his face, yet growing dim and dark as a greater glory of another revelation rises behind it. Fifthly, the same figure veiled, as the light beneath the veil dies away and shade rests upon the scene, and there rises around him a multiplication of the figure, the Jews in their synagogues veiled, as the Book of the Law is read before them. Sixthly, the same figure of Moses once more, but now unveiled as he turns again to Mount Sinai and uncovers his face to rekindle its glory in the Divine presence; and now again, this same figure multiplied in the Apostle and the Corinthian congregation following him, all with faces unveiled, and upturned toward the light of Christs presence, the glory streaming into their faces with greater and greater brightness, as if borne in upon them by the Spirit or breath of light from that Divine countenance, till they are transfigured into a blaze of splendour like unto it.Stanley<\/em>, pp. 418, 420.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:11<\/span>. That which remaineth<\/em>.Christianity is connected with all those religions which have preceded it, and that not merely as one of them, but as their truth, their aim, as simply religion. Christianity is the absolute religion<\/em>the only true and intrinsically valid religion. Such is the pretension with which it entered the world, and which it constantly maintains. This may be called exclusiveness and intolerance, but it is the intolerance of truth. As soon as truth concedes the possibility of her opposite being also true, she denies herself. As soon as Christianity ceases to declare herself to be the only true religion, she annihilates her power, and denies her right to exist, for she denies her necessity. The old world concluded with the question, What is Truth? The new world began with the saying of Christ, I am the Truth. And this saying is the confession of Christian faith. The form which the Christian faith may assume may alter; the human notions by which it seeks to express itself may change; but Christian faith must declare itself to be the unchangeable truth. It must affirm that this truth is the answer to the old questions of human nature, and that all the religions which have been its predecessors were mostly preliminary and preparatory, and have found in it their aim and goal. Heathenism was the seeking religion, Judaism the hoping religion; Christianity is the reality of what heathenism sought, and Judaism hoped for.Luthardt, Saving Truths,<\/em> p. <\/p>\n

20. He adds in notes:<\/p>\n

Christianity is the religion which, in the person of its Founder, actually realises that union of man with God which every other religion has striven after, but none attained; and from this creative centre, by doctrine and moral influence, by redemption and reconciliation, restores the individual and the human race to their true destiny, to that true communion, to that mind with God in which all that is human is sanctified and glorified. (Ullmann.)
If we consider the different religions with respect to this fundamental problem [of the bringing together Creator and creature, Holy God and sinful man], we may say that heathenism knows not the problem; that Israel is living in the problem, and awaiting its solution; but that Christianity alone furnishes the solution, through its Gospel of the Incarnation of God [and the Atonement of the Cross]. (Martensen, Dogmatik<\/em>.)<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Appleburys Comments<\/strong><\/p>\n

Self-commendation
Scripture<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:1<\/span>. Are we beginning again to commend ourselves? or need we, as do some, epistles of commendation to you or from you?<\/p>\n

Comments<\/p>\n

Are we beginning again to commend ourselves.Paul had just written of the glorious triumph of the messengers of Christ and also of the message itself which had to do with eternal life and eternal death. He had indicated that he was adequate for this ministry. In his relationship to Christ as an inspired apostle, he spoke the Word of God with all sincerity. He did not make merchandise of it as some had done. The whole chapter is an explanation of his fitness for the task.<\/p>\n

As he often does in his writings, Paul anticipated possible charges of self-commendation. He was well aware of the arrogance of some people at Corinth. See 1Co. 4:18<\/span>. He knew of those who were bringing false charges against him. See 2Co. 10:10<\/span>. The message of the Word of God was of such importance to the apostle Paul that he wanted to make sure that the Corinthians would not make the mistake of assuming that what he was writing was idle boasting about his own powers and abilities.<\/p>\n

epistles of commendation.There is certainly a place for letters of commendation. Paul had written many words of commendation about his fellow-workers, Timothy and Titus. In writing to the Philippians about Timothy, he had said, for I have no man likeminded who will care truly for your state for they all seek their own and not the things of Jesus Christ (Php. 2:20-21<\/span>). The closing words of First Corinthians contain words of commendation about some of the brethren who were also well known to the Corinthians. Paul wrote to the Romans commending Phoebe whom he calls, our sister who is a servant of the church that is in Cenchrea. He urged them to treat her in a manner befitting the saints and to assist her in whatever matter she might have need (Rom. 16:1-2<\/span>). This faithful saint had been a helper of many including the apostle Paul. In the closing part of that epistle Paul mentioned a number of the brethren whom he commended in various ways because of their service in the Lord. His commendation of Luke, the beloved physician, is found in Col. 4:14<\/span>. Mark, for some reason, had not completed the first missionary journey with Paul and Barnabas. This became a matter of sharp contention between them when they started on their second journey. Paul refused to take Mark with him. Long afterwards, he wrote to Timothy, saying, Take Mark and bring him with thee for he is useful to me for ministering (2Ti. 4:11<\/span>).<\/p>\n

to you from you?Paul may have had in mind the many who were corrupting the Word of God and who may have brought epistles of commendation of themselves so that they might become established among the Corinthians. Paul knew about those who had caused so much trouble among the Galatian churches. They had come from James, but there is no good reason to assume that he had approved what they were doing. See Gal. 2:12<\/span>. In the light of James comments as reported in Act. 15:1-41<\/span> and Pauls investigation as given in Galatians two, one might readily assume that their claims were false.<\/p>\n

Paul needed no letter of commendation to the church at Corinth, for he performed all the signs of an apostle in their midst. See 2Co. 12:12<\/span>. Neither did Paul need a letter of commendation from them. He had written to them in First Corinthians saying, If to others I am not an apostle, yet at least I am to you for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord (1Co. 9:2<\/span>). This point is elaborated upon in the two-fold answer that follows.<\/p>\n

Our Epistle<\/p>\n

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Butlers Commentary<\/strong><\/p>\n

SECTION 1<\/strong><\/p>\n

It Dooms The Soul <\/strong>(2Co. 3:1-6<\/span>)<\/p>\n

3<\/strong> Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some do, letters of recommendation to you, or from you? 2You yourselves are our letter of recommendation, written on your hearts, to be known and read by all men; 3and you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.<\/p>\n

4 Such is the confidence that we have through Christ toward God. Not that we are competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence is from God, 6who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not in a written code but in the Spirit; for the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:1-3<\/span><\/strong> Ineffective: <\/strong>Legalism is an almost constant problem for preachers. The problem is either his own legalism or that of members of the congregation he serves. It is probably the most productive tool of the devil to thwart the work of the church on earth! It is a sin much more insidious than sins of the flesh. It damns more souls than fornication and thievery put together! Legalism is a problem, not only for those inside the church, but for millions of impenitent sinners seeking to be justified before God by some meritorious code devised by their own self-righteous arrogance. Legalism is fundamentally an attitude. It manifests itself in behavior designed to conform to specific codes or rules. And those codes of conduct are almost as numerous as there are human beings! Legalism is the attitude that demands justification from God on the basis of having behaved in conformity with an established set of regulations or rulesusually regulations established by the individual. The Pharisees took the law of Moses, made their own code of behavior as interpretations (called, traditions of the elders) and declared they were justified before God because they had kept the law.<\/p>\n

Followers of the Pharisees were everywhere in the first century world of Paul. Many of them had infiltrated the Christian churches established in the Roman provinces. Paul called them, false brethren (Gal. 2:4<\/span>) and dogs (Php. 3:2<\/span>). They were the Judaizers who insisted that before any Gentile could become a disciple of the Messiah (Christ) he had to be circumcised according to the law of Moses and keep the traditions of the elders.<\/p>\n

Someone in the Corinthian church had impugned Pauls credentials as an emissary of God because he had no commendations from the Judaizers. Some had come to the Corinthians with letters of commendation from the Judaizers and were received. These Judaizers were there, as in Galatia, Philippi, Colossae, Rome, Jerusalem, and other places, to undo Pauls work and regiment the Corinthian Christians into little cells of legalistic Judaism. They undoubtedly carried with them introductory letters from the Sanhedrin to accredit them. Once upon a time even Paul had had such letters himself (Act. 9:2<\/span>).<\/p>\n

Pauls argument is that no amount of letters of accreditation from the Judaizers will produce eternal life or the Christian freedom cherished by the Corinthians. That is because legalism is totally ineffective in clearing the conscience (see Heb. 10:1-4<\/span>). It cannot produce life in the heart (mind) of man. The law of Moses produces condemnation, judgment, and eternal death. So do all traditions and codes of legal justification invented by men, no matter how liberal the code may be (see Rom. 2:12-16<\/span>). Mans conscience tells him he has sinned and defaulted on his own standards, let alone Gods! The only way sinful man can have a consciousness of life is through a dispensation of divine grace. Grace is dispensed through Christ.<\/p>\n

The apostle contends that the converted heathen Corinthians were living credentials of his ministry. They proved he was the properly authorized emissary from Christ. Paul had written on their hearts the eternal gospel. They had become persons with a consciousness of immorality. They looked to the things that are unseen . . . eternal (2Co. 4:16-18<\/span>). Their mind-set and lifestyle was known and read by all men . . . (2Co. 3:2<\/span>). That was Pauls letter of commendation from God. The Greek philosopher Plato had said 400 years before Paul, that the good teacher does not write his message in ink that will fade; he writes it upon men. And that is the way the gospel of Christ operates. It becomes fixed upon the character, the personality, the spirit of the humble and contrite person. Christs word is eternal. It shall never pass away. It never returns to him void but always accomplishes that for which it is sent (see Isa. 55:11<\/span>). Christ had written his character, through his servant, Paul, upon the hearts of the Corinthian Christians, not with that which was destined to fade (the law)but with the eternal Spirit of God. Their relationship to Christ was Pauls accreditation (see 1Co. 9:2<\/span>). It is an awesome thought that every Christian, whether he likes it or not, is at once a living letter known and read by his contemporaries. Christians represent Christ to the world. Men judge the church by its members. The honor of God is in the hands of believers (see Rom. 2:24<\/span>; Joh. 13:35<\/span>; 1Th. 1:7-8<\/span>).<\/p>\n

The possessive pronoun in the Greek text is hemon and should be translated our. Some ancient Greek manuscripts (among them the Siniaticus) have humon for the pronoun which would read your. Evidently the RSV translators chose the pronoun humon even though the preponderance of manuscripts show hemon. For Paul to say, You yourselves are our letter of recommendation, written on our hearts, to be known and read by all men . . . does not make sense and does not fit the context. Unless Pauls sentence could be separated this way: You yourselves are our letter of recommendation to be known and read by all men, and you are written on our hearts. Another commentator has suggested that Paul means the hearts of all Christians, in general, not Paul alone. That is, Pauls credentials are written on all our hearts to be known and read by men, you Corinthians, too. But Paul goes on to say in 2Co. 3:3<\/span>, and you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us . . . so he is referring to that which is written on their hearts. The RSV translation seems in keeping with the context. They were Pauls verification: they were read by all men.<\/p>\n

The Greek verbs in this passage are instructive. The perfect tense participle eggegrammene, having been inscribed means what Christ had written on their hearts through Paul had been done in the past with a continuing result. And the present tense participles, ginoskomene (being known) and anaginoskomene (being read) indicate that the Corinthians were continually being known and read by all men. Furthermore, the present participle phaneroumenoi (being shown) indicates they were continually showing that they were Pauls recommendation.<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:4-5<\/span><\/strong> Insufficient: <\/strong>The Judaizers went to Corinth with letters from the fathers at Jerusalem, no doubt. But no human being is sufficient to produce in man what God desires. Paul would not even claim that sufficiency on his own. He would have the Corinthians understand that his confidence is through Christhis sufficiency is from God. Legalism is insufficient because it does not come from God. God gave the Law. But God never intended the Law to be used in a legalistic, self-justifying way. The Law had a holy and good purpose (see Rom. 7:7-12<\/span>). It was actually intended to teach just the opposite from what the Judaizers taught. The Law was to bring all who knew it to a consciousness of condemnation and total inability to be justified by it. It is not the law which is insufficientit is legalistic perversion of the law which is insufficient. The Law is sufficient for its purposeto produce awareness of sin, the need for grace, and tutoring unto faith.<\/p>\n

Paul would not even take credit for what had been produced in the Corinthians through him. He gave all the credit to Christ and God. That is another of the glaring insufficiencies of the legalistic spirit. It dare not be honest and give credit where the credit is due. The legalist is a legalist because he wants all the credit for himself. Grace, unmerited favor, is anathema to him! Let all preachers and congregations beware of legalism. It is ineffective and insufficient. In fact, it produces exactly the opposite of what Gods powerful word produces. Stay with the Word. Preach the wordleave traditions and codes to the legalists.<\/p>\n

Like it or not, right or wrong, people generally manifest what they have been taught or what they have learned. Teaching and learning is a character-building process. People become books to be read by all those with whom they associate. The apostles were read as having been with Jesus (Act. 4:13<\/span>). That is how people become letters of recommendation. Paul told the brethren at Thessalonica they were his joy and crown of boasting (1Th. 2:19-20<\/span>; 2Th. 1:3-4<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co. 3:6<\/span><\/strong> Incriminating: <\/strong>Legalism dooms men under the judgment of God even more so than the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses was given by God and provisions were made in it for having faith reckoned as righteousness (see Gen. 15:6<\/span>; Heb. 11:1-40<\/span>). But legalism takes the Law and prostitutes it into a system of human self-justification. But by the law shall no flesh be justified (Gal. 2:16<\/span>).<\/p>\n

Paul reminded the Corinthians that his credentials testified that he had been qualified by God to be a minister of a new covenant, not in a written code which kills, but in the Spirit which gives life. Law condemns to separation from God (death) because man cannot, does not, keep the Law. Man is guilty. Gods penalty for breaking his Law is eternal banishment. But from the very first violation of his Law, God started preparing to forgive and justify men by a totally gracious deed of his own. All who believed in that in the O.T. were justified by Gods gracious deed (redemptive work of Christ). The new covenant was prophesied, typified and proclaimed in the O.T. All those in the O.T. who refused to trust in the coming grace of God through the Messiah (and there were many), but trusted in their legal standing according to Law, never had the salvation of God. Paul plainly says that the new covenant was a manifestation of the righteousness of God apart from law, although the law and the prophets had borne witness to just such justification by faith (Rom. 3:21-26<\/span>).<\/p>\n

In this letter to the Corinthians the apostle wants it understood that he has been qualified to be a minister (dispenser) of the new covenant which is all about life. The new covenant does not condemn or sentence anyone to death. It holds forth the word of life. Of course, anyone who does not enter into the new covenant will die forever because all who refuse the gospel must accept lawone kind of law or another (see Rom. 2:12-16<\/span>). And to trust in law for justification is the very essence of legalism. Legalism incriminates and kills. The Spirit of God, given gratis (by grace), brings justification and life.<\/p>\n

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

III.<\/strong><\/p>\n

(1) Do we begin again to commend ourselves?<\/strong>The MSS. present various readings: Do we begin again to commend ourselves [Nay, not so], unless we desire [which we do not] letters of commendation; but the Received text is sufficiently supported, and gives a clearer and simpler meaning. Here, again, we have to read between the lines. Titus has told St. Paul what has been said of him at Corinth. Referring, probably, to what he had said in his First Epistle as to the wisdom which he preached (1Co. 2:6<\/span>), his having laid the foundation (1Co. 3:10<\/span>), his dwelling on his sufferings (1Co. 4:11<\/span>), his preaching without payment (1Co. 9:15<\/span>) as a thing he gloried in, they had sneered at him as always commending himself. They had added that it was no wonder that he did so when he had no authoritative letters of commendation from other churches, such as were brought by other teachers. As soon as the words We are not as the many had passed his lips, the thought occurs that the same will be said again. He hears<\/em> it said, as it were, and makes his answer.<\/p>\n

Need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you?<\/strong>We are left to conjecture who are thus referred to. Possibly some of the Apollos party had contrasted the letters which he had brought from Ephesus (Act. 18:27<\/span>) with St. Pauls want of them. Possibly the Judaising teachers who meet us in 2Co. 11:13<\/span> had come with credentials of this nature from the Church of Jerusalem. The indignant tone in which St. Paul speaks indicates the latter view as the more probable. The letters of commendation deserve notice as an important element in the organisation of the early Church. A Christian travelling with such a letter from any Church was certain to find a welcome in any other. They guaranteed at once his soundness in the faith and his personal character, and served to give a reality to the belief in the communion of saints, as the necessary sequel to the recognition of a Catholic or universal Church. It is significant of the part they had played in the social victory of the Christian Church that Julian tried to introduce them into the decaying system which he sought to galvanise into an imitative life (Sozomen. Hist.<\/em> v. 16).<\/p>\n

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Chapter 3<\/p>\n

EACH MAN A LETTER OF CHRIST (<\/strong> 2Co 3:1-3<\/span> )<\/p>\n

<\/strong> 3:1-3 Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Surely you do not think that we need–as some people need–letters of commendation neither to you or from you? You are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by all men. It is plain to see that you are a letter written by Christ, produced under our ministry, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone, but on tablets which are living, beating, human hearts. <\/p>\n

<\/em> <\/p>\n

Behind this passage lies the thought of a custom which was common in the ancient world, that of sending letters of commendation with a person. If someone was going to a strange community, a friend of his who knew someone in that community would give him a letter of commendation to introduce him and to testify to his character. <\/p>\n

Here is such a letter, found among the papyri, written by a certain Aurelius Archelaus, who was a beneficiarius, that is a soldier privileged to have special exemption from all menial duties, to his commanding officer, a military tribune called Julius Domitius. It is to introduce and commend a certain Theon. “To Julius Domitius, military tribune of the legion, from Aurelius Archelaus, his beneficiarius, greeting. I have already before this recommended to you Theon, my friend, and now also, I ask you, sir, to have him before your eyes as you would myself. For he is a man such as to deserve to be loved by you, for he left his own people, his goods and his business and followed me, and through all things he has kept me safe. I therefore pray you that he may have the right to come and see you. He can tell you everything about our business…I have loved the man…I wish you, sir, great happiness and long life with your family and good health. Have this letter before your eyes and let it make you think that I am speaking to you. Farewell.” <\/p>\n

That was the kind of commendatory letter, or reference, of which Paul was thinking. There is one such in the New Testament. Rom 16:1-27<\/span> is a letter of commendation written to introduce Phoebe, a member of the Church at Cenchrea, to the Church at Rome. <\/p>\n

In the ancient world, as nowadays, sometimes written testimonials did not mean very much. A man once asked Diogenes, the Cynic philosopher, for such a letter. Diogenes answered, “That you are a man he will know at a glance; but whether you are a good or a bad man he will discover if he has the skill to distinguish between good and bad, and if he is without that skill he will not discover the facts even though I write to him thousands of times.” Yet in the Christian Church such letters were necessary, for even Lucian, the pagan satirist, noted that any charlatan could make a fortune out of the simple-minded Christians, because they were so easily imposed upon. <\/p>\n

The previous sentences of Paul’s letter seemed to read as if he was giving himself a testimonial. He declares that he has no need of such commendation. Then he takes a side-glance at those who have been causing trouble in Corinth. “There may be some,” he says, “who brought you letters of commendation or who got them from you.” In all probability these were emissaries of the Jews who had come to undo Paul’s work and who had brought introductory letters from the Sanhedrin to accredit them. Once Paul had had such letters himself, when he set out to Damascus to obliterate the Church. ( Act 9:2<\/span>). He says that his only testimonial is the Corinthians themselves. The change in their character and life is the only commendation that he needs. <\/p>\n

He goes on to make a great claim. Every one of them is a letter of Christ. Long ago Plato had said that the good teacher does not write his message in ink that will fade; he writes it upon men. That is what Jesus had done. He had written his message on the Corinthians, through his servant, Paul, not with fading ink but with the Spirit, not on tablets of stone as the law was first written, but on the hearts of men. <\/p>\n

There is a great truth here, which is at once an inspiration and an awful warning–every man is an open letter for Jesus Christ. Every Christian, whether he likes it or not, is an advertisement for Christianity. The honour of Christ is in the hands of his followers. We judge a shopkeeper by the kind of goods he sells; we judge a craftsman by the kind of articles he produces; we judge a Church by the kind of men it creates; and therefore men judge Christ by his followers. Dick Sheppard, after years of talking in the open air to people who were outside the Church, declared that he had discovered that “the greatest handicap the Church has is the unsatisfactory lives of professing Christians.” When we go out into the world, we have the awe-inspiring responsibility of being open letters, advertisements, for Christ and his Church. <\/p>\n

THE SURPASSING GLORY (<\/strong> 2Co 3:4-11<\/span> )<\/p>\n

<\/strong> 3:4-11 We can believe this with such confidence because we believe it through Christ and in the sight of God. It is not that in our own resources we are adequate to reckon up the effect of anything that we have done, as it were personally, but our adequacy comes from God, who has made us adequate to be ministers of the new relationship which has come into existence between him and men. This new relationship does not depend on a written document, but on the Spirit. The written document is a deadly thing; the Spirit is a life-giving power. If the ministry which could only produce death, the ministry which depends on written documents, the ministry which was engraved on stone, came into being with such glory that the children of Israel could not bear to look for any time at the face of Moses, because of the glory which shone upon his face–and it was a glory that was doomed to fade surely even more will the ministry of the Spirit be clad in glory. For if the ministry which could not produce anything else but condemnation was a glory, the ministry which produces the right relationship between God and man excels still more in glory. For, indeed, that which was clad with glory no longer enjoys glory because of this–because of the glory that surpasses it. If that which was doomed to pass away emerged in glory, much more that which is destined to remain exists in glory. <\/p>\n

<\/em> <\/p>\n

This passage really falls into two parts. At the beginning of it Paul is feeling that perhaps his claim that the Corinthians are a living epistle of Christ, produced under his ministry, may sound a little like self-praise. So he hastens to insist that whatever he has done is not his own work but the work of God. It is God who has made him adequate for the task which was his. It may be that he is thinking of a fanciful meaning that the Jews sometimes gave to one of the great titles of God. God was called El ( H410<\/span>) Shaddai ( H7706<\/span>) , which is The Almighty, but sometimes the Jews explained El Shaddai to mean The Sufficient One. It is he who is all-sufficient who has made Paul sufficient for his task. <\/p>\n

When Harriet Beecher Stowe produced Uncle Tom’s Cabin, 300,000 copies were sold in America in one year. It was translated into a score of languages. Lord Palmerston, who had not read a novel for thirty years, praised it “not only for the story, but for the statesmanship.” Lord Cockburn, a Privy Counsellor, declared that it had done more for humanity than any other book of fiction. Tolstoi ranked it among the great achievements of the human mind. It certainly did more than any other single thing to advance the freedom of the slaves. Harriet Beecher Stowe refused to take any credit for what she had written. She said, “l, the author of Uncle Tom’s Cabin? No, indeed, I could not control the story; it wrote itself. The Lord wrote it, and I was but the humblest instrument in his hand. It all came to me in visions, one after another, and I put them down in words. To him alone be the praise!” <\/p>\n

Her adequacy was of God. It was so with Paul. He never said, “See what I have done!” He always said, “To God be the glory!” He never conceived of himself as adequate for any task; he thought of God as making him adequate. And that is precisely why, conscious as he was of his own weakness, he feared to set his hand to no task. He never had to do it alone; he did it with God. <\/p>\n

The second part of the passage deals with the contrast between the old and the new covenant. A covenant means an arrangement made between two people through which they enter into a certain relationship. It is not, in the biblical usage, an ordinary agreement, because the contracting parties enter into an ordinary agreement on equal terms. But in the biblical sense of covenant, it is God who is the prime mover and approaches man to offer him a relationship upon conditions which man could neither initiate nor alter but only accept or reject. <\/p>\n

The word Paul uses for new when he speaks of the new covenant is the same as Jesus used and it is very significant. In Greek there are two words for new. First, there is neos ( G3501<\/span>) , which means new in point of time and that alone. A young person is neos ( G3501<\/span>) because he is a newcomer into the world. Second, there is kainos ( G2537<\/span>) , which means not only new in point of time, but also new in quality. If something is kainos ( G2537<\/span>) it has brought a fresh clement into the situation. It is the word kainos ( G2537<\/span>) that both Jesus and Paul use of the new covenant, and the significance is that the new covenant is not only new in point of time; it is quite different in kind from the old covenant. It produces between man and God a relationship of a totally different kind. <\/p>\n

Wherein does this difference lie? <\/p>\n

(i) The old covenant was based on a written document. We can see the story of its initiation in Exo 24:1-8<\/span>. Moses took the book of the covenant and read it to the people and they agreed to it. On the other hand the new covenant is based on the power of the life-giving Spirit. A written document is always something that is external; whereas the work of the Spirit changes a man’s very heart. A man may obey the written code while all the time he wishes to disobey it; but when the Spirit comes into his heart and controls it, not only does he not break the code, he does not even wish to break it, because he is a changed man. A written code can change the law; only the Spirit can change human nature. <\/p>\n

(ii) The old covenant was a deadly thing, because it produced a legal relationship between God and man. In effect it said, “If you wish to maintain your relationship with God, you must keep these laws.” It thereby set up a situation in which God was essentially judge and man was essentially a criminal, forever in default before the bar of God’s judgment. <\/p>\n

The old covenant was deadly because it killed certain things. (a) It killed hope. There was never any hope that any man could keep it, human nature being what it is. It therefore could issue in nothing but frustration. (b) It killed life. Under it a man could earn nothing but condemnation; and condemnation meant death. (c) It killed strength. It was perfectly able to tell a man what to do, but it could not help him to do it. <\/p>\n

The new covenant was quite different. (a) It was a relationship of love. It came into being because God so loved the world. (b) It was a relationship between a father and his sons. Man was no longer the criminal in default, he was the son of God, even if a disobedient son. (c) It changed a man’s life, not by imposing a new code of laws on him, but by changing his heart. (d) It therefore not only told a man what to do but gave him the strength to do it. With its commandments it brought power. <\/p>\n

Paul goes on to contrast the two covenants. The old covenant was born in glory. When Moses came down from the mountain with the Ten Commandments, which are the code of the old covenant, his face shone with such a splendour that no one could took at it ( Exo 34:30<\/span>). Obviously that was a transient splendour. It did not and it could not last. The new covenant, the new relationship which Jesus Christ makes possible between man and God, has a greater splendour which will never fade because it produces pardon and not condemnation, life and not death. <\/p>\n

Here is the warning. The Jews preferred the old covenant, the law; they rejected the new covenant, the new relationship in Christ. Now the old covenant was not a bad thing; but it was only a second-best, a stage upon the way. As a great commentator has put it, “When the sun has risen the lamps cease to be of use.” And as has been so truly said, “The second-best is the worst enemy of the best.” Men have always tended to cling to the old even when something far better is offered. For long people, on so-called religious grounds, refused to use chloroform. When Wordsworth and the romantic poets emerged, criticism said, “This will never do.” When Wagner began to write his music, people would not have it. Churches all over the world cling to the old and refuse the new. Because a thing was always done, it is right, and because a thing was never done, it is wrong. We must be careful not to worship the stages instead of the goal, not to cling to the second-best while the best is waiting, not, as the Jews did, to insist that the old ways are right and refuse the new glories which God is opening to us. <\/p>\n

THE VEIL WHICH HIDES THE TRUTH (<\/strong> 2Co 3:12-18<\/span> )<\/p>\n

<\/strong> 3:12-18 It is because we possess such a hope that we speak with such freedom. We do not draw a veil over things, as Moses did over his face so that the children of Israel should not gaze at the end of the glory which was doomed to fade away. But their minds were dulled. To this very day the same veil remains, still not drawn aside, when they read the record of the old relationship between God and man, because only in Christ is that veil abolished. Yes, to this day, whenever the books that Moses wrote are read, the veil rests upon their heart. But, whenever a man turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. The Lord is the Spirit. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. And we all, with no veil upon our faces, see as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, and we go on changing this image from glory to glory, even as it comes from the Lord who is the Spirit. <\/p>\n

<\/em> <\/p>\n

All the pictures in this passage emerge directly from the passage which goes before. Paul begins from the thought that when Moses came down from the mount the glory upon his face was so bright that no one could gaze steadily upon it. <\/p>\n

(i) He thinks back to Exo 34:33<\/span>. The King James Version has it that Moses put a veil upon his face until he had finished speaking; but the correct translation of the Hebrew, is that Moses, as in the R.S.V., did this when he had finished speaking. Paul takes this to mean that Moses veiled his face so that the people should not have to see the slow fading of the glory that once was there. His first thought is that the glory of the old covenant, the old relationship between God and men, was essentially a fading one. It was destined to be overpassed, not as the wrong is overpassed by the right, but as the incomplete is overpassed by the complete. The revelation that came by Moses was true and great, but it was only partial; the revelation that came in Jesus Christ is full and final. As Augustine so wisely put it long ago, “We do wrong to the Old Testament if we deny that it comes from the same just and good God as the New. On the other hand we do wrong to the New Testament, if we put the Old on a level with it.” The one is a step to glory; the other is the summit of glory. <\/p>\n

(ii) The idea of the veil now takes hold of Paul’s mind and he uses it in different ways. He says that, when the Jews listen to the reading of the Old Testament, as they do every Sabbath day in the synagogue, a veil upon their eyes keeps them from seeing the real meaning of it. It ought to point them to Jesus Christ, but the veil keeps them from seeing that. We, too, may fail to see the real meaning of scripture because our eyes are veiled. <\/p>\n

(a) They may be veiled by prejudice. We, too, often go to scripture to find support for our own views rather than to find the truth of God. <\/p>\n

(b) They may be veiled by wishful-thinking. Too often we find what we want to find, and neglect what we do not want to see. To take an example, we may delight in all the references to the love and the mercy of God, but pass over all the references to his wrath and judgment. <\/p>\n

(c) They may be veiled by fragmentary thinking. We should always regard the Bible as a whole. It is easy to take individual texts and criticize them. It is easy to prove that parts of the Old Testament are sub-Christian. It is easy to find support for private theories by choosing certain texts and passages and putting others aside. But it is the whole message that we must seek; and that is just another way of saying that we must read all scripture in the light of Jesus Christ. <\/p>\n

(iii) Not only is there a veil which keeps the Jews from seeing the real meaning of scripture; there is also a veil which comes between them and God. <\/p>\n

(a) Sometimes it is the veil of disobedience. Very often it is moral and not intellectual blindness which keeps us from seeing God. If we persist in disobeying him we become less and less capable of seeing him. The vision of God is to the pure in heart. <\/p>\n

(b) Sometimes it is the veil of the unteachable spirit. As the Scots saying has it, “There’s none so blind as those who winna see.” The best teacher on earth cannot teach the man who knows it all already and does not wish to learn. God gave us free will, and, if we insist upon our own way, we cannot learn his. <\/p>\n

(iv) Paul goes on to say that we see the glory of the Lord with no veil upon our faces, and because of that we, too, are changed from glory into glory. Possibly what Paul means is that, if we gaze at Christ, we in the end reflect him. His image appears in our lives. It is a law of life that we become like the people we gaze at. People hero-worship someone and begin to reflect his ways. If we contemplate Jesus Christ, in the end we come to reflect him. <\/p>\n

Paul sets for many a theological problem when he says, “The Lord is the Spirit.” He seems to identify the Risen Lord and the Holy Spirit. We must remember that he was not writing theology; he was setting down experience. And it is the experience of the Christian life that the work of the Spirit and the work of the Risen Lord are one and the same. The strength and guidance we receive come alike from the Spirit and from the Risen Lord. <\/p>\n

Where the Spirit is, says Paul, there is liberty. He means that so long as man’s obedience to God is conditioned by obedience to a code of laws he is in the position of an unwilling slave. But when it comes from the operation of the Spirit in his heart, the very centre of his being has no other desire than to serve God, for then it is not law but love which binds him. Many things which we would resent doing under compulsion for some stranger are a privilege to do for someone we love. Love clothes the humblest and the most menial tasks with glory. “In God’s service we find our perfect freedom.” <\/p>\n

-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)<\/p>\n

Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

II. <\/strong> THE APOSTOLIC OFFICE, 2Co 3:1<\/span> to 2Co 6:10<\/span>.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. It is above commendation, above Mosaicism<\/strong>, 2Co 3:1<\/span> to 2Co 4:6<\/span>.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. <\/strong> Again<\/strong> The last verse contains a powerful self-assertion, and St. Paul is immediately reminded that among the imputations reported by Titus as made against him was his self-eulogy; <\/em> especially, perhaps, in 1Co 9:15<\/span>; 1Co 9:21<\/span>. <\/p>\n

Some<\/strong> His Judaic opponents. <\/p>\n

Epistles of commendation<\/strong> Recommendatory letters. Such letters all affiliated associations are obliged to use to authenticate messengers, or members, from one locality to another. Such, for instance, are our “certificates of membership” at the present day. Commendatory letters were in use among the Jews also; and in the early Church, the bishops furnished certifications for clergy circulating in other dioceses. By such letters was Apollos commended from Ephesus to Corinth. Act 18:27<\/span>. So Timothy is commended to the Corinthian Church in 1Co 16:10-11<\/span>, and Titus and his comrades in this epistle, 2Co 8:18-19<\/span>. <\/p>\n

To you<\/strong> The clear implication is, that his detractors came with such letters <\/strong> from somewhere. <\/em> And the fountain head is indicated by the entire narration of Act 15:1-33<\/span>, as being at Jerusalem. See our notes on that passage. A set of ultra-Judaists came down from Jerusalem to Antioch, proclaiming that the retention of circumcision by Christians was necessary to salvation. St. Paul says, (Gal 2:12<\/span>,) that a similar set came to Antioch from James<\/strong>, the resident apostle at Jerusalem. And Renan, in his “St. Paul,” talks of “a counter-mission organized by James” against St. Paul, and assures us that James furnished the Judaists with credentials. All such fancies touching the conduct and position of that illustrious man are dispersed by Luke’s narration of his course towards the ultra-Judaic party at the Council of Jerusalem. Act 15:1-33<\/span>. The Judaic emissaries were a small extreme section, whom James refused to countenance. Doubtless the emissaries that now had come from Jerusalem were of the same type. In about a year from the time of writing this epistle, Paul and James met in council at Jerusalem, as described in Act 21:18-20<\/span>, where see notes; and James rejoiced in the labours and successes of our great apostle. Indeed, Luke’s narrative of the invasion of Antioch by the Judaists may be read as a fair type of their visitation at Corinth. The epistles of commendation <\/strong> they brought bore, doubtless, the signature, not of James, but of the ultra clique in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

‘Are we beginning again to commend ourselves? or do we need, as do some, letters of commendation to you or from you? You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read of all men, it being revealed openly that you are a letter of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in tables that are hearts of flesh.’<\/p>\n

‘Are we beginning again to commend ourselves?’ What he has just been describing of their being triumphantly led by God in victory must not be misunderstood. We have not said it, he stresses, in order that we may commend ourselves. For the truth is that he and his fellow-workers do not need to commend themselves. The Corinthian Christians are themselves the proof of their commendation.<\/p>\n

So having glorified God for leading him and his fellow-workers continually in triumph Paul now stresses that the Corinthians have even greater reasons for recognising that they are true servants of Christ and that he is God’s true Apostle. Others would come with letters of recommendation, (see Act 9:2<\/span>; Act 22:5<\/span>; Act 18:27<\/span>; Rom 16:1<\/span>) but he and his fellow-workers do not need letters of recommendation. They do not even need to commend themselves. The Corinthians themselves are his letters of recommendation, openly revealed to all men. For they owed their very rebirth to him and his ministry, and he wants them to know that they are written in the very hearts, both of him and his fellow-ministers.<\/p>\n

‘Written on our hearts.’ They are not just converts, they are beloved brothers and sisters. We need not press the illustration It was to get over a point. It soon changes so that it becomes ‘their hearts’.<\/p>\n

‘Ministered by us.’ They should remember through whom this wonderful work, now in their hearts, was ministered.<\/p>\n

Paul needed no letters of recommendation because he only went to virgin territory, to places of new opportunity or to churches that he himself had founded. In the first case a letter of recommendation would have been useless, in the second it should have been unnecessary.<\/p>\n

Note the stress on ‘all men’. Unlike his opponents Paul’s triumph is not localised. All the world knows of it for they see it in those who have come to Christ under his ministry (compare ‘in every place’ – 2Co 2:14<\/span>).<\/p>\n

Indeed all who see the Corinthian Christians recognise that they are a letter of Christ (a letter that reveals Christ, or that is from Christ and written by Him), written with something far superior to ink. They are written with the Spirit of ‘the living God’, the life-giving God, the powerfully active God, and the writing paper is not stone tablets, but their human, beating hearts. So their very lives, Paul says, declare his credentials.<\/p>\n

The contrast is with Moses’ message, written in tablets of stone (Exo 31:18<\/span>). Moses’ message was an outward one, even if it was written with the finger of God, the writing of the old covenant. It did not of itself change hearts. It spoke of deliverance, but it also laid down requirements without giving the power to fulfil them. But the message they have received was written on the inward heart by the Spirit of the living God, it was living and vital, life-changing and personally applied, and by it they had entered into God’s new covenant (2Co 3:6<\/span>) sealed by the blood of Jesus (1Co 11:25<\/span>).<\/p>\n

In mind were the words of God in Jer 31:33<\/span>, ‘I will make a new covenant — this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord, I will put My law in their inward parts and I will write it in their heart, and I will be their God, and they will be My people — for they will all know Me from the least of them to the greatest.’ And this combined with Eze 36:27<\/span>, ‘A new heart also will I give you, and a new Spirit will I put within you, and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh.’ In both cases there is the stress on ‘new’. This would not be just a continuation of the old but would have a different basis. It would work within and not from without, an inward transforming rather than a bringing to commitment, although the very transformation would result in full commitment. So, says Paul, all that was promised in God’s word was fulfilled in them through his ministry. What needed he of a better witness?<\/p>\n

Paul is not degrading the old covenant. The old covenant was written with ‘the finger of God’, emphasising its importance and God’s personal concern. And it came in glory (2Co 3:7<\/span>). But the new was more effective because it was written by ‘the Spirit of the living God’, God’s personal dynamic, life-giving action in the heart, and came with even greater glory. Although here we should note how Luke can use the term ‘the finger of God’ to express the work of the Spirit (compare Luk 11:20<\/span> with Mat 12:28<\/span>). So the point is more on where the action was carried out, in the first case on tablets of stone, in the second case directly in the heart, than on Who by.<\/p>\n

There could be no clearer distinction than here of those who are offered a means of life, but of whom many turn it down, and those who by the working of God’s sovereign power are brought to respond and be saved. The one are offered the writing of God on the tablets of stone, the other receive the work of the Spirit in their hearts establishing His word there and transforming them.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

He Is Not Speaking Like This To Commend Himself. Indeed The Corinthians Themselves Are His Letter of Recommendation, Written By The Spirit of God ( 2Co 3:1-6<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> ).<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

He firmly points out that he does not need to commend himself to them like this, for are they not themselves a testimony to his success in Christ? They are his letters of recommendation. And he goes on to describe the wonder of what has happened to them. It is the Spirit of the living God Who has written in their hearts the new covenant sealed by the blood of Christ. They have been reborn and transformed by His activity. What they are enjoying is no outward covenant written on stone, which in the end results in failure and condemnation. It is one written by God within them which has transformed them, and it all began through the ministry of Paul. Thus can they know that he is a true Apostle of God.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Explanation: Paul’s Letter of Commendation <\/strong> In 2Co 3:1-6<\/span> Paul explains how he needs no commendations from men to carry out his duties, for he has been divinely qualified by God. His letter of commendation is read in the hearts of those believers at Corinth.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1<\/strong><\/span>  Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you?<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> “Do we begin again to commend ourselves” <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> Webster<\/em> says the word “commend” means, “To mention as worthy of attention or to express approval of.”<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1<\/strong><\/span> <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> Letters of introduction, or recommendation have always been and even today are important documents for obtaining jobs, school enrollment and even business accounts. In Uganda, these letters are of major importance in everyday business activity. Paul used them extensively throughout his missionary travels. He sent coworkers to other cities with such letters.<\/p>\n

Paul well knew the importance of such letters in an effort to accomplish a task. Remember how he followed such protocol as a persecutor of the Church before his conversion.<\/p>\n

Act 9:1-2<\/span>, “And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues , that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.”<\/p>\n

Act 22:5<\/span>, “As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren , and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished.”<\/p>\n

Act 26:10-11<\/span>, “Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests ; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them. And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.”<\/p>\n

2Co 3:2<\/strong><\/span>  Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: <\/p>\n

2Co 3:3<\/strong><\/span><\/strong>  Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:2-3<\/span><\/strong> Comments – Epistles of Christ Written Upon their Hearts – <\/em><\/strong> From a number of statements that Paul makes in his second epistle to the Corinthians, we can assume that skeptics had questioned and doubted the ministry of Paul the apostle and challenged his authority in Christ. They may have scorned his testimonies of divine revelations and visitations from the Lord and of angels, or of his miraculous escapes from danger and imprisonment. No one could doubt the fact that he was bringing many souls to faith in Jesus Christ and that he was reaching further towards the West than any other preacher of the Gospel. We even see Paul defending the genuineness of his ministry to the Church in Jerusalem in Act 15:1-35<\/span> by bringing a living epistle named Titus with him as proof of his divine calling to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-3<\/span>). Therefore, Paul says that these living epistles are “known and read of all men.”<\/p>\n

The Corinthian church members are an epistle, of and from Jesus Christ, written by Paul and companions, not written with ink, but with God’s Spirit, not written on stone, but written in their hearts. So there are four things about this letter that we can conclude: <\/p>\n

1. The source of the message was from Jesus.<\/p>\n

2. The writers were Paul and his companions. <\/p>\n

3. The writing material was the hearts of flesh instead of stone tablets.<\/p>\n

4. The pen was not ink, but it was by the Spirit of the Living God.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-3<\/strong><\/span> Comments – Paul’s Letters of Commendation – <\/em><\/strong> Some scholars see Paul making a parenthetical digression in 2Co 3:1-3<\/span>. In other words, Paul takes a minute to elaborate upon the phrase “letters of commendation.” This is made clear in the Greek text, which begins verse two with “our epistle,” thus, placing emphasis upon the topic of letters of commendation. <\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-3<\/span>, “Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you? ( Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart .)”<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4<\/strong><\/span>  And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4<\/span><\/strong> Comments <\/em><\/strong> The phrase “such trust” means, “confidence such as this.” Paul had enough confidence in him being called of God, and not a false teacher, that he said he did not need a letter of recommendation from anyone, because the church at Corinth was his manifested proof. This confidence came through Jesus Christ working and manifesting in his life through the Holy Spirit. Confidence like this, or such as this kind, is what Paul had regarding his ministry. This confidence is towards God, that is, as Paul prayers to God and communes with Him, he comes with confidences as a faithful child of God (Thus 1Jn 3:21<\/span>). Paul had confidence in himself through Jesus Christ as being God’s servant. His confidence of having any ability for this calling was in the power of God through Jesus. Paul was confident and sure that he was of God and that he was preaching the true Gospel of Christ Jesus. This is explained in verse 5.<\/p>\n

1Jn 3:21<\/span>, “Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.”<\/p>\n

2Co 3:5<\/strong><\/span>  Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;<\/p>\n

2Co 3:5<\/span><\/strong> Comments <\/em><\/strong> The word “sufficiency” refers to “worthiness” or “ability.” We are not worthy in ourselves to qualify as ministers of Jesus Christ (Note John the Baptist [Mat 3:11<\/span> ] and the centurion [Mat 8:8<\/span> ]).<\/p>\n

Mat 3:11<\/span>, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:”<\/p>\n

Mat 8:8<\/span>, “The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.”<\/p>\n

Paul’s qualification and ability are nothing of his own, but from the grace of God who called him and equipped him. Note:<\/p>\n

Gal 1:15<\/span>, “But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace,”<\/p>\n

1Ti 1:12<\/span>, “And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;”<\/p>\n

In the ministry, we often feel inadequate or unqualified to be doing the great things that God requires of us. It is then that we have to decide that God has qualified us for the task, and not ourselves. We learn to trust in His grace and not in our own abilities.<\/p>\n

We understand from 2Co 3:5<\/span> that Paul had learned not to trust in his own feelings about being qualified for God’s service. He had learned to yield to the moving of the Holy Spirit when God was ready to us him. We must be careful not to wear a “false humility” about ourselves, declaring ourselves unworthy to be used by Him, for our qualifications have come from God. Note these words from Frances J. Roberts:<\/p>\n

“Commit to Me thy sanctification. Bring thy thought into captivity and let thy mind be under the control of the Mind of Christ. Do not curb the impulses of the Spirit within you, neither refuse to allow Me the freedom to manifest Myself through you by means of the gifts. Ye may resist Me, because ye feel unworthy or ‘unready’ to be used. This is a delusion of the mind. I do not use you when you ‘feel prepared’ but when I need you and you are yielded. Even as I use you, ye will discover that in the process of being used, I shall do a work in you yourself to the edification of your own heart and life.” [55]<\/p>\n

[55] Frances J. Roberts, Come Away My Beloved<\/em> (Ojai, California: King’s Farspan, Inc., 1973), 120.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/strong><\/span>  Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> “Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament” <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> The New Testament church, because of its Jewish heritage, immediately incorporated the Old Testament Scriptures into its daily worship. These new believers quickly realized that some of the Old Testament teachings, such as the Law of Moses, must now be interpreted in light of the New Covenant. We see this challenge taking place at the first council of Jerusalem in Acts 15<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Act 15:1-2<\/span>, “And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.”<\/p>\n

In addition to the recognition of the Old Testament, the apostles realized that they had been given the authority to reveal the new covenant with as high authority as they held the Jewish Old Testament. According to 2Co 3:1-11<\/span>, they were appointed ministers of this new covenant.<\/p>\n

The major requirement for all of the New Testament writings to be considered “divinely inspired Scripture” was apostolic authority. These twenty seven books had to have been either written by one of the twelve apostles, or either been imposed by these apostles upon the churches as an “instrument” of the Church, to be read and obeyed by all. Thus, we see the Gospels and Paul’s epistles being read in gatherings alongside the Old Testament Scriptures, being elevated to equal authority as other sacred Scripture.<\/p>\n

Therefore, Paul’s qualifications as a minister of the new covenant was elevated to a level higher than others due to the fact that God had given him the calling of writing much of the New Testament. Paul realized that his writings were on an equal level of authority as the Old Testament Scriptures. Therefore, Paul held the authority to speak on the level of authority that Christ Jesus spoke while on this earth.<\/p>\n

Note similar Scriptures that indicate how the New Testament writings became elevated by apostolic authority to become equal to the Old Testament Scriptures:<\/p>\n

1Co 14:37<\/span>, “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.”<\/p>\n

Col 4:16<\/span>, “And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.”<\/p>\n

1Th 4:2<\/span>, “For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus.”<\/p>\n

1Th 5:27<\/span>, “I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren.”<\/p>\n

2Th 2:15<\/span>, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”<\/p>\n

1Ti 5:18<\/span>, “For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.”<\/p>\n

1Pe 1:12<\/span>, “Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.”<\/p>\n

2Pe 3:16<\/span>, “As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”<\/p>\n

Rev 1:3<\/span>, “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.”<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/strong><\/span> “not of the letter” – <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> The minister of the letter (which kills) has the ministry of death (verse 7). Note Rom 7:9-11<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Rom 7:9-11<\/span>, “For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.”<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/strong><\/span> “but of the spirit” – <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> The minister of the spirit (which give life) has the ministry of righteousness (verse 9). Note Eph 2:1<\/span>; Eph 2:5<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Eph 2:1<\/span>, “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;”<\/p>\n

Eph 2:5<\/span>, “Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)”<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/strong><\/span> “for the letter killeth”<\/strong> – Comments – <\/em><\/strong> No man can fulfill the Law perfectly, except the Lord Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n

Rom 7:9<\/span>, “For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died .”<\/p>\n

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Paul’s Divine Calling: The Gospel Ministry Excels that of Moses – <\/strong> In 2 Corinthians3:1-18<\/span> we again get a glimpse of what a man looks like who is walking in a mature level of sanctification. It is important to note that this passage gives us a perspective of the role of the Holy Spirit as He calls God’s servants to a ministry of reconciling the world back to God. We immediately see a man who has dedicated his life to Christian service. In 2Co 3:1-6<\/span> Paul explains how he needs no commendations from men to carry out his duties, for he has been divinely qualified by God. Paul illustrates the importance of his calling by referring to the story of Moses as he ministered the Law and statutes to the children of Israel in the wilderness. He explains the glory of his ministry over that of Moses who taught the Law in order to reconcile the Jews unto God. Such a high calling given to Paul far outweighs that given to Moses, whose face shown with God’s glory while delivering the Laws (2Co 3:7-18<\/span>).<\/p>\n

Outline <\/em> Here is a proposed outline:<\/p>\n

1. Explanation 2Co 3:1-6<\/span><\/p>\n

2. Illustration 2Co 3:7-18<\/span><\/p>\n

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Paul’s Spiritual Journey: His Ministry of Reconciling the World to Christ 2Co 1:3<\/span><\/strong> to 2Co 7:16<\/span> forms the first major division of this Epistle. In these seven chapters we have the testimony of Paul’s ministry of reconciling the world unto Christ. It reflects the work of the foreknowledge of God the Father (2Co 1:3-11<\/span>), justification through Jesus the Son (2Co 1:3-11<\/span>), and the sanctification of the Holy Spirit (2Co 1:21<\/span> to 2Co 4:16<\/span>) at work in the life of a mature servant, then God’s role in bringing him to his eternal home in Glory (2Co 4:17<\/span> to 2Co 5:10<\/span>). Paul then calls the Corinthians to be reconciled with God (2Co 5:11<\/span> to 2Co 7:16<\/span>). <\/p>\n

Outline – <\/em> Here is a proposed outline:<\/p>\n

A. Paul’s Testimony of the Father’s Comfort 2Co 1:3-11<\/span><\/p>\n

1. Explanation 2Co 1:3-7<\/span><\/p>\n

2. Illustration 2Co 1:8-11<\/span><\/p>\n

B. Paul’s Testimony of Jesus Christ 2Co 1:12-20<\/span><\/p>\n

1. Explanation 2Co 1:12-14<\/span><\/p>\n

2. Illustration 2Co 1:15-20<\/span><\/p>\n

C. Paul’s Seal of the Holy Spirit (His Anointing) 2Co 1:21<\/span> to 2Co 4:16<\/span><\/p>\n

1. Indoctrination 2Co 1:21<\/span> to 2Co 2:17<\/span><\/p>\n

a. Explanation 2Co 1:21<\/span> to 2Co 2:4<\/span><\/p>\n

b. Illustration 2Co 2:5-17<\/span><\/p>\n

2. Calling 2Co 3:1-18<\/span><\/p>\n

a. Explanation 2Co 3:1-6<\/span><\/p>\n

b. Illustration 2Co 3:7-18<\/span><\/p>\n

3. Perseverance 2Co 4:1-16<\/span><\/p>\n

a. Explanation 2Co 4:1-6<\/span><\/p>\n

b. Illustration 2Co 4:7-16<\/span><\/p>\n

D. Paul’s Hope of Glorification 2Co 4:17<\/span> to 2Co 5:10<\/span><\/p>\n

E. Paul’s Call for Reconciliation 2Co 5:11<\/span> to 2Co 7:16<\/span><\/p>\n

Paul Explains Why He Changed His Travel Plans <\/em><\/strong> <\/strong> In 2Co 1:15<\/span> to 2Co 2:1<\/span> Paul explains to the Corinthians why he had to change his original travel plans. It becomes obvious from comparing Paul’s reference to his travel plans in his two epistles to the Corinthians that he had initial plans of visiting the Corinthians by a certain route that took him directly from Asia to Corinth, into Macedonia and back to Corinth before departing back to Asia. However, these plans were changed at some point in time, because he left Asia and entered Macedonia before spending the winter in Greece.<\/p>\n

In Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians he tells them of his anticipated plans of coming to visit the Corinthians when he goes into Macedonian to strengthen the churches there (1Co 16:5-7<\/span>). <\/p>\n

1Co 16:5-7<\/span>, “Now I will come unto you, when I shall pass through Macedonia: for I do pass through Macedonia. And it may be that I will abide, yea, and winter with you, that ye may bring me on my journey whithersoever I go. For I will not see you now by the way; but I trust to tarry a while with you, if the Lord permit.”<\/p>\n

This very well may be the same travel plans that Paul refers to in 2Co 1:15<\/span> to 2Co 2:1<\/span> that were changes. Since an adversarial group within the church of Corinth had accused Paul of being fickle and unstable with his promises, Paul felt compelled to explain his reasons for a change of plans by giving a Scriptural basis. He explains that he did not come at this time in order to spare them of grief from the punishment that he would have inflicted upon them. He bases the authenticity of his ministry to them on the seal of the Holy Spirit that worked mightily among them through the hands of him and his co-workers.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Paul’s Seal of the Holy Spirit (His Anointing) <\/strong> In 1Co 1:21<\/span> to 1Co 4:16<\/span> Paul explains the role of the Holy Spirit in his spiritual journey of serving the Lord. This passage will open with the statement that he has been sealed with the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of his inheritance (2Co 1:22<\/span>) and his discussion on his glorification will close with the same statement (2Co 5:5<\/span>). Paul will explain how his has been called to indoctrinate them in the faith (2Co 1:21<\/span> to 2Co 2:17<\/span>), and how the calling of the Gospel excels over that of Moses (2Co 3:1-18<\/span>), and how he is determined to persevere (2Co 4:1-16<\/span>) in order to reach his eternal home in Glory. <\/p>\n

Outline – <\/em> Note the proposed outline:<\/p>\n

1. Indoctrination 2Co 1:21<\/span> to 2Co 2:17<\/span><\/p>\n

a. Explanation 2Co 1:21<\/span> to 2Co 2:4<\/span><\/p>\n

b. Illustration 2Co 2:5-17<\/span><\/p>\n

2. Calling 2Co 3:1-18<\/span><\/p>\n

a. Explanation 2Co 3:1-6<\/span><\/p>\n

b. Illustration 2Co 3:7-18<\/span><\/p>\n

3. Perseverance 2Co 4:1-16<\/span><\/p>\n

a. Explanation 2Co 4:1-6<\/span><\/p>\n

b. Illustration 2Co 4:7-16<\/span><\/p>\n

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

The Glory of the New Testament Ministry. <\/strong><\/p>\n

The apostle’s letter of commendation:<\/p>\n

v. 1<\/strong>. Do we begin again to commend ourselves? Or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you or letters of commendation from you?<\/strong><\/p>\n

v. 2<\/strong>. Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men,<\/strong><\/p>\n

v. 3<\/strong>. forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the he art.<\/p>\n

<\/strong> The apostle was often driven to self-defense, and therefore he also made statements concerning his work which his opponents, ever on the lookout for faults and flaws, maliciously explained as self-glorification, See 1Co 9:15<\/span>; 1Co 14:18<\/span>; 1Co 15:10<\/span>. Since, then, Paul had just written that his preaching of the Gospel was done in all sincerity and the opponents might take occasion to repeat their charge, he guards against their insinuation: Do we begin once more to commend ourselves? -of which he had been falsely accused. His question plainly states that there is not a grain of sinful presumption in the declarations which he has made. And he repeats, with emphasis: Or do we stand in need of commending letters to you or from you, like certain other people? This is a fine bit of irony directed against the false apostles and Judaizing teachers it seems that some of these, upon their arrival at Corinth, produced such letters written by prominent members of the older congregations, especially by men with Judaizing tendencies. But Paul scouts and scorns the idea that he “who first brought the Gospel to Corinth should need to present formal credentials to the Corinthian church; and it would lie equally anomalous that he should seek recommendations from them. ” The idea was preposterous, absurd. The witness of his character and office is far superior to any that could be given him by any congregation.<\/p>\n

With winning tact the apostle now turns to the Corinthians with the statement. You are our letter, written in our hearts, known, acknowledged, and read by all men The believers at Corinth were a testimonial, a letter of recommendation, superior to any that the intruders were able to produce. Their whole being in Christ they owed to his work of planting and building, of teaching and educating. What need had Paul of further letters? They were his credentials, written in his heart, he himself being writer, bearer, and receiver of this letter. The weal and woe, the welfare of the congregation at Corinth, that was the apostle’s continued concern; that he bore in his heart with loving prayer. And the letter which he thus bore as a continual testimony was open to the knowledge of the world as such, and it could be read without difficulty: both handwriting and contents could be recognized and appropriated by all beholders that cared to investigate. “Facts speak louder than words.”<\/p>\n

The apostle explains this more fully: Manifested that you are a letter of Christ, prepared by our service: Christ was the Author, Paul acted as His secretary. And the letter itself was not written with ink on long strips or pieces of papyrus after the manner of the time, but by the Spirit of the living God. Through the instrumentality of the Spirit the truth of the Gospel has been imprinted upon their hearts, as the apostle says: Not on stone tablets, but on tablets that are hearts of flesh. Christ the Author, the Holy Ghost the Transmitter of divine power, Paul the secretary and minister: in that way this wonderful letter was composed. The reference used by Paul reminds of an event in the history of Israel, when the Decalogue was written by the finger of God upon stone tablets. But here the Gospel, the gracious news of the atonement through the redemption of Christ, is implanted into the heart as a lasting blessing: Christ dwelling in the heart by faith.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

EXPOSITION<\/strong><\/p>\n

Defence against the charge of self-recommendation, which St. Paul does not need (2Co 3:1-3<\/span>). His sufficiency comes from God (2Co 3:4-6<\/span>), who has made him minister of a covenant far more glorious than that given to Hosea (verses 7-11). This ministry needs no veil upon the face (verses 12, 13), such as to this day darkens the hearts of the Jews (verses 14, 15), though it shall one day be removed (verses 16-18).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-11<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

St. Paul’s ministry is his sufficient letter of commendation. <\/em><\/p>\n

2Co 3:1<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Do we begin again to commend ourselves?<\/strong> The last verse of the last chapter might be seized upon by St. Paul’s opponents to renew their chargethat he was always praising himself. He anticipates the malignant and meaning smiles with which they would hear such words. The word “again” implies that this charge had already been brought against him, perhaps in consequence of such passages as 1Co 2:16<\/span>; 1Co 3:10<\/span>; 1Co 4:11-14<\/span>; 1Co 9:15-23; 1Co 14:18<\/span>, etc. Such passages might be called self-laudatory and egotistical, were it not that (as St. Paul here explains) they arose only from a sense of the grandeur of his office, of which he was the almost involuntary agent, used by God as it seemed best to him. Hence he says later on (2Co 7:1-16 :18) that self-praise is no commendation, and that the true test of a man is God’s commendation. The verb “I commend,” technically used in the same sense as our “commendatory letters,” occurs also in Rom 16:1<\/span>. Or need we,<\/strong> etc.? The reading, , thus translated, is better supported than , unless, which would have a somewhat ironical force. The in the reading implies, “Can you possibly think that we need,” etc.? Generally, when a stranger came to some Church to which he was not personally known, he carried with him some credentials in the form of letters from accredited authorities. St. Paul treats it as absurd to suppose that he or Timothy should need such letters, either from <\/em>the Corinthians or to them. As some<\/strong>. He will not name them, but he refers to the Judaists, who vaunted of their credentials in order to disparage St. Paul, who was too great to need and too independent to use them. We can hardly, perhaps, realize the depth and bitterness of antagonism concealed under that word “some” in 1Co 4:18<\/span> Gal 1:7<\/span>; Gal 2:12<\/span>. It is not meant that there was anything discreditable in using such letters (for Apollos had used them, Act 18:27<\/span>), but the disgraceful thing was that St. Paul should be disparaged for not bringing them. Epistles of commendation.<\/strong> The phrase, <\/em>“introductory letters”was familiar in later Greek. In days when there were few public hostels, and when it was both a duty and a necessity for small and persecuted communities like those of the Jews and Christians to practise hospitality (Rom 12:13<\/span>; Heb 13:2<\/span>. etc.), it was customary both for synagogues and Churches to provide their friends and emissaries with authentic testimonials. Otherwise they might have been deceived by wandering impostors, as, in fact, the Christians were deceived by the vagabond quack Peregrinus. We can easily see how the custom of using such letters might be abused by idle, restless, and intriguing persons, who have never found it very difficult to procure them. We find traces of their honest <\/em>use by Phoebe, by Silas and Jude, by Apollos, by Mark, and by Zenas, in Rom 16:1<\/span>; Act 18:27<\/span>; Act 15:25<\/span>; Col 4:10<\/span>; Tit 3:13<\/span>; and of their unfair use by certain Judaists, in Gal 1:7<\/span> and Gal 2:12<\/span>. Nothing can more forcibly illustrate the necessity for St. Paul’s protest against the idle vaunt of possessing such letters, than the fact that, more than a century afterwards, <\/em>we find malignant innuendoes aimed at St. Paul in the pseudo-Clementines, under the name of” the enemy” and “Simon Magus” and “a deceiver.” He is there spoken of as using letters from the high priest (which, indeed, St. Paul had done as Saul of Tarsus, Act 9:1<\/span>, Act 9:2<\/span>); and the Churches are warned never to receive any one who cannot bring credentials from James; so deep-rooted among the Judaists was the antagonism to the independent apostolate and daring originality of the apostle of the Gentiles! Dr. Plumptre quotes Sozomen (‘H.E.’, Jas 5:16<\/span>) for the curious fact that the Emperor Julian tried to introduce the system of “commendatory letters” into his revived paganism. Or letters of commendation from you.<\/strong> The substitution of “letters” for “epistles” is an instance of the almost childish fondness for unnecessary synonyms, which is one of the defects of the Authorized Version. The true reading probably is “to you or from you” (, A, B, C). The word “commendatory” (sustatikon<\/em>) <\/em>is omitted in A, B, C. Or from you<\/em>. <\/em>It was worse than absurd to suppose that St. Paul should need those literae formatae <\/em>to a Church of which he was the thunder; and nothing but the boundless “inflation” which characterized the Corinthians could have led them to imagine that he needed letters from <\/em>them to other Churches, as though, forsooth, they were the primary Church or the only church (1Co 14:36<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:2<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Ye are our epistle.<\/strong> Their very existence as a Church was the most absolute “commendatory letter” of St. Paul, both from <\/em>them and to <\/em>them. Written in our hearts.<\/strong> The expression has no connection with the fact that the high priest bore the names of Israel graven on the jewelled Urim, which he wore upon his breast. St. Paul means that others may bring their “letters of commendation” in their hands. His <\/em>letter of commendation is the very name and existence of the Church of Corinth written on his heart. Known and read of all men.<\/strong> The metaphor is subordinated to the fact<\/em>. <\/em>All men may recognize the autograph, and in it were read the history of the Corinthian converts, which was written on the apostle’s heart, and which therefore rendered the notion of any other letter of commendation to or from them superfluous and even absurd. The play on words (epigignosko <\/em>and anagignosko<\/em>) <\/em>is similar to that in 2Co 1:13<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:3<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Manifestly declared.<\/strong> The fame and centrality of Corinth gave peculiar prominence to the fact of their conversion. The epistle of Christ ministered by us.<\/strong> The Corinthians are the epistle; it is written on the hearts of St. Paul and his companions; Christ was its Composer; they were its amanuenses and its conveyers. The development of the metaphor as a metaphor <\/em>would be somewhat clumsy and intricate, but St. Paul only cares to shadow forth the essential fact which he wishes them to recognize. Not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; i.e. <\/em>not with visible or perishable materials, but spiritual in its origin and character. The notion of “the finger of God” naturally recalled the notion of “the Spirit of God” (comp. Mat 12:28<\/span> with Luk 11:20<\/span>). Not in tables of stone. God’s writing by means of the Spirit on the heart reminds him of another writing of God <\/em>on the stone tablets of the Law, which he therefore introduces with no special regard to the congruity of the metaphor about “an epistle.” But in fleshy tables of the heart.<\/strong> The overwhelming preponderance of manuscript authority supports the reading “but in fleshen tabletshearts.” St. Paul is thinking of Jer 31:33<\/span>, “I will put my Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts;” and Eze 11:22<\/span>, “I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart of flesh.” The tablets were not hard and fragile, but susceptible and receptive. Our letters of introduction are inward not outward, spiritual not material, permanent not perishable, legible to all not only by a few, written by Christ not by man.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Such trust.<\/strong> The confidence, namely, that we need no other recommendation to or from you. Through Christ.<\/strong> Who alone can inspire such confidence in myself and my mission (1Co 15:10<\/span>). To God-ward; <\/strong>i.e. <\/em>in relation to God; towards whom the whole Being of Christ is directed (Joh 1:1<\/span>), and therefore all the work of his servants (Rom 5:1<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:5<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Not that we are sufficient of ourselves.<\/strong> He here reverts to the question asked in 2Co 2:16<\/span>. He cannot bear the implication that any “confidence” on his part rests on anything short of the overwhelming sense that he is but an agent, or rather nothing but an instrument, <\/em>in the hands of God. To think anything as of ourselves. He has, indeed, the capacity to form adequate judgments about his work, but it does not come from his own resources ( ) <\/em>or his own independent origination ( ); comp. 1Co 15:10<\/span>. But our sufficiency.<\/strong> Namely, to form any true or right judgment, and therefore to express the confidence which I have <\/em>expressed. Is of God.<\/strong> We are but fellow <\/em>workers with him (1Co 3:19<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Who also. <\/strong>Either, “And he it is who;” or, “Who besides this <\/em>power, has made us adequate ministers.” Hath made us able ministers;<\/strong> rather, made us sufficient ministers<\/em>. <\/em>Of the new testament; <\/strong>rather, of a fresh covenant <\/em>(Jer 31:31<\/span>). The “new testament” has not the remotest connection with what we call “The New Testament,” meaning thereby the bookwhich, indeed, had at this time no existence. The word “testament” means a will, and in this sense implies neither the Hebrew berith <\/em>nor the Greek diatheke, <\/em>both of which mean “covenant.” In one passage only of the New Testament (Heb 9:16<\/span>, Heb 9:17<\/span>) does diatheke <\/em>mean a “testament” or “will.” For the thought, see Eph 3:7<\/span>; Col 1:25<\/span>; 1Ti 1:11<\/span>, 1Ti 1:12<\/span>. Not of the letter, but of the spirit.<\/strong> In other words, “not of the Law, but of the gospel;” not of that which is dead, but of that which is living; not of that which is deathful, but of that which is life-giving; not of bondage, but of freedom; not of mutilation, but of self-control; not of the outward, but of the inward; not of works, but of grace; not of menace, but of promise; not of curse, but of blessing; not of wrath, but of love; not of Moses, but of Christ. This is the theme which St. Paul develops especially in the Epistles to the Romans and the Galatians (see Rom 2:29<\/span>; Rom 3:20<\/span>; Rom 7:6<\/span>, Rom 7:10<\/span>, Rom 7:11<\/span>; Rom 8:2<\/span>; Gal 3:10<\/span>; Gal 5:4<\/span>, etc.). Not of the letter<\/em>. <\/em>Not, that is, of the Mosaic Law regarded as a yoke of externalism; a hard and unhelpful “thou shalt” and “thou shalt not;” a system that possessed no life of its own and inspired no life into others; a “categoric imperative,” majestic, indeed, but unsympathetic and pitiless. Both the Law and the gospel were committed to writing; <\/em>each covenant had its own book; <\/em>but in the case of the Mosaic Law there was the book and nothing more; in the case of the gospel the book was nothing compared to the spirit, and nothing without the spirit. Out of the spirit<\/em>. <\/em>That is, of the gospel which found its pledge and consummation in the gift of the Spirit. The Law, too, was in one sense “spiritual” (Rom 7:14<\/span>), for it was given by God, who is a Spirit, and it was a holy Law; but though such in itself (in se<\/em>) <\/em>it was relatively (per aceidens<\/em>) <\/em>a cause of sin and death, because it was addressed to a fallen nature, and inspired no spirit by which that nature could be delivered (see Rom 7:7-25<\/span>). But in the gospel the spirit is everything; the mere letter is as nothing (Joh 6:63<\/span>). For the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.<\/strong> This is one of the very numerous “texts” which have been first misinterpreted and have then been made, for whole centuries, the bases of erroneous systems. On this text more than any other, Origen, followed by the exegetes of a thousand years, built his dogma that the Scripture must be interpreted allegorically, not literally, because “the letter” of the Bible kills. The misinterpretation is extravagantly inexcusable, and, like many others, arose solely from rending words away from their context and so reading new senses into them. The contrast is not between “the outward” and the inward sense of Scripture at all. “The letter” refers exclusively to “the Law,” and therefore has so little reference to “the Bible” that it was written before most of the New Testament existed, and only touches on a small portion of the Old Testament. Killeth<\/em>. <\/em>Two questions arise.<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> What <\/em>and whom <\/em>does it kill? <\/em>And <\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> how <\/em>does it kill?<\/em><\/p>\n

The answers seem to be that<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> the letterthe Law regarded as an outward letterpasses the sentence of death on those who disobey it<\/em>. <\/em>It says, “He who doeth these things shall live in them;” and therefore implies, as well as often says, that he who disobeys them shall be cut off. It is, therefore, a deathful menace. For none can <\/em>obey this Law with perfect obedience. And<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> the sting of death being sin, the Law kills by directly leading to sin, in that it stirs into existence the principle of concupiscence (Rom 7:7-11<\/span>; 1Co 15:56<\/span>; Gal 3:10<\/span>, Gal 3:21<\/span>). But the spirit giveth life<\/em>. <\/em>This contrast between a dead and a living covenant is fundamental, and especially in the writings of St. Paul (Rom 2:27-29<\/span>; Rom 7:6<\/span>; Rom 8:11<\/span>; Gal 5:8<\/span>; 1Co 15:45<\/span>). The Law stones the adulteress; the gospel says to her, “Go, and sin no more.”<\/p>\n

2Co 3:7<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The ministration of death. <\/strong>The ministration, that is, of the Law, of “the letter which killeth.” St. Paul here begins one of the arguments a minori ad majus <\/em>which are the very basis of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Written and engraven in stones;<\/strong> literally, engraved in letters on stones <\/em>(Exo 31:18<\/span>). The reference shows that, in speaking of “the letter,” St. Paul was only thinking of the Mosaic Law, and indeed specifically of the Decalogue. Was glorious;<\/strong> literally, occurred in glory, <\/em>or, proved itself glorious<\/em>. <\/em>In itself the Law was “holy, just, and good” (Rom 7:12<\/span>), and given “at the disposition of angels” (Act 7:53<\/span>); and its transitory glory was illustrated by the lustre which the face of Moses caught by reflection from his intercourse with God (Exo 24:16<\/span>). Could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses <\/strong>(Exo 34:29<\/span>, Exo 34:30<\/span>). St. Paul has been led quite incidentally into this digression in the course of defending himself by describing the nature of his ministry; but it bore very definitely on his general purpose, because his chief opponents were Judaists, whose one aim it was to bind upon the Church the yoke of Mosaism. That they could not “behold” the face of Moses is the hagadah, <\/em>or traditional legend, derived from Exo 34:30<\/span>, which says that “they were afraid to draw nigh <\/em>to him. The reader may recall the beautiful lines of Cardinal Newman-<\/p>\n

“Lord I grant me this abiding grace
Thy words and saints to know;
To pierce the veil on Moses’ face,
Although his words be slow.”<\/p>\n

Because of the glory of his countenance.<\/strong> This circumstance is so often alluded to as to have become identified with the conception of Moses. The Hebrew words for “a ray of light” and “a horn” are identical; hence, instead of saying that his face was “irradiated,” the Vulgate says, Cornnta erat ejus facies; <\/em>and even in our version of Hab 3:4<\/span> we find “And he had horns <\/em>[i<\/em>.e<\/em>. <\/em>‘rays of light’] coming out of his hand.” To this is due the mediaeval symbol of Moses with horns, as in the matchless statue by Michael Angelo. Which glory was to be done away. <\/strong>The Greek might be expressed by “the glorythe evanescing gloryof his countenance.” It was not “to be <\/em>done away,” but from the first moment they saw it it began to vanish. The verb “to do away,” implying annulment, and the being abrogated as invalid, is a characteristic word in this group cf Epistles, in which it occurs twenty-two times. This illustrates the prominence in St. Paul’s thoughts of the fact that the Law was now “antiquated” and “near its obliteration” (comp. Heb 8:13<\/span>). But in dwelling on the brief and transient character of this radiance, St. Paul seizes on a point which (naturally) is not dwelt upon in Exo 34:1-35<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:8<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The ministration of the spirit.<\/strong> That is, “the apostolate and service of the gospel.” Be rather glorious.<\/strong> A contrast may be intended between the ministration of the letter, which “became glorious,” which had, as it were, a glory lent to it ( ), and that of the spirit, which is, of its own nature, in glory.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:9<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The ministration of condemnation. <\/strong>The same antithesis between the Law as involving “condemnation” and the gospel as bestowing “righteousness” is found in Rom 5:18<\/span>, Rom 5:19<\/span>. The glory; perhaps, rather, a glory; <\/em>a stronger way of describing it as “glorious.” Of righteousness.<\/strong> Involving the further conception of “justification,” as in Rom 5:21<\/span>; Rom 1:16<\/span>, Rom 1:17<\/span>; Rom 4:25<\/span>; Rom 5:21<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:10<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

For<\/strong>. He proceeds to show that the latter ministration was far more superabundant in glory. That which was made glorious, <\/strong>etc. Many various interpretations have been offered of this text. The meaning almost undoubtedly is, “For even that which has been glorified [namely, the Mosaic ministry, as typified by the splendour of his face] has not been glorified in this respect [i.e. in the respect of its relation to another <\/em>ministry], because of the surpassing glory [of the latter].” In other words, the glory of Mosaism is so completely outdazzled by the splendour of the gospel, that, relatively speaking, it has no glory left; the moon and the stars cease to shine, they “pale their ineffectual fires” when the sun is in the zenith. The phrase, “in this respect,” occurs again in 2Co 9:3<\/span> and 1Pe 4:16<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:11<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

For<\/strong>. An explanation of the “surpassing” glory of the later covenant founded on its eternity. That which is done away;<\/strong> rather, that which is evanescing; <\/em>“which is being done away,” as in 2Co 3:7<\/span>. Was glorious is glorious.<\/strong> The expression is varied in the Greek. The brief, the evanescent covenant was “through glory,” i.e. <\/em>it was a transitory gleam; the abiding covenant is “in glory;” i.e. <\/em>it is an eternal splendour. It is, however, a disputed point whether St. Paul intended such rigid meanings to be attached to his varying prepositions (Rom 3:30<\/span>, : Rom 5:10<\/span>, : Gal 2:16<\/span>, : Phm 1:5<\/span>, <\/em> <\/em> ). That which remaineth. The final, eternal, unshakable gospel (Heb 12:27<\/span>). Is glorious; <\/strong>literally, is in glory<\/em>. <\/em>Christ is eternally the Light of the world (Joh 1:9<\/span>; Joh 9:5<\/span>); and Moses and Elias derived all their permanence of glory by reflection from this transfiguring light.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:12-18<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The confidence inspired by this ministry and the veil on the hearts of those who will not recognize it.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:12<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Such hope. <\/strong>A hope based upon the abiding glory of this gospel covenant. Plainness of speech.<\/strong> The frankness and unreserved fearlessness of our language is justified by the glory of our ministry. It was impossible for Moses to speak with the same bold plainness.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:13<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

And not as Moses.<\/strong> We need not act, as Moses was obliged to do, by putting any veil upon our faces while we speak. And here the image of “the veil” as completely seizes St. Paul’s imagination as the image of the letter does in the first verses. Put a veil;<\/strong> literally, was putting, <\/em>or, used to put, <\/em>a veil on his face when he had finished speaking to the people. That the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished; <\/strong>rather, that the children of Israel might not gaze on the end of what was passing away<\/em>. <\/em>The object of the veil, according to St. Paul, was to prevent the Israelites from gazing on the last gleam of the covenant<\/em>. <\/em>In other words, he did not wish them to be witnesses of a fading <\/em>glory. It is preposterous to imagine that St. Paul is here casting any blame on the conduct of Moses, as though he acted fraudulently or delusively. Moses was aware, and even told the people, float his legislation was not final (Deu 18:15 -19<\/span>), but it would be quite natural that he should not wish the people to witness the gradual dimming of the lustre which, in St. Paul’s view, was typical of that transitoriness. It seems, however, that St. Paul is here either<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> following a different reading or rendering of Exo 34:33<\/span>; or<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> is adopting some Jewish hagadah; <\/em>or<\/p>\n

(3)<\/strong> is giving his own turn to the narrative, as the rabbis habitually did, by way of midrash, <\/em>or exposition. For from the narrative of Exodus we should not gather that it was the object of Moses to hide the disappearance of the splendour, but rather to render the light endurable. In our Authorized Version the verse runs, “till Moses had done speaking with them he put a veil on his face;” but the meaning of the original may be, “after he had done speaking with them,” as the LXX<\/strong>. takes it and the Vulgate. The end<\/em>. <\/em>To interpret this of Christ, <\/em>because of Rom 10:4<\/span>, is an instance of the superstitious and unintelligent way in which systems are made out of a mosaic of broken texts. The foolish character of the interpretation is shown when we consider that it involves the inference that Moses put a veil on his face in order to prevent the Israelites from seeing Christi But this attempt to illustrate Scripture by catching at a similar, expression applied in a wholly different way in another part of Scripture, is one of the normal follies of scriptural interpretation.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:14<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Their minds<\/strong>. This word is rendered” devices” in 2Co 2:11<\/span>; “minds” in 2Co 3:14<\/span> and 2Co 4:4<\/span>; and “thought” in 2Co 10:5<\/span>. It means that their powers of reason were, so to speak, petrified. Were blinded; <\/strong>rather, were hardened<\/em>. <\/em>The verb cannot mean” to blind.” By whom were their minds hardened? It would be equally correct to say by themselves (Heb 3:8<\/span>), or by Satan (2Co 4:4<\/span>), or by God (Rom 11:7<\/span>, Rom 11:8<\/span>). The same veil.<\/strong> Of course the meaning is “a veil of which the veil of Moses is an exact type.” The veil which prevented them from seeing the evanescence of the light which shone on the face of Moses was symbolically identical with that which prevented them also from seeing the transitory character of his Law. It had been as it were taken from his face and laid on their hearts (see Act 13:27-29<\/span>; Rom 11:1-36<\/span>.). Many commentators have seen in this verse a reference to the Jewish custom of covering the head with the tallith, <\/em>a four-cornered veil, when they were in the synagogues. But this is doubtful, since the tallith <\/em>did not cover the eyes. More probably his metaphor may have been suggested by Isa 25:7<\/span>, “And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast ever all people, and the veil <\/em>that is spread over all nations.” Untaken away.<\/strong> There are two other ways of rendering this verse:<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> “For until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remaineth unlifted; which veil is done away in Christ,” as in the Revised Version; or<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> “The same veil remaineth, it not being revealed that it is done away in Christ,” as it is taken by Chrysostom and many others, and in the margin of the Revised Version. The latter seems to be the better view. It is not the veil, but the old covenant, which is being done away in Christ. To the Jews that truth still remained under a veil. The present tense, “is in course <\/em>of <\/em>annulment,” might naturally be used until the utter abrogation of even the possible fulfilment of the Mosaic Law at the fall of Jerusalem. In the reading of the old testament; <\/strong>rather, the old covenant<\/em>. <\/em>There is no allusion to the Old Testament as a book, <\/em>but the phrase is equivalent to “Moses is read” in the next verse. (On this obduracy of the Jews, see Rom 11:7<\/span>, Rom 11:8<\/span>, Rom 11:25<\/span>.)<\/p>\n

2Co 3:15<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

When Moses is read <\/strong>(Act 15:21<\/span>). The veil;<\/strong> rather, a veil; <\/em>a veil of moral obstinacy, which prevents them from seeing the disappearance of the old covenant, as effectually as the veil on the face of Moses prevented them from seeing (as St. Paul viewed the matter) the disappearance of the transitory lustre on the face of Moses.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:16<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

When it shall turn to the Lord. <\/strong>The nominative of the verb is not expressed. Obviously the most natural word to supply is the one last alluded to, namely, “the heart of Israel.” The verb may have been suggested by Exo 34:31<\/span>. Shall be taken away;<\/strong> literally, is in course of removal<\/em>. <\/em>The tenses imply that “the moment the heart of Israel shall have turned to the Lord, the removal of the veil begins.” Then “they shall look on him whom they pierced” (Zec 12:10<\/span>); “He will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast over all people, and the veil that is spread over all nations” (Isa 25:7<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:17<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Now the Lord is that Spirit. <\/strong>The “but” (Authorized Version, “now”) introduces an explanation. To whom shall they turn? To the Lord. “But the Lord is the Spirit.” The word “spirit” could not be introduced thus abruptly and vaguely; it must refer to something already said, and therefore to the last mention of the word “spirit” in 2Co 3:3<\/span>. The Lord is the Spirit, who giveth life and freedom, in antithesis to the spirit of death and legal bondage. The best comment on the verse is Rom 8:2<\/span>, “For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus <\/em>hath made me free from the law of sin and death.” All life and all religion had become to St. Paul a vision of all things in Christ. He has just said that the spirit giveth life, and, after the digression about the moral blindness which prevented the Jews from being emancipated from the bondage of the letter, it was quite natural for him to add, “Now the Lord is <\/em>the Spirit to which I alluded.” The connection in which the verse stands excludes a host of untenable meanings which have been attached to it. There is liberty.<\/strong> The liberty of confidence (Rom 8:4<\/span>), and of frank speech (Rom 8:12<\/span>), and of sonship (Gal 4:6<\/span>, Gal 4:7<\/span>), and of freedom from guilt (Joh 8:36<\/span>); so that the Law itself, obeyed no longer in the mere letter but also in the spirit, becomes a royal law of liberty, and not a yoke which gendereth to bondage (Jas 1:25<\/span>; Jas 2:12<\/span>)a service, indeed, but one which is perfect freedom (Rom 5:1-21<\/span>; 1Pe 2:16<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:18<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

But we all.<\/strong> An appeal to personal experience in evidence of the freedom. With open face; <\/strong>rather, with unveiled face; <\/em>as Moses himself spoke with God, whereas the Jews could not see even the reflected <\/em>splendour on the face of Moses till he had shrouded it with a veil. Beholding as in a glass.<\/strong> This is at least <\/em>as likely to be the true meaning as “reflecting as a mirror,” which the Revised Version (following Chrysostom and others) has substituted for it. No other instance occurs in which the verb in the middle voice has the meaning of “reflecting,” and the words, “With unveiled face,” imply the image of “beholding.” They are, in fact, a description of “the beatific vision.” An additional reason for retaining the translation of our Authorized Version is that the verb is used in this <\/em>sense by Philo (‘Leg. Alleg.,’ 3:33). The glory of the Lord.<\/strong> Namely, him who is “the Effulgence of God’s glory” (Heb 1:2<\/span>), the true Shechinah, “the Image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15<\/span>). Are changed into the same image. <\/strong>The present tense implies a gradual <\/em>transfiguration, a mystical and spiritual change which is produced in us while we contemplate Christ. From glory to glory.<\/strong> Our spiritual assimilation to Christ comes from <\/em>his glory and issues in a glory like his (1Co 15:51<\/span>; comp.” from strength to strength,” Psa 84:7<\/span>). As by the Spirit of the Lord. This rendering (which is that of the Vulgate also) can hardly be correct. The natural meaning of the Greek is “as by the <\/em>[or, from<\/em>] the Lord the Spirit<\/em>.” Our <\/em>change into glory comes from the Lord, who, as St. Paul has already explained, is the Spirit of which he has been speaking. No such abstract theological thought is here in his mind as that of the “hypostatic<\/em> union,” of the Son and the Holy Spirit. He is still referring to the contrast between the letter and the spirit, and his identification of this “spirit” in its highest sense with the quickening life which, by the gift of the Holy Spirit, we receive from Christ, and which is indeed identical with “the Spirit of Christ.”<\/p>\n

HOMILETICS<\/strong><\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-5<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Soul-literature.<\/strong><\/p>\n

“Do we begin again to commend ourselves?” etc. In the early Church it was customary for the member who was travelling into another locality to take with him a letter of commendation from the Church to which he or she belonged. The apostle says he did not require such a document from the Corinthian Church, as some others did, for they themselves were letters written on his own heart; and his ministry was a letter written on their hearts also. They were the living “epistles of Christ,… written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.” Our subject is soul-literature, or Christianity written on the heart; and I offer five remarks.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> Christianity written on the soul is CHRISTIANITY<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MOST<\/strong> LEGIBLE<\/strong> FORM<\/strong>. There are some whose caligraphy is difficult to decipher and whose thoughts are difficult to understand; their ideas are misty and their style involved; but what is written on the soul <\/em>is written so clearly that a child can make it out.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> Christianity written on the soul is CHRISTIANITY<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MOST<\/strong> CONVINCING<\/strong> FORM<\/strong>. Books have been written on the evidences of Christianity; not a few by the ablest men of their times, such as Paley, Lardner, Butler. But one life permeated and fashioned by the Christian spirit is a far more convincing power than any or all of their most magnificent productions. He who has been transformed by Christianity from the selfish, the sensual, and corrupt, into the spiritual, the benevolent, and the holy, furnishes an argument that baffles all controversy and penetrates the heart.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> Christianity written on the soul is CHRISTIANITY<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MOST<\/strong> PERSUASIVE<\/strong> FORM<\/strong>. There are many books “persuasive to piety,” and many of them very powerful; but the most powerful of them are weak indeed compared to the mighty force of a Christly life. There is a magnetism in gospel truth embodied, which you seek for in vain in any written work. When the “Word is made flesh” it becomes “mighty through God.”<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> Christianity written on the soul is CHRISTIANITY<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MOST<\/strong> ENDURING<\/strong> FORM<\/strong>. The tablet is imperishable. You may put truth on paper, but the paper will moulder; put it into institutions, but the institutions will dissolve as a cloud; put it on marble or brass, but these are corruptible.<\/p>\n

V.<\/strong> Christianity written on the soul is CHRISTIANITY<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> DIVINEST<\/strong> FORM<\/strong>. The human hand can inscribe it on parchment or engrave it on stone, but God only can write it on the heart. “The Spirit of the living God.” Paul was but the amanuensis, God is the Author.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The ministry of the letter and the ministry of the spirit.<\/strong><\/p>\n

“The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.” Notice<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> The twofold MINISTRY<\/strong>. “Ministers… not of the letter, but of the spirit.” What does this mean? Not the two dispensations, the Mosaic and the Christian; for both alike had “letter” and “spirit.” Nor does it mean a double interpretation of the Scripture, the literal and the spiritual It means, I think, the word and the thought, the sentence and the sentiment. Christianity has both “letter” and “spirit.” If it had no “letter,” it would be unrevealed, a thought shut up in the mind of God; if it had no “spirit,” it would be but a hollow sound. The words point to two distinct methods of teaching Christianity.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The technical method<\/em>. <\/em>Who are the technical teachers?<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> The verbalist<\/em>. <\/em>There were men in the Corinthian Church who thought much of words. “The words of man’s wisdom,” high-sounding sentences, oratoric periods, they scrupulously studied. The spirit of thought is so subtle that it goes off in the attempt to give it grand verbal costume.<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> The theorist<\/em>. <\/em>Those who throw into a logical system the ideas they have derived from the gospel; he who exalts his system of thought or creed and makes it a standard of truth is a minister of the “letter.” The grandest system of theology can no more contain the whole truth than a nutshell can the Atlantic.<\/p>\n

(3)<\/strong> The ritualist<\/em>. <\/em>Men must have ritualism of some kind. What is logic but the ritualism of thought? art but the ritualism of beauty? rhetoric but the ritualism of ideas? civilization but the ritualism of the thoughts of ages? But those who represent those symbols as supernatural powers and mystic media of saving grace are ministers of the “letter” rather than of the “spirit.”<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. The spiritual<\/em>. <\/em>What is it to be a minister of the “spirit”? He is a man more alive to the grace than the grammar, to the substance than the symbols of revelation. He is a man who has a comprehensive knowledge of those eternal principles that underlie all Scriptures, and has a living sympathy with those eternal elements.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> The twofold RESULTS<\/strong>. “The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.”<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The result of the technical <\/em>ministry. It “killeth.”<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> The verbalist kills<\/em>. <\/em>It was said by Burke “that no man understands less of the majesty of the English constitution than the nisi prius <\/em>lawyer, who is always dealing with the technicalities of precedence.” And truly no man understands less of the gospel than he who is constantly dealing with its verbalities. Words in religion, when taken for realities, “kill,” kill inquiry, freedom, sensibility, moral manhood.<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> The theorist kills<\/em>. <\/em>He who preaches his own little creed instead of the gospel of God kills souls. The Jews formulated a theory concerning the Messiah from their Scriptures. In their theory he was to appear in such a form, do such a work, reach such a destiny. He came, but did not answer to their theory, and they rejected him and were damned. Man’s theory of the gospel is not the gospel, any more than pneumatical science is the life-breathing atmosphere.<\/p>\n

(3)<\/strong> The ritualist kills<\/em>. <\/em>He who exalts even the authorized ritualism of the gospel, such as baptism and the Lord’s Supper, to say nothing of the unauthorized rites, kills souls. The ceremonial Church has ever been a dead Church. The ministry of the “letter” then “killeth;” it reduced the Jewish people to the valley of dead bones, entombed the souls of Europe for many a long century.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. The result <\/em>of the spiritual ministry. “The spirit giveth life.” “It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing; the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” “The spirit giveth life”life to the intellect, conscience, sympathies, the whole soul.<\/p>\n

CONCLUSION<\/strong>. How little of this soul-life we have in congregations! Creed-life, sect-life, Church-life, we have in abundance; hut where is soul-life, the life of holy love, earnest inquiry, independent action, spiritual freedom in relation to all that is Christlike and Divine?<\/p>\n

2Co 3:7-11<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Divine revelation more glorious in Christ than in Moses.<\/strong><\/p>\n

“But if the ministration,” etc. At the outset three facts are noteworthy.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The infinite Father has made a special revelation of himself to his human offspring.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. This special revelation of himself has mainly come through two great general sourcesMoses and Christ.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. The special revelation of himself, as it came through Christ, far transcends in glory the form it assumed as it came through Moses. The essence of the revelation is the same, but the forms differ, and the form it assumes in Christianity are the most glorious. There are two facts here.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> That the special revelation as it came through MOSES<\/strong> WAS<\/strong> GLORIOUS<\/strong>. It was so glorious that “the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses.” Four things impress us with its glory as revealed in Moses.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The wonderful display of divinity attending its manifestation on Mount Sinai<\/em>. <\/em>The expression, “the face of Moses,” refers to this (Exo 34:1<\/span>). What wonderful things Moses saw and heard during the forty days he was on the mount! “The Lord rose up and came from Seir with ten thousand of his saints,” etc.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. the<\/em> magnificence of its religious scenes and celebrations<\/em>. <\/em>The temple, hew splendid! the priesthood, how imposing! the psalmody, how inspiring! “Glorious things are spoken of thee, O thou city of God.”<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. The stupendous miracles that stand in connection with it<\/em>. <\/em>The wilderness was the theatre of magnificent manifestationsthe pillar, the manna, the flowing rock, the riven sea, etc.<\/p>\n

4<\/strong>. The splendid intellects which were employed in connection with it<\/em>. <\/em>Solomon, Elijah, Daniel, David, Ezekiel. For these reasons Divine revelation as it came through Moses was truly glorious.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> That although this special revelation was glorious as it came in connection with Moses, it was MORE<\/strong> GLORIOUS<\/strong> as it came in connection with CHRIST<\/strong>. “How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?” etc. Confining our illustrations on this point to the passage before us, we observe:<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The Christian form of revelation is more likely to give life than the Mosaic<\/em>. <\/em>In Moses it was the “ministration <\/em>of death.” The Jews exalted the “letter” that “killeth” above the “spirit that giveth life,” and they got buried in forms. In Christ the revelation is the gospel in life.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. The Christian form of Divine revelation is more emphatically spiritual than the Mosaic<\/em>. <\/em>It is here called the “ministration of the spirit.” In Moses it was associated with numerous forms and ceremonies; in Christ there are only two simple rites, and the spirit throbs in every sentence.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. The Christian form of Divine revelation is more restorative than the Mosaic<\/em>. <\/em>The apostle speaks of the one as the “ministration of condemnation,” of the other as the “ministration of righteousness.” Maledictions thunder in the former, beatitudes in the latter.<\/p>\n

4<\/strong>. The Christian form of Divine revelation is more enduring than the Mosaic<\/em>. <\/em>“For if that which is done away [which passeth away] was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.” Judaism is gone; Christianity is the “Word of God, which abideth foreverse” It is the final revelation of Heaven to our world.<\/p>\n

Such, then, is a brief illustration of the apostle’s position; and the subject, in conclusion, serves several important purposes.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. It serves to expose the absurdity of making Moses the interpreter of Christ<\/em>. <\/em>It has been common with professing Christians to look at the New Testament through the spectacles of Moses, and thus to Judaize Christianity. Much in popery, much, alas! in old puritanism, much even in modern theology, is but Christianity Judaized, a going back to the “beggarly elements.”<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. It serves to show the wrongness of going to Moses to support opinions which you cannot get from Christ<\/em>. <\/em>You can support war, slavery, capital punishment, by going to Moses; but you cannot find the shadow of a foundation for these in Christ.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. It serves to reveal the glorious position of a true gospel minister<\/em>. <\/em>To show this was the object of the apostle in the text. The position of Moses, David, Isaiah, and all the great teachers under the old administration was glorious, but it is scarcely to be compared with the position of him who preaches that Christ of “whom Moses and the prophets did write.”<\/p>\n

2Co 3:12-18<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The gospel as a transcendent benefactor.<\/strong><\/p>\n

“Seeing then that we have such hope,” etc. Amongst the invaluable services which the gospel confers on man, there are four suggested by the text. It gives him moral courage, spiritual vision, true liberty, and Christ-like glory. It gives him<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> MORAL<\/strong> COURAGE<\/strong>. “Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness [boldness] of speech: and not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished,” etc. This means that, seeing the revelation we have of God in Christ is not so terrible as his revelation in Moses, we have “great boldness.” We need have no superstitious fear or dread. Unlike the Jews, who were afraid to look at the Divine radiance on the face of Moses, who trembled at the manifestation of God on Sinai, and who lacked the courage to look at the fact that their system was a temporary one, passing away; we have courage to look calmly at the manifestations of God and the facts of destiny. We use “great boldness.” He who has the spirit of Christianity in him has courage enough to look all questions in the face, and to speak out his convictions with the dauntless force of true manhood.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> SPIRITUAL<\/strong> VISION<\/strong>. “But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament; which veil is done away in Christ.” The “veil” of Moses was on his face, some material used for the moment and then withdrawn, but the “veil” referred to here was that “veil” of prejudice and traditional notions which prevented them from seeing when Paul wrote that the old dispensation has passed away before the brightness of the new. The souls of unrenewed men are so veiled by depravity that they fail to see anything in the great universe of spiritual realities. The spiritual is no more to them than nature is to men born blind. Now, the gospel is the only power under God that can take the “veil” from the soul, and enable us to see things as they are. Its grand mission is to open the eyes of the blind, etc.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> TRUE<\/strong> LIBERTY<\/strong>. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” By the “Spirit of the Lord” here is meant the Spirit of Christ, his moral temper; and wherever this is, there is freedom.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. Freedom from the bondage of ceremonial sin. <\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. Freedom from the trammels of legality. <\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. Freedom from the dominion of sin. <\/p>\n

4<\/strong>. Freedom from the fear of death.<\/p>\n

The Spirit of Christ is at once the guarantee and the inspiration of that liberty which no despot can take away, no time destroythe “glorious liberty of the children of God.”<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> CHRIST<\/strong>–LIKE<\/strong> GLORY<\/strong>. “But we all, with open face, beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord,” etc.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The glory of Christ was the glory of moral excellence. He was the “brightness of his Father’s glory.”<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. The glory of Christ is communicable. It comes to man through transformation “changed into the same image.”<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. The glory of Christ which comes to man is progressive: “from glory to glory.” The gopel alone can make men glorious.<\/p>\n

HOMILIES BY C. LIPSCOMB<\/strong><\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-6<\/span><\/strong>. – No letters of commendation needed; his converts were epistles.<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the close of the last chapter St. Paul had spoken of men who corrupted the Word of God (retailed it as a commodity for their own profit), and he had put himself and his ministry in contrast to them. Likely enough, this would provoke criticism. The quick interrogation comes – Was he commending himself, or did he need letters of commendation to them and from them? “Ye are our epistle written on his heart, known and read of all menan epistle coming from Christ, and produced instrumentally by him as Christ’s agent; not written with ink, but by the Spirit; “not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.” With regard to the figure, it is probable that there was not another occasion in his life when it would have occurred to his imagination. Circumstances conspired with his state of mind. to produce it, and one can almost trace the sequence of associations out of which it came. What solicitude the former Epistle had given him! What would be the effect? Amid his thanksgiving to God (2Co 11:14<\/span>) it was a matter of joy that he had written this letter, and he could now see God’s hand very clearly in its production. Was not that Epistle a new and additional proof that he was Christ’s apostle? Yet what was that Epistle, written with ink, to this “epistle <\/em>of Christ,” recorded on the soul, a part of itself, a part of its immortality? It was manifestly declared” that they were Christ’s epistle, and it was equally clear that this epistle was due to his ministration. “Ministered by us.” Had. they not given a new and striking evidence of the two facts, viz. Christ the Author of the epistle written on their hearts, and he the apostle, the ministerial agent of the work? It was a fresh motive to confidence: “Such trust have we through Christ to God-ward.” Are we boasting of the late success of our Epistleof our former successes? Nay; how can we be “sufficient of ourselves,” or rely on our own wisdom and strength, when we have just confessed that we wrote to you “out of much affliction and anguish of heart, with many tears,” and while the period of suspense lasted we were unfitted for our work, and at last, to rest in our spirit, we left Troas for Macedonia so as to see Titus the sooner? Nay; “our sufficiency is of God.” It is he who also “hath made us able ministers of the New Testament.” And wherein differs this new covenant from the old? Already he had spoken of “tables of stone” as contrasted with “fleshy tables of the heart,” and the antithesis is resumed and further elaborated. The covenant is new, <\/em>it is of the spirit, <\/em>it is of the spirit that giveth life<\/em>. <\/em>Opposite in these particulars was the old covenant, the Mosaic Law, its ministers being cheifly engaged in executing a system of rules and ceremonials, adhering in all things to the exact language, and concerning themselves in no wise beyond the outward form. The external man with his interests and fortunes occupied attention. A nation was to exemplify the system, and therefore, by necessity, it largely addressed the senses, borrowing its motives and enforcing its penalties from a consideration of objects near and palpable. If we read Rom 7:1-25<\/span>. we see what St. Paul meant by “the letter killeth.” On the other hand, the dispensation of the spirit “giveth life.” The antithesis is stated in the strongest possible formdeath and life. This, accordingly, was the apostle’s “sufficiency,” a spiritual wisdom for enlightenment, a spiritual power for carrying out his apostolic plans, and an attained spiritual result seen in the recovery of Gentiles from the degradation of idolatry, and in the freedom of Jews from the bondage of the Mosaic Law.L.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:7-11<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Ministry of the Old Testament compared with that of the New, and the superiority of the latter shown.<\/strong><\/p>\n

He speaks now of the “ministration of death,” not of it as the ministry of the letter; and yet it was “glorious.” Compared with the revelation made to Enoch, Abraham, Jacob, it was “glorious.” Whether witnessing to the unity of God or to his providence over an elect race, it was an illumination, or splendour, unequalled in the centuries before Christ. Tribes were organized as a nation, bondmen transformed into free men; and, despite their proclivity to heathenish idolatry, they came finally to hold and defend the doctrine of one God, their Jehovah, their Lord of hosts, their Benefactor and Friend, as the doctrine underlying all their hopes and aspirations. The sanctity of human life which the great lawgiver made the foundation of his system, the rights of persons and property, the obligations of brotherhood among themselves, duties to the poor and the stranger, duties to their nation, reverence for the sabbath and its worship, obedience to God in the minutest things, were taught them with a precision and a force that largely succeeded in producing the only phenomenon of its kind in historya nation educated in the sense of God, of his presence in their midst, and of his providence as an unceasing and omnipotent agency in their homes and business. What a “glory” there was in their literature we all know. No psalmody is given in the New Testament; none was wanted; inspired poetry reached its full measure of excellence in King David and his poetic successors; and the Christian heart, whether in prayer or praise, finds much of its deepest and most devout utterance in these ancient Judaean hymns. Reproduction is the test of enduring greatness. In this respect the genius and piety of David stand unrivalled. Whenever men worship God, he is the “chief singer” yet; nor have we any better standard by which to try the merit of our religious poetry and music than the similarity of their effect upon us to that produced by the Psalms of David. Last of all in the order of time, first in its importance, what a “glory” in him born of the Virgin Mary! On this system St. Paul made no war. What he antagonized was the misunderstanding and abuse of the system in the hands of Pharisees and Sadducees, and, especially in the shape it assumed among the Judaizers at Corinth and in Galatia. He calls the old covenant “glorious,” a word he never uses but in his exalted moods of thought, True, it was “written and engraven in stones,” but by whose hand? Even “the face of Moses’ was more than the Israelites could bear, “for the glory of his countenance.” The splendour irradiating Moses was transient”which glory was to be done away;” but it did what it was intended to do by demonstrating where he had been and on what mission. Yetthe glory acknowledgedit was “the ministration of death.” All the sublimity was that of terror, none that of beauty, when Sinai became the shrouded pavilion of Jehovah. “Whosoever toucheth the mount shall be surely put to death.” This external characterization was a symbol of its condemning power. “When the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.” It was not in the language of the Law that David prayed, “Cast me not away from thy presence, and take not thy Holy Spirit from me;” nor in sympathy with the Law that Isaiah spoke of the Anointed One, “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me;” bat in contemplation of grace beyond Law, and therefore extra <\/em>to the ordinary workings of the Mosaic economy. A provision existed for these spiritual anticipations, and it was a part of its excellence, the highest part, that it had on a few minds this prevenient influence. Still, the distinctive feature stands, “a ministration of death;” and to the hour when Jerusalem and her temple fell, Sinai was the mount that could not be touched without death. It had a glory, a derived and subordinate glory, and the glory itself was to die. Certain qualities of Hebrew mind under the system, methods of thought, poetic modes of looking at nature, cultivated instincts of providence, yearnings for spirituality, were to survive and attain their completeness; but the system was to end by the law of limitation organic in its structure. Now, on this basis, the glorious economy of which Moses was the minister, and the transientness of its duration, St. Paul builds an argument for the superior glory of the gospel. It is the “ministration” of the Holy Ghost. It is “the ministration of righteousness.” Under the economy of grace the righteousness of God was first secured. That done, the justice of God appeared in the sinner’s justification. And in this justification the converted man realizes that sense of demerit and guilt which arises in his personal instinct of justice, is met and satisfied; while, at the same time, gratitude and love are awakened by the unmerited goodness of God in Christ. The two stand together. They are inseparable in the constitution of the universe. They are inseparable by the laws of the human mind. The joy of the one is vitally blended with the gladness of the other; so that if the renewed heart feels its indebtedness to the mercy of God in Christ, it feels also that its salvation rests on the vindicated righteousness of God in Christ. It is what Christ is to the Father that makes him precious as the Christ of his faith, hope, and love. Most fitly, then, St. Paul presents the antithetic emphasis on condemnation <\/em>and righteousness<\/em>. <\/em>Condemnation and righteousness are legal terms. The element of similarity in their common relation to Law is clearly recognized. Without this common element the antithesis could have no meaning. The dissimilarity is thus made vivid. “Much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.” Each is a “ministration,” each a “ministration” of “glory,” but the “ministration of righteousness doth exceed in glory.” The idea is explained and strengthened yet further. A favourite thought of the Jews, and particularly of the Pharisees, was the perpetuity of the Law. After the Exile, this was the stronghold of patriotism, sentiment, and religion. On no other ground could Pharisaism have acquired its popular ascendency. This was the battle it was ever fighting for the nationthe dignity of the Law as seen in its permanent utility, since only thereby could Israel attain her true destiny and far surpass her ancient renown. Of course the anti-Pauline party at Corinth had much to say on St. Paul’s view of the Law. Here, then, is an opportunity for him to defend his ministry. The point now is that the Mosaic ministration had no glory “in this respect,” that is, in respect to the succeeding dispensation, which had entirely obscured its lustre. The once stately figure was not erect, but prostrated; it was disrobed of its gorgeous vestments; it wore no longer the breast, plate with its precious stones; its glory had departed; and all this “by reason of the glory that excelleth.” If so, then how transcendent the splendour of the Spirit’s dispensation? “If that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.” In the former Epistle he had written of various gloriesone of the sun, another of the moon, still another of the stars, the radiance distributed over immeasurable spaces and among orbs widely different, each preserving from age to age its own distinctive splendour, every ray of light imaging the world whence it issued. A firmament was before his eye in its circles of magnificence. But now the glory, on which in other days he had looked with so much pride as a Pharisee, had passed forever from his sight. Yet, so far from feeling that there was loss, he exulted in the infinite gain, because “of the glory that excelleth.”L.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:12-18<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Boldness of speech; the two ministries; from glory to glory.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Dwelling on the superior excellence of the gospel, it was natural for the apostle to speak of his hopefulness (such hope) and of the effect thereof on his ministry. He had spoken of his trust (2Co 3:4<\/span>), and now he expresses the hope which filled his soul from “the intervening vision of the glory of his work” (Stanley) and its future results. He uses “great plainness of speech”unreservedness, without disguise, boldness (the last conveying his meaning most fully). The “able ministers of the new covenant” were also bold, having no reason for concealment, but every reason for openness and candour. From the beginning of the Spirit’s dispensation this boldness had characterized apostolic preaching. St. Peter, who had shown such cowardice in the high priest’s palace, evinced the utmost fearlessness at Pentecost. It was a spectacle of wonder to the Sanhedrim. “When they saw the boldness of Peter and John they marvelled;” and what was the explanation of their courage? “They took knowledge of them that they had been with Jesus.” Immediately thereafter we hear of prayer offered by the Church that “with all boldness” they may speak God’s Word. Boldness, at that time, was a virtue in request, and not one of the apostles failed to meet its requisitions. At this point the contrast between the Law and the gospel presents a new aspect. Moses had veiled his face, “that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.” The veil concealed the evanescence of the brightness and was symbolic of that judicial blindness which fell upon Israel. “Their minds were blinded,” or hardened, so that their perceptions were not in accordance with facts; impressibility was lost, feeling was callous. “Until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament.” The punishment continued. What were the old Scriptures but a sealed book to most of the Jews in the apostle’s day? and now, after eighteen centuries, how palpable to us the confirmation of his words in the ignorance and the delusions of the Jews touching the spiritual import of their sacred books! “Until this day” has a meaning for us it could not have had to St. Paul’s contemporaries. Time has done nothing or next to nothing to remove the darkness enveloping Jewish mind. Shrewd, intelligent, sagacious, in everything else; distinguished on nearly every arena of commercial and professional life; often foremost among men in matters as widely separated as music and statesmanship;they yet present the strangest of contrarieties in adhesion to prejudices almost two thousand years old, and that too while evincing an adaptiveness to every form of civilization and to all the modifications going on in the current activities of the age. Find them where you may, they are pliant to circumstances, Not a national mould can be mentioned in which their external character cannot be cast, and yet, while this plasticity is such that we have Russian, Italian, German, Spanish, French, English, American, Jews, and withal the individual nationality apparent, there is the same religious blindness of which St. Paul wrote long ago. Their land, homes, institutions, the objects that come before us when we think of Judaea and Galilee, have passed from their grasp; but they hold fast to the shreds of their ancient beliefs, nor can any power relax their hold. Now, surely, this is inexplicable on the ordinary grounds of human experience. No law of the mind, no law of society, can explain the phenomenon. Such a spectacle as the Jews present of retaining their attachment and devotion to a skeleton religion, from which the soul has departed, is unique in the world’s history. St. Paul solves the enigma; it is providential, it is punitive; “until this day <\/em>the veil is untaken away.” Two statements follow:<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> the “veil is done away in Christ;” <\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> but, though done away in Christ, “even unto this day, when Moses [his writings] is read, the veil is upon their heart.”<\/p>\n

Only in and through Christ have we the power to see Christ in the Old Testament. Only in Christ risen and glorified, only in him as sending the Holy Ghost, can we understand the relations of Moses to the gospel. “Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures”a post-resurrection matter altogether and coincident with the preliminary gift of the Holy Ghost during the forty days. Yet, while asserting that Moses has been unveiled, and that his testimony to Christ, as the end of the Law to every believer, has been made clear and simple, nevertheless, the veil remains. The idea would seem to be, “The veil remains not taken away in the reading of the old covenant, it not being unveiled to them that it (the old covenant) is done away in Christ” (note in Lange’s ‘Commentary’). But was there not room for hope? Already, in thousands of cases, the veil had been removed. A blinder and more rabid Pharisee than St. Paul lived not in Jerusalem, and he had had the veil taken away. The work was going on. One day it would be completed and Israel would know her Messiah. “When it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.” We, in the present day, read this third chapter of the Second Corinthians in a fuller light than even our immediate ancestors. The events of the nineteenth century have shown us how near the Jews are to the heart of Providence. Taken as a body of people, they are advancing in wealth, in culture, in certain elements of social power, at a rate beyond the average progress of races. Christian thinkers cannot look at these facts without seeing much more than material prosperity. Providence is the historic antecedent of the Spirit. The prophets of God in our age are not Elijahs and Elishas, but events that revolutionize thought and silently change the hearts of nations. But this turning to the Lord (verse 16) must be explained as to its Divine Agent, and the nature, thoroughness, and growing excellence of the work be set forth. Its Divine Agent<\/em>. <\/em>He is the Holy Ghost. Not only did Christ teach that he depended on the Holy Spirit for his anointing as the Messiah, and that the unction proceeding thence was the strength and inspiration of his earthly work (“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me”); not only did he refer everything to the fulness of the Spirit in him (“I do nothing of myself”); not only did he wait for its baptismal descent upon him before entering on his ministry, and’ acknowledge his presence in his miracles and teaching (“If I cast out devils by the Spirit of God,” etc.; “The words I speak unto you, I speak not of myself”); but, in the most solemn hours of his existence, death just at hand, he taught the disciples to expect the Spirit as his gift, stating what would be his offices as Remembrancer, Convincer, Witness, Glorifier, and in all the Comforter. This was to be their outfit for discipling all nations, for victory over themselves as to all self-seeking and self-furthering emotions, for triumph over all opposing forces. This was to be the means of realizing him as their glorified Lord, so that they should know him no more after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Now, we must not fail to notice that we are indebted to St. Paul for a very full portrayal of the actual work of the Spirit in the Church. One may call him the historian of the Spirit, the thinker who, under God, discerned his blessed operations in their variety and compass, the writer who put them on record for the illumination of the Church in all ages, the man who laid bare his own soul in extremities of sorrow and in moments of supreme happiness so that we might have his theology of the Holy Ghost in its experimental results. From him, then, we have not only the completest doctrinal instruction on this most vital subject, but likewise the flesh-and-blood view superinduced upon the anatomy of theological truth; witness this third chapter: yet this is only one among his many-sided presentations el this topic. Observe, however, this chapter fills a special place in his system of teaching. Step by step he had been approaching a point at which he could demonstrate the pre-eminent excellence of the gospel. Charity had been delineated once and forever; the resurrection had been argued on a method and in a manner unusual with him; so too the economy of the Church as a society divinely planned. In this third chapter all his prominent ideas coalesce in one great master truth, viz. the dispensation of the gospel as the ministry of the Spirit. The phrase, “ministry of the Spirit,” is itself remarkable. It includes, in a certain sense, the ministry of Moses, while differentiating the old covenant from the new. It takes in all ministries, apostolic, ordinary, and the numerous kinds of the ordinary. If we have lost some of these as they existed in St. Paul’s day, how many have we gained as original to later times and generic to circumstances called into existence by England and America in the eighteenth centurythe century of a constellation of epochs in the firmament of history? “Now the Lord is that Spirit.” Everywhere, in everything, the Lord Jesus Christ is the Dispenser of its manifold influence. “Being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.” It is the doctrine of Pentecost. It is the miracle and grandeur of Pentecost. Yet St. Peter does little more than state the fact. The doctrinal elaboration waits for St. Paul, and these two Epistles furnish the opportunity. Nature, thoroughness, and growing excellence of the Spirit<\/em>‘s work<\/em>. <\/em>It is liberty<\/em>. <\/em>“Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” Liberty from the pedagogy of the Law; liberty from the tyranny of the carnal intellect; liberty from that national domination which in the case of the Jews offered such a solid resistance to the gospel; liberty from Gentile idolatry; liberty from every agency that wrought evil in the soul of man. “if the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.” But it was the glorified Son who was to make men free by communicating the Holy Ghost. It is a revelation of God in Christ and Christ in the Spirit of the consciousness and conscience of men, and therefore thorough<\/em>. <\/em>It addresses his consciousness as one who has the capacity to think, feel, judge; and it addresses his conscience as to how he should think, feel, judge, as touching his obligations and as enforcing them by an immortality of reward or punishment. By the truth of the gospel, by the Spirit accompanying that truth and rendering it effective, consciousness is enlightened, cultivated, enlarged. The man sees much in himself he never saw before. And his moral sense or conscience, that mightiest of the instincts, is instructed and guided so as to represent the Spirit. It is in the soul a Remembrancer, a Convincer, a Witness, a Glorifier of Christ, a Comforter. And under this twofold development which is brought into unity by the Spirit of truth and love, the work of grace extends to all the man’s faculties. The intellect, the moral sensibilities, the social affections, lift up the physical man into themselves, and grow together into the spiritual man. Not an appetite, not a passion, not an attribute, of body or soul is left neglected. The ideal is “body, soul, and spirit” consecrated to Christ, living, working, suffering, so that” whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the Name of the Lord Jesus.” And its growing excellence <\/em>is seen in this, that in harmony with its freedom and its development of spiritual consciousness and conscience, it has an unveiled face. The eye is open and unhindered. Nothing intervenes between it and the glory of the Lord. True, it sees only in a mirror; it sees by reflection; it sees the image merelythe image of God in Christ, the image of humanity in Christ, the God Man, the one perfect Man of the human race. We see him in the New Testament, in the Gospels and Epistles, in the Acts of the Apostles and in the Apocalypse, the acts of Providence <\/em>future and final. We see him in all his relations and aspectsthe babe of Mary, the boy of Nazareth, the carpenter’s son, the public Man, Teacher, Benefactor, Healer, Helper, Friend. Every page of the New Testament is as a burnished surface whereon he is presented to the eye of faith as a manifestation of God’s righteousness and love, while he exhibits also the guilt and condemnation of man. “The glory of the Lord” is thus brought to view amidst the scenes and circumstances that instruct us in daily life. It is on a level with our comprehension. It finds the same kind of access to our sympathies that human qualities have in ordinary intercourse. “I beseech thee, show me thy glory,” was the prayer of Moses, and the Lord answered and made all his goodness pass before him. What Christ’s glory was in Moses, in the Psalms and prophecies, in his incarnation and atoning death, in his glorification; what it has been, is now, and will be;all this we have in the Scriptures of the Spirit and in his Divine offices to sanctify the Word. If we behold as in a mirror, is the image distorted, confused, inoperative, ineffective? Nay; it is with “open face” that we look, and the result is we “are changed into the same image from glory to glory.” Faith is the organ of vision, and faith is essentially transforming by its power to make what is an object of thought and fueling the most effectual of subjective influences. It takes the object from the outer world, separates it from the limitations of sense and intellect, disconnects the object from whatever is darkening and enervating, and secures to it fulness of activity. Faith is the purest, truest, noblest, form of belief. It is belief of things unseen and eternal, revealed to us by God and testified unto by the most honest and faithful witnessess the human race could furnish. To give us a Peter, a John, a Paul, as testifiers, the world was under providential training for many centuries and especially its elect race, whose ancestor, Abraham, inaugurated the career of the nation by an act of faith the most pathetic, the most sublime, the most illustrious, in the annals of mankind. It is not only a belief of things invisible as disclosed by a Revealer and assured by witnesses, but likewise a belief created, directed, and sustained in personal consciousness by the agency of the Holy Ghost. Hence its power to conform us to the Divine image as displayed in Christ, and hence also its progressive work. Not only are we changed, but we are changed “from glory to glory.” “The righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith,” so that we realize more and more clearly the consistency of the Divine righteousness in our justification, and the righteousness formed in our souls by the Spirit. We know why we are pardoned and by whom renewed, and, as we advance into new stages of experience, the past work of grace is rendered more and more intelligible. Current experiences leave much unexplained. Infancy, childhood, youth, in religious life are not fully comprehended till the interpretative light of manhood is thrown back upon them. “From glory to glory;<\/em>“ <\/em>this is true of every Christian virtue. At flint we are timid in confessing Christ before the world; the cross is heavy; self-denial is often very painful; the remains of the carnal mind are yet strong enough to resist when some onerous task is put upon us; but in time we gain strength, and in time are able to run and not weary, to walk and not faint. It is “from strength to strength,” as the psalmist sang long ago. Take the virtue of patience; what years are needed to acquire it in any large degree! St. Peter says, “Add to your faith, virtue,” etc.; keep up the supply, and exercise all diligence in building up one virtue by means of another. Again, “Grow in grace;” if growth stops, grace stops. “From glory to glory<\/em>.” <\/em>Temptations that had to be fought against, and sometimes ineffectually, twenty years ago, trouble us no longer. Infirmities are less infirm. Mysteries that used to perplex have ceased to disturb. People whose presence was an annoyance can be borne with. Irritations, recurring daily, have lost their power to ruffle the temper. Many a crooked way has been made straight, many a rough place smooth, many a darkened spot bright, to our steps. “From glory to glory<\/em>.” <\/em>Grace has worked its way down into our instincts and begun their fuller development. Thence comes the white light so grateful to sighs and so helpful. It is reflected upon the intellect, the sense organs, the outward world, and dissipates the occasional gloom that falls upon us when Satan’s “It is written” obscures our perceptions, or when the logic of the sense intellect gathers its mists about our pathway. Blessed hours of illumination are those which attend the later stages of grace penetrating the depths of instinct. Doubts are over; for we know whom we have believed. “From glory to glory<\/em>.” <\/em>Gradually our hearts are detached from the world, and, while its beauty and love and tenderness are none the less, they are seen as parts of a higher life and a remoter sphere. Afflictions, once “grievous,” yield “the peaceable fruit of righteousness;” for the “afterward” has come, and what an “afterward”! To be reconciled to the cross of pain; to glory in the cross of the Divine Sufferer; to die to self as we die when the Man of sorrows becomes the Christ of our instincts; to say, “Thy will be done” with no half way utterance, but from the heart, and submit not only willingly but gladly to whatever it may please Providence to ordain;this indeed is proof that we have advanced “from glory to glory<\/em>.”<\/em>L.<\/p>\n

HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON<\/strong><\/p>\n

2Co 3:2<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Our epistle.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Paul did the work of his life partially by his voice, but to no small extent by his pen. His compositions which have come down to us, and by which we chiefly know him, are epistolary. His letters were admitted, in his own time, and even by his enemies and traducers, to be weighty and powerful. But in his own view the best of all his epistlesthose which most unmistakably witnessed to his apostleshipwere the characters, the new lives, of those who by his ministry had received the gospel of Christ. Whether as amanuenses <\/em>who had indited these spiritual epistles, or as tabellarii, <\/em>or letter carriers, who had charge of them, and delivered them to human society, the apostles “ministered” their converts, who attested their skill and fidelity. At the expense of complicating the figure, Paul observes of the Corinthians that they were written in the hearts of himself and his colleagues. The lesson of the text is that Christians are ever authenticating the ministry of faithful preachers of the gospel<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> MEN<\/strong> MAY<\/strong> READ<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> HEART<\/strong> AND<\/strong> LIFE<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> CONVERT<\/strong> THE<\/strong> DIVINE<\/strong> COMMISSION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MINISTER<\/strong>. There are such proofs of the divinity of the doctrine in its effects upon the character and conduct of its sincere recipients as point up to the heavenly authority by which the agents were appointed and authenticated.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> AND<\/strong> THE<\/strong> FAITHFULNESS<\/strong> AND<\/strong> ZEAL<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MINISTER<\/strong>. Paul had a good conscience with regard to the manner in which he had discharged his sacred and benevolent service to his fellow men. Especially was this the case with his ministry to the Corinthians. In his First Epistle to them he had written, “If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you; for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.”<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> AND<\/strong> THE<\/strong> ADAPTATION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MINISTRY<\/strong> TO<\/strong> THE<\/strong> NEEDS<\/strong> AND<\/strong> THE<\/strong> CIRCUMSTANCES<\/strong> OF<\/strong> MEN<\/strong>. Events proved that to Jew and to Gentile, to men of every class and character, the gospel of Christ was the power of God unto salvation. This Church at Corinth was as an epistle written in various languages, in various styles, addressed to all nations and to all conditions of men, and assuring them that the apostles of Christ were laden with treasure which was able to enrich and to bless the world.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:3<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Epistles of Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n

Some teachers had visited the Christians of Corinth, who boasted of the letters of introduction they brought with them, authenticating their commission and their ministry. Paul needed no such epistles; for the members of the Church were themselves his <\/em>epistles; and better still, they were not only his, they were Christ<\/em>‘s <\/em>epistles, manifestly and undeniably such. The same may be said of all true disciples and followers of the Lord Jesus; it is an honourable and an inspiriting designation.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> WRITER<\/strong>CHRIST<\/strong>. Many great men, especially great thinkers, have perpetuated their influence and have served their race by their writings. As poets, philosophers, or moralists, they have made a place for themselves in the mind of humanity. The greatest of all, the Divine Man, wrote nothing. It is greater to be than to write; and the Lord Jesus simply lived and worked, suffered, died, and conquered. He could not compress and limit his mind within the compass of a treatise or a volume. He left his evangelists and apostles to write of him; his earthly manifestation thus spoke a universal language. Yet, in a sense, he has always been writing, and he is writing now. He is still daily issuing epistles to the world. <\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> EPISTLE<\/strong>CHRISTIANS<\/strong>. As a friend and counsellor, when on a journey and at a distance, communicates by letter with those who need his guidance and the assurance of his interest, so our Lord, though he has ascended on high, is ever sending epistles to the children of men. Every Christian upon whom he impresses his own will, character, and purposes, thus becomes Christ’s communication to the world, written by his hand, and authenticated by his autograph. Every individual is a syllable, every congregation a word, every generation of believers a line, in the ever-lengthening scroll, which approaches its close as the ages near the end.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> TABLET<\/strong>THE<\/strong> HEART<\/strong>. God does not write on stone, as men did in ancient monumental inscriptions, or as he once did on the tables of the Law. Nor on waxen tablets, as men wrote of old with the stylus, in notes of ordinary business or friendship. Nor on parchment or papyrus, as perhaps these Epistles of Paul were written. But Christ writes on tablets that are hearts of flesh. The expression, adapted from the Old Testament, is an impressive one. In the Proverbs, Wisdom invites the young man to write her precepts upon the tablets of his heart. By Jeremiah the Lord promised to write his Law upon his people’s heart. Christ takes the human soul and works upon it, and engraves there his own characters, sets down there his own signature, and sends the human natureso written uponinto the world, to tell of himself, to convey his thought, his will.<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> AGENCY<\/strong>NOT<\/strong> INK<\/strong>, BUT<\/strong> THE<\/strong> SPIRIT<\/strong> OF<\/strong> GOD<\/strong>. As in the processes of nature we see the operation of the living God, so in grace we discern spiritual handwriting. The Spirit of God most deeply reaches and most blessedly affects the spirit of man. The Spirit carries truth and love home to the heart with an incomparable power. He writes upon the soul in deep, legible, sacred, and eternal characters.<\/p>\n

V.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> HANDWRITING<\/strong> AND<\/strong> SUBSTANCE<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> EPISTLES<\/strong>. What difference there is in the appearance and in the matter of the letters we daily receive! They vary in handwriting, in style, in tone, in matter, according to the character of the writer, the relation of the writer to the reader, the business upon which they treat. But there is something characteristic in allall tell us something of our correspondents, and of their mind and will. So is it with these living epistles described in the text. Every epistle tells of the Divine Writer, bears witness to the Lord from whom it emanates, is evidently written in his handwriting, and reveals his mind and heart. Every epistle must be so authenticated by his signature that it cannot be suspected to be a forgery. Spirituality, holiness, obedience, meekness, benevolence,these are the proofs that the epistle is the composition of the Christ. This is to be manifestly, unmistakably, declared.<\/p>\n

VI.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> READERS<\/strong>ALL<\/strong> MEN<\/strong>. There is some writing which only a few can read; the characters may be ill written and illegible, or they may be in cipher, or the language may be scientific and technical. There are letters of private business or of personal friendship, only intended for certain individuals. But there is literature, such as the Bible or the law of the land, intended for the instruction and benefit of all. So, whilst there is religious language only fully understood by the initiated, by a select classe.g. doctrines, meditations, prayersthere is language intended for all mankind. The Christian character and life can be read with profit by all men. They can comprehend the virtues which adorn the Christian, and which are the manifest signs of the Lord’s spiritual presence. If we are truly Christ’s, then his handwriting will be legible to all men, and all men who know us may gain some advantage through reading what the Divine hand has inscribed upon our nature.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6-11<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The old and the new.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The warm and affectionate nature of the apostle had embraced the religion of Christ with a fervour, an attached devotion, exceeding even that which he had shown in his earlier days towards the dispensation in which he had been nurtured, Not that he had lost any of the reverence, the affection, he had cherished towards the covenant which God had established with his Hebrew ancestors; but that the new dispensation was so glorious to the view of his soul that it shed its brightness upon the economy which it replaced. The contrast drawn here seems almost depreciatory of that Law which was “given by Moses,” when that Law was brought into comparison with the “grace and truth which came by Jesus Christ.”<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> NEW<\/strong> IS<\/strong> BETTER<\/strong> THAN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> OLD<\/strong>. If God is a God of order, if progress characterizes his works, if development is a law of his procedure, then it is only reasonable to believe, what we find to be the ease, that that which displaces and supersedes what was good is itself preferable and more excellent.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> SPIRIT<\/strong> IS<\/strong> BETTER<\/strong> THAN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> LETTER<\/strong>. Yet “the letter” was adapted to the childhood of the race, and was indeed necessary for the communication of the spiritual lesson to be conveyed from heaven. But Christianity cannot be compressed into any document; it is itself a spirit, unseen and intangible, but felt to be mighty and pervasive.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> RIGHTEOUSNESS<\/strong> IS<\/strong> BETTER<\/strong> THAN<\/strong> CONDEMNATION<\/strong>. The old covenant abounded in prohibitions and in threats of punishment. The Law, when broken, as it incessantly was broken, is a sentence of condemnation to all who are placed under it. But it is the distinctive honour of Christianity that it brings in a new, a higher, an everlasting righteousness. It has thus more efficacy than the most faultless law of rectitude, for it supplies the motive and the power of true obedience.<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> LIFE<\/strong> IS<\/strong> BETTER<\/strong> THAN<\/strong> DEATH<\/strong>. “The soul that sinneth, it shall die<\/em>“such is the import of the old covenant, which thus ministered death to those who were under it. “The gift of God is eternal life <\/em>through Jesus Christ our Lord”such is the evangel of the new covenant to mankind. Death is the emblem of all that is dark, dreary, and repulsive; life is fraught with brightness, beauty, joy, and progress. Well might the apostle rise to fervid eloquence when depicting the incomparable moral excellence and beauty of the covenant of Divine grace. And justly might he deem his office one of highest honour and happiness, as bringing salvation and a blessed immortality to the lost and dying sons of men.<\/p>\n

V.<\/strong> ETERNAL<\/strong> GLORY<\/strong> IS<\/strong> BETTER<\/strong> THAN<\/strong> TRANSITORY<\/strong> AND<\/strong> PERISHABLE<\/strong> SPLENDOUR<\/strong>. There was a glory in the scene and circumstances amid which the Law was given; there was a glory in that code of piety and rectitude which was then conferred upon the chosen nation; there was a glory in the illumined countenance of the great lawgiver when he came down from the mount. But this glory was for a season, and indeed it almost lost its title to be spoken of as glory, by reason of the glory that excelleth. The ministration of the Spirit, of righteousness, that which remaineth, this is encompassed with a halo, an aureole, of spiritual and heavenly splendour which shall brighten until it merges in the ineffable glory of eternity.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:15<\/span><\/strong>, <\/strong>2Co 3:16<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The veil.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The historical incident in this passage makes way for the allegorical representation. When Moses came down from the mount he veiled his face that the people might not see his features and might not witness the fading of his celestial glory. And Paul affirms that a similar veil conceals the countenance of the great prophet and lawgiver when his writings are publicly read in the hearing of his countrymen. In many ways the Pentateuch is a witness to the Messiah, even Jesus. But over the Pentateuch, as read, there rests a veil which hinders the Jews from penetrating to the spiritual, the prophetic, meaning of the inspired writer. Moses testified of Christ; but to the unenlightened the writings of Moses prevent any perception, any vision, of the Divine Lord. A similar veil keeps many from apprehending the truth which is so near them.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> IN<\/strong> WHAT<\/strong> DOES<\/strong> THE<\/strong> VEIL<\/strong> CONSIST<\/strong>? Especially in prejudice and in unbelief. As the Israelites were so persuaded of the incomparable excellence of the Mosaic Law that they could not discern the higher revelation to which that Law was designed to lead, so oftentimes men’s minds are so preoccupied with their own notions of religion, of righteousness, etc., that they are not prepared to give heed to the Divine manifestation and appeal.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> WHAT<\/strong> DOES<\/strong> THE<\/strong> VEIL<\/strong> HIDE<\/strong>? The covering referred to in the context hid the face of the lawgiver; but the veil of error and of unbelief conceals the countenance of Christ, the revelation of Divine attributes, purposes, and promises. What it would be most for our interests to behold we may, by our sin and folly, obscure from our own view. See what we may, if we behold not the light of God’s glory in the face of Jesus Christ we forfeit the highest privileges of which we are capable.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> HOW<\/strong> IS<\/strong> THE<\/strong> VEIL<\/strong> REMOVED<\/strong>? The answer is very simple, “When it shall turn to the Lord.” That is to say, the obstacle to spiritual vision lies with ourselves and not with Heaven. Repentance, or the turning of the heart away from sin, is the condition of true enlightenment, Whilst the mind is occupied with itself and its own inclinations and fancies, the spiritual glory of the Saviour is not discernible. It only needs that, under the guidance of the Spirit of God, the mind should look away from self to Christ, in order that at once the scales should fall from the eyes of the beholder, and the veil should drop from the face of the Redeemer, and a true revelation <\/em>should take place.<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> WHAT<\/strong> DOES<\/strong> THE<\/strong> REMOVAL<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> VEIL<\/strong> EFFECT<\/strong>?<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The transitory character of preparatory dispensations is clearly discerned; the veil being dropped, it is seen that the glory of the older covenant has gone.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. The true glory of Christ and of Christianity is made manifest; the new covenant appears in all its splendour, unfading and eternal.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:17<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The spirit of liberty.<\/strong><\/p>\n

If there are two words especially dear to St. Paul, they are thesethe spirit <\/em>as distinguished from the form and the letter, and liberty <\/em>as distinguished from religious bondage.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> MAN<\/strong>‘S NEED<\/strong> OF<\/strong> LIBERATION<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. Sin is bondage, however he may confuse between liberty and licence. There is no slave so crippled and so pitiable as is the bondman of sin.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. Man’s happiness and well being depend upon his deliverance from this spiritual serfdom.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. No earthly power can effect this great enfranchisement.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> DIVINE<\/strong> LIBERATOR<\/strong>. Many of the designations applied to our Lord Jesus imply this character and function. He is the Saviour, who saves from the yoke of sin, the doom of death; the Redeemer, who ransoms from a spiritual captivity, who pays the price, and sets the prisoner free. “The Lord is the Spirit;” i.e. <\/em>the work of redemption was wrought by Jesus in the body, and is applied and made actual to the individual soul by the unseen but mighty and ever-present Spirit, in whose operations the Lord. Christ perpetuates his action and achieves his dominion.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> ESSENCE<\/strong> OF<\/strong> SPIRITUAL<\/strong> LIBERTY<\/strong>. It is irrespective of personal condition; for the slave can enjoy its sweets, even when his clanking chains remind him of his earthly bondage. It is emancipation from the curse and penalty of the Law, as this oppresses every sinner who is at all aware of his real condition. It is freedom from what St. Patti calls the dominion of sin. It is the glad consecration of all powers to the service of the Divine Redeemer. It is “the glorious liberty of the children of God.”<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> FRUITS<\/strong> OF<\/strong> FREEDOM<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. Obedience, <\/em>strange and paradoxical as the assertion seems, is the consequence of the gracious enfranchisement of the soul. The service of the heart, which cannot be rendered in bondage, is natural in the state of emancipation.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. Joy <\/em>is natural to the emancipated slave, who realizes the dignity and the blessedness of freedom.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. Praise <\/em>of the Deliverer never ceases, but ascends in unintermitting strains to the Author and Giver of spiritual and everlasting liberty.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:18<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The glorious transformation.<\/strong><\/p>\n

An exulting joy scorns to have moved the soul of the apostle, when he meditated upon the present immunities and honours, and. upon the prospects of future blessedness and glory which, through Christ, belong to all true believers and followers of the Lord. A kind of spiritual exhilaration pervades and exalts his spirit, and adds eloquence and poetry to his enraptured language.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> UNINTERRUPTED<\/strong> VISION<\/strong>. The figure of the veil continues to haunt the mind of the inspired writer, even after it has answered the purpose of its first introduction. Associating his brethren in the faith with himself, he affirms, concerning Christians, that the veil was in their case removed, so that for them was actually realized a wonderful approach to the unseen Saviour. Before their enlightenment by the Spirit of God, the scales were upon their eyes and the veil was before their countenance. Now, in Heaven’s light they see light. The sin, the prejudice, the unbelief, which hid the Saviour from their view, have been removed, and nothing comes between the soul and its Saviour.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> SPIRITUAL<\/strong> REFLECTION<\/strong>. Instead of the countenance being concealed by a veil, it is, in the case of true Christians, converted into a mirror, which receives and then reflects the rays of light. Thus the glory of the Lord, which is ever manifested in nature, and which shone in the face of our incarnate Redeemer, is gathered up and given forth by the renewed and purified character of the Christian. This is a moral process. A spiritual nature alone is capable of attracting and receiving such light, alone is capable of giving it forth in uncontaminated, though reflected, rays. Thus the disciple mirrors the Teacher and the servant mirrors the Lord. We are living representatives of the Divine Head.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> GLORIOUS<\/strong> TRANSFORMATION<\/strong>. Faith in Christ and fellowship with Christ are the forces which produce assimilation to Christ. The image which is beheld seems to infix itself upon the mirror-like soul that receives it. The life of faith thus serves to carry on a gradual process of spiritual assimilation. The progression <\/em>is denoted by the phrase, “from glory to glory,” by which we understand, not earthly splendour, but spiritual excellence and. perfection. And the agency <\/em>is indicated by the expression here used, “as by the Lord the Spirit.” Because he is the Spirit, the Lord has access to the heart, and renews, hallows, and glorifies the nature to which he makes himself graciously and divinely known. And there seems to be no limit to this most blessed process. In fact, the future state appears to offer the most amazing scope for its continuation: “We shall be like Christ; for we shall see him as he is.”T.<\/p>\n

HOMILIES BY E. HURNDALL<\/strong><\/p>\n

2Co 3:3<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Christ-letter.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The people of God are set forth under various figures in Scripture. For exampleas corn ripening for harvest; as Lebanon’s cedars, standing like rocks under fiercest blasts; as stars fixed in heavenly places; as the sun climbing the heavens, enlightening the world; as purified gold, fit for the King; as jewels flashing forth tints of loveliness, prepared for regal crown; as vine branches richly laden; as pomegranates and figs, sweet and refreshing; for might, the lion and eagle; and, great paradox, for weakness, the defenceless sheep and lamb; for humility, the lily; for dignity, the palm tree; for usefulness, the salt of the earth. Here, as “the epistle of Christ.” A singular but impressive title. And this sets forth what each individual believer should bea Christ-letter. We have been accustomed to regard epistles as certain books of the Scripture or letters passing between men. The apostle leads us to this thoughtmen are epistles<\/em>. <\/em>Apart from nature and providence, we have regarded the Bible as God’s only book. Now we are directed to other books of God, volumes of redeemed humanity. We speak of the Epistles of Scripture as inspired; men who are the epistles of Christ are inspired by the same Spirit. Of the former we think as testimonies for God, for Christ, for religion; the latter are equally so. And, as though God were not content with Wing to mankind silent and secluded epistles, he has placed in the midst of the world living <\/em>epistles, moving amongst men, unobscured, ever beheld and perused. We regard the Scriptures with reverence. What a thought that we, if we are truly of Christ, constitute part of the great Scriptures of God! The Bible we esteem as sacred; if of Christ, we are sacred, appointed to bear a like witness to the verities of the Christian faith. It would seem as though there could scarcely be a more honourable designation than this”the epistle of Christ.” If we are to be the epistles of Christ<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> GOD<\/strong> MUST<\/strong> WRITE<\/strong> OUR<\/strong> LIVES<\/strong>. The epistle, to be worth anything, must be dictated by God. We say Paul’s Epistles, Peter’s Epistles, John’s Epistles; but, if this adequately represents them, they are nothing. If they are anything, they are God<\/em>‘s <\/em>EpistlesGod’s Epistle to the Corinthians and to the Romans, and so on. So with us. If we are epistles of Christ, we must be “of God,” “written, not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God” (verse 3); and the writing must be, not on “tables of stone “for <\/em>us, but in “tables that are hearts of flesh” within <\/em>us. The work of the Divine Spirit in our natures and in our lives can alone make us epistles of Christ. This is the highest form of human life, when it is made <\/em>by God, day by day, hour by hourthe will of God finding expression in conduct, thoughts, motives, being. Free will is the glory of man, received by the fiat of the Eternal; but the noblest act of free will is its voluntary subjection to the will of God. We are highest when we are willing to become most completely the servants <\/em>of God. Satan tempted our first parents to pass from under the will of God by the promise, “Ye shall be as gods.” There was wonderful deceit here. The temptation found them <\/em>as gods, it left them <\/em>as devils. To live otherwise than in subjection to the will of God is to go down. The way upward is, “Not my will, but thine, be done.” To consult the Divine wish in all our undertakings, to follow the Divine instruction in all our deeds, to wait upon the Divine purpose in our whole being and course, is for God to be writing our lives<\/em>. <\/em>How different, alas! is our experience! How often we have taken the pen out of the Divine hand, that we ourselves might write a little! How often, by our wilfulness, our self-seeking, our sin, we have rendered the Divine writing blurred, and the manuscript of our life blotted and defaced! How often have our foolish insertions entirely altered the meaning of what the Divine fingers were tracing! What chaos, confusion, disaster, have come into the epistle of our life because it has been largely of ourselves and not of God! How poor has been the influence of the life-letter because it has not been inspired of the Holy Ghost!<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> OUR<\/strong> LIVES<\/strong> WILL<\/strong> THEN<\/strong> TESTIFY<\/strong> OF<\/strong> CHRIST<\/strong>. This must be our supreme aim if we desire to be epistles of Christ. He is to be the one conspicuous feature in our life and being. Epistles we are to be, which, when men read, they shall find that they are reading of Christ<\/em>. <\/em>Many professing Christians are anything but epistles of Christ. There are some very great epistles of doubt, read and known of many men, telling us that they do not claim apostolical succession, and proving this with conclusiveness by being anything but fully persuaded in their own minds; epistles of dismalness, epistles of idleness, epistles of delay, epistles of change, epistles of frivolity, epistles of self, epistles of quarrelsomeness, and others who seem to be epistles of nothingness. In contrast to the true consistent believerChrist manifested in his actions, Christ breathed forth in his influence, Christ the utterance of his life. To him “to live is Christ<\/em>.” <\/em>If we are the epistles of Christ:<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. We must allow men to read us<\/em>. <\/em>We must not be too reserved. We must not hide our light.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. We should not be too forward<\/em>. <\/em>Much talk of our attainments and graces will convince most men that we have not any. A book is not instructive which has the most of the printing outside.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. Men will be willing to read us when very unwilling to read the Epistles of the Scriptures<\/em>. <\/em>There are two things which men are very fond of readingtheir newspaper and each other. The true epistle of Christ is likely to have wide circulation and large usefulness.H.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The new covenant.<\/strong><\/p>\n

I. <\/strong>A COVENANT<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> SPIRIT<\/strong>. The old covenant, the Law which came by Moses, was the “letter”precepts laid down to be literally obeyed, fixed and rind, external and ritual. The new covenant, the gospel, is the covenant of love, of spiritual obedience. The Jew, under the old covenant, could not be exempted by any piety of spirit from the letter of the legal ordinance; but under the new covenant the spirit of the observance is chief. The old covenant did not supply the inward Power producing obedienceit was something outside of man, imposed upon him. But the new covenant has for an essential feature the Power of God operating in the heart, leading to newness of life. The old covenant approached man from without, the new covenant works from within. One is “letter”external; the other is “spirit”internal.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> A COVENANT<\/strong> OF<\/strong> LIFE<\/strong>. In the old covenant there was the holy Law and the command to fully obey it: “The Law is not of faith; but, The man that doeth them shall live in them” (Gal 3:12<\/span>). The old covenant demanded perfect obedience: “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the Law to do them” (Gal 3:10<\/span>). Thus the old covenant tended to condemnation and death, because fallen human nature failed to keep the perfect Law of God. The “letter” of unswerving righteousness convicted man of sin, and then “killed” him. Not that the Law was evil, but that it showed the evil in man. “The wages of sin is death.” The Law, by <\/em>discovering sin, showed that the wages were due<\/em>. <\/em>The old covenant thus left man condemned, and, if man was to be justified and restored, there was urgent need of a new covenant. We find, thus, that the old covenant is ever Pointing to the new, and that the design of the former was to lead to the latter: “The Law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ” (Gal 3:24<\/span>). Moreover, the Jew possessed the new covenant as well as the old, though not so fully unfolded as we have it. Men condemned by the old covenant lived the life of faith upon the Son of God who was to come, and thus participated in the life giving principle of the new covenant. This new covenant is a covenant of life:<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. Because Christ has perfectly fulfilled the Law of God on man’s behalf, and to man this perfect obedience is imputed. Condemnation is thus avoided. Life is secured for man by man’s Substitute.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. Man’s personal transgressions are atoned for by the sacrifice of Christ.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. The Holy Ghost is given to kindle spiritual life in man, to sanctify his nature, to bring him at last into full accord with the perfect Law of God.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> A COVENANT<\/strong> NOT<\/strong> TRANSITORY<\/strong>. The old covenant has passed away. The new covenant puts men in a position with relation to God which is an everlasting one. Death and the next world will not call for the abrogation of this covenant, nor any changes occurring during the residence of the human family in the world. The old covenant was imperfect; it demanded something beyond itself; it was designed to do this. There is no such element in the new. It is complete; it calls for nothing outside of its own provisions.<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> A COVENANT<\/strong> OF<\/strong> SURPASSING<\/strong> GLORY<\/strong>. This arises largely from points already noticed.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. Its spiritual character.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. Its issues in bringing life, not death, to fallen man.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. Its enduring character.<\/p>\n

4<\/strong>. Its direct initiation and administration by the Son of God. “The Law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (Joh 1:17<\/span>). The inauguration of the old. covenant saw the face of Moses illumined. The new covenant came with the transfiguration of Christ.<\/p>\n

5<\/strong>. Its marvellous revelation of Divine love<\/em>. <\/em>The old covenant laid the emphasis upon Divine righteousness; the new, whilst displaying with untarnished lustre this attribute of Deity, exhibits pre-eminently the love of God.H.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:15<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The veil on the heart.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The veil which Moses put on his face (Exo 34:33<\/span>) obscured its brightness. The apostle seizes upon the event, so familiar to readers of Jewish history, to illustrate moral blindness, and. especially the moral blindness of Jews in his own day. As moral blindness is subjective, <\/em>he speaks of the veil, not upon those things which are obscured, as in the case of the face of Moses, but as upon the heart. Upon the heart, <\/em>because in spiritual matters the inability does not spring from the head, but from the heart. This veil upon the heart<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> OBSCURES<\/strong> THE<\/strong> GLORY<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> OLD<\/strong> DISPENSATION<\/strong>. It did so to Jews in Paul’s day; it does so to Jews now. The true glory of the old covenant lay in its foreshadowing of the new. It was a covenant of types and shadows. Underlying its legality was a deep spiritualits. The Law condemned, and only condemned, but the “Law” was not the whole of the old covenant. Associated with the Law was the embryo of the gospel. And unveiled hearts looked through condemnation and shadow and type to the delivering Messiah, by whom men could be justified by faith and not by works. But the veil upon the heart caused the Jew to regard the old covenant as complete in itself, and to disregard the deeper spiritual meanings of its provisions. From him its true glory was thus hidden. A rigid system became much more rigid. The wings of a dispensation rising to something higher were clipped. A hard, narrow creed was substituted for an expansive and noble theology.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> HIDES<\/strong> CHRIST<\/strong>. It did so when Christ came. When the Messiah appeared, veiled hearts failed to recognize him. The Jews would have welcomed a Messiah who came to continue Judaism as Judaism was understood by them. But the development of Judaism into Christianity, the fruition of the old covenant in the new, had no charms for them; on the contrary, it was obnoxious to them in the highest degree, as spirituality is ever to a carnal nature. In the Christ they could not see the Christ. He was not their <\/em>Christ, and by facile logic was thus demonstrated to be no Christ at all. “Their minds were blinded” (2Co 3:14<\/span>). From many today Christ is thus hidden. To them “a root out of a dry ground” is as beautiful as he. They think the fault is in him, <\/em>but it is in themselves<\/em>. <\/em>False conceptions of the objects, duties, and pleasures of life possess them, and are the coloured media through which Christ is looked at. They see a darkened, shorn, maimed Christ; the true <\/em>Christ is hidden from them.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> CAUSES<\/strong> MEN<\/strong> TO<\/strong> REST<\/strong> IN<\/strong> SELF<\/strong>–RIGHTEOUSNESS<\/strong>. This was the only way of justification which was apparent to the Jew upon whose heart the veil rested. The veil shut out all, except legalism. So with many now. It is their <\/em>righteousness, not the righteousness of Christ, to which they look. They seek to save themselves, not to be saved by another. Each is a Messiah to himself. But poor rest is secured. The voices of old. sins make themselves heard, and to their clamour no satisfactory response is forthcoming. Present power to do right is found lacking. This is not to be wondered at, seeing that the Source of all true spiritual power has been abandoned. Piety becomes either a vague dream of the future or a dismal formality of the present.<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> KEEPS<\/strong> MEN<\/strong> UNDER<\/strong> CONDEMNATION<\/strong>. The Law of God condemns, and if only the bare Law is seen there is no deliverance. self-righteousness, if attained to in perfection, would not cancel past sentences on sin. But self-righteousness practically is ever self-unrighteousness, and, instead of atoning for sin, continuously increases it. The most moral man has but the cheerless vision of a broken Law imperiously demanding its penalties. <\/p>\n

V.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> VEIL<\/strong> IS<\/strong> REMOVED<\/strong> AS<\/strong> WE<\/strong> TURN<\/strong> TO<\/strong> THE<\/strong> LORD<\/strong>. (2Co 3:16<\/span>.) When the Jew, led by the Spirit, believed on Christ, the veil, which had obscured his vision of the old covenant, and which had thus perverted his being and life, was removed. He saw then the true significance of the old economy, and perceived that Christ, in his own person and work, constituted the very fulfilment of the Law. Old things passed away, all things became new. The veil is destroyed forever as we come to Christ. The apostle has, no doubt, in his mind the action of Moses: “When Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he took the veil off” (Exo 34:34<\/span>). Our turning to the Lord is a sign that the veil is rent in twain like the veil of the temple, and as we reach the Lord and are taught by the Divine Spirit, the veil vanishes, obscurity gives place to brightness, and we marvel that we ever could have been as we once were. When Moses came out from the presence of the Lord he again assumed the veil, but he is not here an example to us; for we are not to come out again, but to abide with Christ, to be “forever with the Lord.”H.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:18<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The great change.<\/strong><\/p>\n

I. WHAT<\/strong> THIS<\/strong> CHANGE<\/strong> IS<\/strong>. Into the Divine likened. This, which was lost through the Fall, is recovered in the gospel. Believers become like Christ, who is the Brightness of the Father’s glory, and the express Image of his person (Heb 1:3<\/span>). The change is not merely of opinion, or feeling, or even conduct, but a change of being<\/em>. <\/em>It is not something connected with ourselves, but our very selves which are changed, and changed so as to be like Christ.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. A marvellous change<\/em>. <\/em>For before men believe, they are singularly unlike Christ. By nature like Satan; by grace like Christ.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. An all-desirable change<\/em>. <\/em>For ennoblement, peace, joy, usefulness.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MASTER<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> CHANGE<\/strong>. It follows upon turning to the Lord (2Co 3:16<\/span>). As Moses, standing before God, was singularly changed in countenance, so that his face reflected the Divine glory, so we are changed as we are turned towards Christ, as we turn towards him in penitence and faith and in desire to be his. The figure of a mirror is employed.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. We may read “reflecting as a mirror,” and then the idea conveyed will be that, as Christ shines upon us, as he acts upon us, we become changed. Or:<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. If we read “beholding as in a mirror,” the thought will be that, as we gaze upon Christ as he is reflected in the mirror of the gospel, we become like him. Both thoughts are correct, though it is by the Divine action we are changed, our looking upon Christ being only the means by which the Divine action reaches us.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> A SPECIAL<\/strong> FEATURE<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> CHANGE<\/strong>. Progressive”from glory to glory.” The change is often gradual. There is a great fundamental change at conversion. A condition of “glory” is reached, but there is a glory beyond this. We “grow in grace.” At first we are “babes in Christ,” but we develop into the stature of perfect men in him (Eph 4:13<\/span>). Conversion is but the first stage. Many seem to think that it is the final one. Justification is enough for them; sanctification is not in their thoughts. But this is not the salvation of Christ. We are saved for holiness, for usefulness, for the service of God, and as continuously we gaze upon Christ in faith, and as his power falls upon us, we pass into a further “glory.”<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> A CONDITION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> CHANGE<\/strong>. Our face unveiled. And here face stands for heart. The veil occasioned by the old enmity, by prejudice, by misconception, by ignorance, must be removed. This will be so with all who in sincerity turn to the Lord. “When it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away” (2Co 3:16<\/span>). The more completely our face is unveiled the more rapidly shall we pass from “glory to glory.” We should strive to remove all that is likely to hinder our development into the likeness of Christ. Anything that comes between ourselves and him will do this. Heart veils are of very various patterns.<\/p>\n

V.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> STRIKING<\/strong> USEFULNESS<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> CHANGE<\/strong>. Adopting the reading “reflecting as a mirror,” we see that:<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. Those who turn to the Lord reflect the glory of the Lord. They show forth Christ. Men take knowledge of them that they have been with Jesus. They reflect the redemptive glory of Christ. They exemplify the power of his salvation. They are monuments upon which is inscribed “Christ, and him crucified.” They reflect the love of Christ in Christian activity. Having been saved themselves, they desire the salvation of all around them. What a thought, that we may reflect, Christ!<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. As they seek to reflect Christ the change progresses. It is when we are diligent in the Master’s business, when we consecrate ourselves to him, when we strive to set him forth in daily life, that we become changed into his image. As we strenuously endeavour to be like him we become like him. Our endeavour to reflect him is responded to by the change in us which enables us to reflect him. Reflecting his glory as a mirror, we are changed into the same image.<\/p>\n

VI.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> WORKER<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> CHANGE<\/strong>. The Holy Ghost, “the Lord the Spirit.” Christ working by his Spirit, who takes of the things of Christ and reveals them unto us. “The Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my Name” (Joh 14:26<\/span>). The work is Divine; it calls for Divine power. We cannot work this change, yet we can “turn to the Lord,” that it may be worked,H.<\/p>\n

HOMILIES BY D. FRASER<\/strong><\/p>\n

Verses, 2, 3<\/strong><\/p>\n

A living letter.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Apollos had carried to Corinth written credentials (see Act 18:27<\/span>; Act 19:1<\/span>). Why had Paul not done so too? He claims that he needed them not. The converts in that city were themselves his credentials. His appeal to the Corinthians on this point proceeds on a principle easily understood and often applied. The best testimonial a teacher can produce is the proficiency of his pupils. The most satisfactory evidences of the skill of a physician are the patients who have recovered health under his care. The convincing proofs of the competency of a gardener are the prosperity of the plants and the abundance of flowers and fruits which he produces from the ground. So was the Church at Corinth itself the best diploma or commendation of the apostle who had founded it and watched over it (see 1Co 4:14-16<\/span>). A good teacher needs no letter of commendation to his own pupils, or a father to his own children. Seizing the idea of a letter, and showing that the Corinthian saints themselves formed the only letter he needed to produce, St. Paul used this as an illustration in two forms.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The Christians at Corinth were written on his heart, for they were dear to him (2Co 7:3<\/span>; Php 1:7<\/span>). And this was no secret. The tie of affection between St. Paul and the Corinthian brethren was “known and read of all.”<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. Christ had written upon their hearts what served as a powerful letter of commendation for his servant Paul. Let us pursue the second use of the metaphor. A Church is an epistle of Christ, open for all men to read.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> AUTHOR<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> LETTER<\/strong>. This is Christ. Whatever Divine thoughts are given to human minds, or spiritual impressions are stamped on human hearts, proceed from Christ. And it is true of Churches in all ages. As Christ is the living One, he is ever writing new epistlesin harmony with those which were written at the beginningand yet new and fresh and suited to the current time.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> AMANUENSIS<\/strong>. At Corinth this was Paul. In modem Churches it is the faithful ministry of the Word. The epistle is not invented or dictated by us, but “ministered by us.” The mind of Christ is thereby conveyed to and impressed on the company of believers.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> TABLETS<\/strong>. They are not of stone, but of the heart. The ministration of neath was written and engraven on stone in the form of ten commandments. The more glorious ministration of the spirit and of righteousness is inscribed on the convictions and affections of living men. The law of Christ is put into the inward parts and written on the heart. For this end, too, the Lord knows how to soften the tablets, to make the heart tender and warm, and so susceptible of the instruction and impression of the Word. Oh to have a still heart, not restless, that the writing may be plain, and to have a lowly heart, not hard, that the engraving may be deep!<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MANNER<\/strong> OF<\/strong> WRITING<\/strong>. “Not with ink.” St. Paul’s letters were so written, as were those of other apostles (2Jn 1:12<\/span>); and by ink of the scribe and the printer have they been preserved and propagated. But for writing on the heart perishable material is unsuited. Jehovah wrote the Law on the tablets of stone with his own hand; and on the tablets of the human heart Jesus Christ writes, using ministry as he pleases in the process with the finger or power of God”the Spirit of the living God.” And so, in all times and all Churches of the saints, the application of the truth is by the living Spirit.<\/p>\n

V.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> THING<\/strong> WRITTEN<\/strong>. It is the mind of Christ. Ye “have learned Christ, and the truth as it is in Jesus.” There is no higher truth to learn, no better message to carry.<\/p>\n

VI.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> PUBLICATION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> LETTER<\/strong>. It is “manifestly declared,” and may be known and read of all men. This is said of the Church collective, for such is the temple of God and such is the epistle of Christan argument surely for Christian consistency and for brotherly concord, that the sacred epistle may not be rendered unintelligible. It each member of a Church abide in his place, and all together dwell in peace and walk in the truth, there is produced an epistle of Christ which puts the gainsayer to silence. Thank God that even a faulty Church or blotted epistle has something of a Divine element, some impression and expression of Christ! The obligation which lies on the Church may be pressed on each member thereof. Would that Christ were more apparent and more legible in Christians! Let your character be a consistent representation or epistle of your Lord, and let it be an original, not a copy of some other man’s religion, but a genuine production of Jesus Christ by “the Spirit of the living God.” If you go to the Lord justifying yourself and accusing others, he will only write on the ground; but if you with a penitent heart accuse yourself, he will write on you his grace and truth. Hereafter, when you have overcome, he will write on you his new Name.F.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The letter and the spirit.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The contrast between letter and spirit is in Scripture peculiar to the pages of St. Paul (see Rom 2:29<\/span>; Rom 7:6<\/span>). The subject specially occupied him, as the champion of Christian liberty and a profound thinker on the relations of the Old and New Testaments.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> CONTRASTED<\/strong> TERMS<\/strong>LETTER<\/strong> AND<\/strong> SPIRIT<\/strong>. A more frequent opposition is between flesh and spirit (see Joh 3:6<\/span>; Joh 6:63<\/span>; Rom 8:1-13<\/span>; Gal 5:16-25<\/span>). The distinction is obvious between a fleshly and a spiritual disposition, and the alternative is shown to be one of life or death. “To be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.” But, by letter and spirit must be intended things of which it is possible for men to be ministers. St. Paul was a minister, not of the letter, but of the spirit; and the context shows that by letter he meant the old covenant, and by spirit the new. Not that there was nothing but letter in the one and nothing but spirit in the other. The contrast is between predominant characteristics; and characteristically, though not exclusively, the old covenant was letter and the new covenant was spirit. Therefore the latter excelled in glory. The old economy, or testament, is not spoken of with disrespect. It was adapted in the wisdom of God to the training of the Hebrew people as his chosen nation. It was not a mere dead writing, but had a meaning in it which was Divine. The very term “letter” implies some import or significance. And there was enough in the Old Testament to educate the minds of men in religious ideas, and bring home sacred obligations and hopes to their hearts. But it is called “the letter” because that which bulked largely in it was a code of law and a handwriting of ordinances. In its prescription of law it was to sinful men a ministration of death; and in its ritual of worship it was inferior to that holy liberty which we now enjoy in everywhere worshipping the Father in spirit and in truth. The old covenant had shadows, the new has substance; the old had rudiments and elements, the new has perfection; the old had patterns of heavenly things, the new has heavenly things themselves; the old was a dispensation of dimness as of light seen through a veil, the new is one of unveiled faces and God’s marvellous light. The new economy, or testament, while characteristically one of “spirit,” is not altogether without letter. As every soul must have a body, and every essence a form, in order to be known among men, so has the spirit of the New Testament embodiment and exact expression. But here lies the contrast. Pre-Christian religion contained a small proportion of spirit and life in a large bulk of letter and ordinance. Christianity has a large proportion of spirit and life in a bulk of law and form as small and light as possible. The teachings of Christianity are facts and principles, not propositions and restrictions; its institutions are simple outlines, not precise ceremonies; and its laws are moral sentiments, not minute mechanical directions.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> EFFECTS<\/strong> WHICH<\/strong> FLESH<\/strong> AND<\/strong> SPIRIT<\/strong> SEVERALLY<\/strong> PRODUCE<\/strong>. The letter, void of spirit, kills. The spirit, in whatever form or letter conveyed, gives life. We must still be on our guard against making that absolute which is intended only as a strong comparative. We must not say or suppose that under the Mosaic economy there was nothing but condemnation, bondage, and death. Beneath and within the letter which had such prominence, there was spirit; and men who knew how to penetrate the letter got the spirit, and with it got life. But the more that men made of mere traditional letter and form, the less they knew of the spirit of liberty and the power of godliness. Most apparent was the killing power of the letter in that generation of Hebrews to which Paul himself belonged. They gloried in circumcision, but had it in the flesh only, and not in the heart. They sought life by the law of works, and fell under its condemnation. The more devoted they were to religious peculiarities and ceremonial restrictions, the more did a shadow of death cover them. They clung to the types and would not recognize the Antitype. They trusted to a covenant which had exhausted its use and was passing away. So this letter worship destroyed spiritual life. Israel after the flesh fell under a ministration of death. On the other hand, in that new dispensation, of which St. Paul was such an earnest minister, and in which spirit predominates, there is abundance of the grace of life. True that, under this dispensation also, a formalist or one who is self-righteous may turn the life into death. Externalism and traditionalism are as powerless as ever to make alive. But, when the letter which in some manner is indispensable to mortal worshippers is kept in due subordination, the spirit gives life, and the ministration of righteousness is exceeding glorious. And the Lord is that Spirit. The Lord is the Life giver and the Life.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> LIGHT<\/strong> CAST<\/strong> BY<\/strong> THIS<\/strong> STATEMENT<\/strong> ON<\/strong> SUNDRY<\/strong> QUESTIONS<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>On the interpretation and use of certain precepts and usages mentioned in Scripture. Reverence for antiquity is good, is in some degree essential to historical Christianity; but there is a pedantry about the forms of things which is unintelligent and unspiritual. To correct this we must always distinguish between letter and spirit, and bear in mind that, in the long course of time and in altered conditions of society, there not only may be but must be circumstantial changes of form and expression in order to the conservation of spirit and truth. Apply this to<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> the precept of turning the cheek to the smiter; <\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> that of washing one:mother’s feet; <\/p>\n

(3)<\/strong> the forbiddal of lawsuits between Christians; <\/p>\n

(4)<\/strong> the salutation with a holy kiss.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. On the corruptions of Christianity. Some harm, no doubt, has been done by the endeavour to abstract the spirit of the gospel too much from its letter, and to dispense altogether with definite forms of doctrine and service. But a greater danger has shown itself on the opposite side. The most formidable corruptions of Christianity have resulted from magnifying letter over spirit, and giving to our religion an imposing exterior while its heart fainted and all but perished. The great bane of the Church has been in the direction of exaggerated ceremonial and tyrannical insistence on outward usage and form.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. On the propagation of the gospel. The old dispensation was not intended for world wide diffusion; but the new has a gospel for all nations, and is meant to live in every climate and among all the tribes and races of mankind. But of its ever reaching its consummation we should despair if it were a religion of unbending, unelastic literalism, and committed itself to the maintenance of dry and rigid forms. We take courage when we remember that “the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power;” that the emphasis in Christianity lies on its active, spiritual, penetrating force; and that the Lord himself “is that Spirit.” We do not set Christian form against heathen form, but preach Christ Jesus the Lord. The letter and the ritual will appear quickly enough, and may be expected to vary in a Church of all nations. What we should be most concerned about is the world wide proclamation el him in whom all nations of the earth are to be blessed.F.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:18<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Christian transfiguration.<\/strong><\/p>\n

When Moses, the minister of the Law, communed with God, his countenance became irradiated, and, on his return to the people of Israel in the camp, he was obliged to put a veil over his face. But that radiance did not last long. It faded from the prophet’s countenance; and this is taken to illustrate the passing away of the glory of all that legal ministration. The Jews who rejected that gospel which St. Paul preached were still occupied with the Law. Moses stood before them still; and, when Moses was read, they failed to see that the lustre had faded from his face. Yet it was so. Not that the Law was at fault or obscure; not that Moses misled or clouded their minds. The veil was no more on his face, but on their hearts; and so they persisted, and the bulk of that nation still persist, in trusting to Moses and rejecting the more glorious ministration by Jesus Christ. The anti-Christian Jews are dimly reading the words of their lawgiver instead of rejoicing in the light of the Lord. But “we all,” whether Jews or Gentiles in the flesh, who have believed the gospel, enjoy a ministration of righteousness and glory.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> GLORY<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> LORD<\/strong>. Moses said to Jehovah, “I beseech thee, show me thy glory.” And he had some vision of the Almighty, and heard Jehovah God proclaim his Name as he passed by; but the God of Israel said, “Thou canst not see my face.” Now this, which was impossible under the old covenant, and which was thought of by the faithful as the blessing of a future state (Psa 17:15<\/span>), is not only possible but actual under the new covenant. Christ is the Image of the invisible God. We see the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, He who of old surrounded himself with clouds or dwelt “in the thick darkness” now reveals himself brightly in his Beloved. The New Testament is, more fully than the Old, a revelation. God is revealed in a manner surpassing all the partial disclosures among the Jews, and correcting all the vain imaginations among the heathen. The holy Child was Immanuel, God with us. The Man who lived so purely, spoke so wisely, and suffered so patiently, revealed the unseen God; and God was glorified in him. So the apostle regarded Christianity as the breaking forth of new light on the human race, and that the very radiance of God in Jesus Christ his Son. So let us regard it. Truly the light is goodthe inner light of the New Testamentthe glory of the Lord.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> CONTEMPLATION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THAT<\/strong> GLORY<\/strong>. We behold it as one looks upon a mirror on which an object out of his reach is reflected. Our Lord has ascended to the Father, and we do not see him face to face in the present life, but we look on the Divine testimony, and, as we look, we gain “the excellency of the knowledge of Christ.” In order to this, two things are necessary.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. We must have our faces unveiled. The veil is prejudice or unbelief. The ignorance of God, long spread over the earth, is described by a prophet as “the covering cast over all people, and the veil that is spread over all nations.” The removal of that covering or veil results in the turning of nations to the Lord. Alas, readers of the New Testament may be as blind to its true meaning and beauty as any Jews were in reading the Law. A vague light, perhaps, comes through the veil, but there is no clear discernment of that glory of the Lord which gives to the New Testament its surpassing power and value. St. Paul knew this well, and felt himself unable to make all men see what he saw. From some who heard him his gospel was hid. It was and is the preacher’s duty to manifest and proclaim the truth; but blinded minds and veiled hearts could, and still can, defeat the testimony. St. Paul himself had once been very blind. When light shone in the face of the martyr Stephen as he stood before the council, “as it had been the face of an angel,” Saul of Tarsus was only bewildered and irritated, and he consented to Stephen’s death. Soon after, on his way to Damascus, a strong light from heaven shone round about him, and the voice of the Lord reached his car. Some holy light through the veil fell on his countenance, but the veil was not yet removed, and the Pharisee was not yet a Christian. Illumination came to him when, at the word of the disciple Ananias, the eyes of his body, which had been blinded by the sudden effulgence on the way, were opened, and at the same time the eyes of the inner man were freed from the scales of unbelief, and God shone into his heart.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. We must form a habit of beholding that glory. We do not presume to say what amount of blessing may be gained through even a rapid or occasional glance cast on the Lord Jesus; but what the apostle intends is an habitual and daily contemplation of that “brightness of the Father’s glory.” No study of books, acquaintance with doctrines, or observance of rites can do for us what is done by the habit of “looking to Jesus.”<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> TRANSFORMING<\/strong> POWER<\/strong> OF<\/strong> SUCH<\/strong> CONTEMPLATION<\/strong>. “Changed into the same image.” A moral metamorphosis is wrought, not magically as by a spell or charm, but in the manner proper to a moral nature, by the moulding influence of a new habit of thought and affection. This proceeds on the well known principle that, whatever we look upon with frequency and with congenial feeling, stamps itself on our minds and characters. He who looks upon evil becomes evil. He who occupies himself with trifles grows trivial. He who associates with the wise grows wise. He who admires the good himself becomes good. So likewise he who beholds the pure and gracious image of God in the face of Jesus Christ is changed insensibly into that image, learns to think the thoughts of God and to exhibit the mind of Christ. Two important features of this great change are indicated in the text.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. It is a progressive one. “From glory to glory.” No doubt, if we could abide continually under the radiance of Christ, his glory would transform us more rapidly and completely than is the experience of average Christians. And we must not dwell on the idea of gradualness so as to excuse a low level of Christian attainment. But the truth lies here, that, as we receive out of Christ’s fulness grace for grace, so are we transformed into his likeness from glory to glory, the light of the Lord gaining upon us and dispelling all the darkness until we are “light in the Lord.”<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. While this change follows a law of moral influence, it is produced by the active operation of a Divine power”as by the Lord the Spirit.” The reference is to the Lord Jesus as “a quickening Spirit,” who is here brought into contrast with Moses, the minister of the killing “letter.” At the same time, we know from other Scriptures that the Lord pervades his Church on earth and renews men in his own image by the gracious presence and work of the Holy Ghost. Without this doctrine of spiritual operation, both direct and indirect, we fail to apprehend the transforming power of a pure Christianity. Note in conclusion:<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The connection between faith and character<\/em>. <\/em>Some raise a cry that faith leads to mysticism and genders dispute, while nothing is wanted, nothing is to be valued, but an exemplary character and a good life. But what if such character and life are best attained by the habit of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ? It might as well be said that it is of little consequence whether a man can see or is blind, so long as he walks and works well. He cannot walk or work well unless he can see. No more can one walk or act like Christ unless he looks to him in faith. Others raise a different cry. They are all for faith, and yet show no conformity to Christ. All such boasting is vain. The effect of beholding the glory of the Lord is to be changed into the same image. If there is no such change the faith is only in imagination, not in heart.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. The far reach of the principle of assimilation to what we habitually and willingly behold<\/em>. <\/em>In this way are Christians conformed to Christ in this present time. But the principle carries much further. It is thus that the saints will be glorified with Christ at his appearing. “We know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.”<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. The evil case of those who see in Christ <\/em>“no beauty that he should be desired<\/em>.” <\/em>They miss both the way of peace and the way of holiness. Alas! when the gospel is set before them, the veil lies upon their hearts. They can see something to be admired in the wisdom of sages and the courage of heroes, and yet see nothing in the Son of God. They may look on nature with admiring eye, and see “the glory in the grass and splendour in the flower;” but Jesus Christ is to them “as a root out of a dry ground.” Lord, remove the veil! Shine into these hearts with power!F.<\/p>\n

HOMILIES BY R. TUCK<\/strong><\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-3<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The best commendation.<\/strong><\/p>\n

It was an early custom in the Christian Church for teachers to carry with them “letters of commendation” when they passed from town to town. Of this custom we have an indication in Act 18:27<\/span>, “When Apollos was disposed to pass into Achaia [Corinth], the brethren [of Ephesus] wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him.” And the thirteenth canon of the Council of Chalcedon ordained that “clergymen coming to a city where they were unknown, should not be allowed to officiate without letters commendatory from their own bishop.” It seems to have been made a charge against the apostle that he never presented any credentials, but assumed an authority for which he had no warrant. The apostle is here replying to such a charge, and his plea is that, having so manifestly received the greater commendation of God’s witness with his work, he in no sense can need man’s good word. His converts were the best possible commendation. His letters <\/em>were those written by God as truth on human hearts. From the Christian standpoint the only satisfactory proof of call to ministry is the Divine seal set on the work of the ministry. It was the plea of St. Peter, when accounting for his admitting the Gentiles into the privileges of the Christian Church, that the “Holy Ghost had fallen upon them, even as upon us at the beginning.” And that was felt to be an all-sufficient attestation of the work which St. Peter had done. In the same way St. Paul pleads that spiritual results had followed his ministry among the Corinthians. God had set his seal upon it, and that was his wholly satisfactory commendation, and the basis of any authority he claimed. Speaking in a figure he says, “The Corinthians are an epistle<\/em>.” <\/em>He regards Christ as the Author, and himself as the amanuensis. The characters of this epistle were preserved by no visible or perishable medium, but by the invisible operation of the Spirit. We consider<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> USEFULNESS<\/strong> OF<\/strong> HUMAN<\/strong> COMMENDATIONS<\/strong>. Such are found to be necessary in the intercourse of nations. The ambassador is duly furnished with his credentials; and the representative of the business firm carries with him his authority to act in the name of the firm. So it is found of practical value that clergymen and ministers going to other districts or countries should have such attestation as will win for them the confidence of those to whom they may happen to minister. Several questions of interest arise in connection with this subject.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. From what central bodies, or from what individuals, should such letters of commendation come?<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. What should they properly concern? And can they ever wisely go beyond the attestation of personal character and ministerial efficiency? Men must be judged by their works rather than by the opinion which others may have formed concerning them. Still, in every age, Churches have needed to be guarded against plausible but unworthy men, who force themselves into positions of influence unawares. And this has been the special trouble of all smaller Churches, and those existing apart from Christian organizations. Every ordinary man should depend for his acceptance upon his letters of recommendation.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> THE<\/strong> LIMITATION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> DEMAND<\/strong> FOR<\/strong> SUCH<\/strong> LETTERS<\/strong>. Sometimes they are merely vexations. The demand for them is a mere piece of officialism. Some men so stand before the world that no letters about them can be necessary. And the letters may only. concern<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> character, <\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> efficiency.<\/p>\n

They should not deal with disputable opinions. A full and fair estimate of character is sufficient to give confidence that a man’s work will be honest and faithful. Commendations of so called “orthodoxy” or “heterodoxy” can never be anything but mischievous. We may commend the man; <\/em>we had better take care not to commend his opinions. Of these let those to whom he ministers be the judges.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> GOD<\/strong>‘S WAYS<\/strong> OF<\/strong> MAKING<\/strong> SUCH<\/strong> LETTERS<\/strong> WHOLLY<\/strong> UNNECESSARY<\/strong>. From the case of St. Paul we learn that God may so manifestly show his acceptance of a man and a man’s work that no other credential can possibly be necessary. A man’s labours and successes may sufficiently declare that he is a man of God, a messenger of God. Illustrate by such cases as Luther, Whitefield, Brainerd, etc. We must well apprehend that, because a thing is unusual, <\/em>it is not therefore untrue<\/em>. <\/em>And in every age men have been raised up whose strongly marked individuality leads them to take fresh lines of thought and of work. Men may hesitate to give such men their credentials; it is enough if God manifestly accepts them.R.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4-6<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The power, and the agency it uses.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The apostle here dwells upon the confidence he has in the Corinthian Church as the all sufficient commendation of his ministry and apostleship. But he will take no honour to himself over his successes at Corinth. He had but been the agent, and the power and sufficiency were altogether of God. St. Paul was always before men <\/em>firm, confident, bold; but always before God <\/em>humble and dependent. The expression, “through Christ to God-ward,” probably means “that our eyes are directed towards God, the Source of our confidence, and that it is through Jesus Christ alone that we possess the right thus to lean on him.” Illustrate, from Old Testament Scriptures, the Jewish habit of mind which referred all events to God’s direct working, confounding the cause with the agency. For instance, God is said to harden Pharaoh’s heart, and to send a lying spirit among the prophets. Such direct reference of all things to God is characteristic of the imaginative, uncultured, superstitions ages; but, in intelligent form, it is found in Christianity. There is no confusion of power and agent, but behind agency the “power” is fully and humbly recognized. This we further unfold, noting the following points:<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> IN<\/strong> CHRISTIANITY<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MAN<\/strong> STILL<\/strong> WORKS<\/strong>. God proposes to save the world by man. He does not use miracle, but deals with men as moral beings, subject to various moral influences arising from their relations one to another. Every man is a force upon his fellow man. Some, by reason of particular positions and endowments, exert great influence on other men. It is at once true that man must be saved by man, and that man cannot be saved by man. The paradox is not a difficult one to explain from the Christian point of view. Christianity asks, therefore, from every man three things.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The consecration of his talents and trusts. <\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. The sanctifying of his relationships. <\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. And the faithful use of his opportunities.<\/p>\n

True of man in his ordinary life spheres, this is more especially true of man as occupied in the Christian ministry.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> IN<\/strong> CHRISTIANITY<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MAN<\/strong> IS<\/strong> ONLY<\/strong> AGENT<\/strong>. He has no sort of independent authority. He is not fittingly likened to the plenipotentiary, who has a matter wholly committed to his judgment and decision. The Christian minister or worker is never free of his close and intimate relations with God. His “sufficiency” is never of himself.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. He works for <\/em>another, and has no self-seeking ends to gain.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. He works at the will <\/em>of another, holding himself ever in attitudes of dependent and submissive obedience, saying continually, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?”<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. He works in the strength <\/em>of another, leaning upon the “everlasting arms.” Taking these as characteristic features of the Christian ministry, it will be readily shown in what a marked way they contrast with the spirit of the self-depending and self-seeking worldly man.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> IN<\/strong> CHRISTIANITY<\/strong> THE<\/strong> MAN<\/strong> IS<\/strong> ACTUALLY<\/strong> ENDUED<\/strong> WITH<\/strong> DIVINE<\/strong> POWER<\/strong>. “Our sufficiency is of God.” It is this truth that needs such distinct assertion for the sake of the Christian worker himself, as well as for the sake of those to whom his work is a witness. The Christian is a man quickened with a new life; it is that “new <\/em>life” which finds expression in his working. The Christian is a man sealed by the Holy Ghost, who dwells in him, and that Holy Ghost is his secret strength and inspiration. Two figures may be contrasted. The water flowing in pipes, and the sap flowing in the branch. The latter is the only figure that efficiently represents the relation of power and agency in the Christian worker, and it is the figure used by our Lord himself. The union and relation are such that, while the full manhood is retained, and even nourished into vigour, the vitality, the real force behind the manhood, and the direction of all details of action, are God’s. The Christian conceives of himself as not even able to think <\/em>anything as of himself, much less to do anything. He is “strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.”R.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The letter and the spirit.<\/strong><\/p>\n

It does not appear that St. Paul had in mind the different senses in which Scripture can now be read. Such distinctions as the literal, the allegorical, and the mystical belong to modern times. The apostle is contrasting the Old Testament with the New. The older revelation consisted of exact directions for the guidance of life and conduct. The new revelation consists of principles and examples by the help and application of which a man may guide his own conduct. But, while this distinction is carefully noted, it should be observed that, in the older revelation, there was both letter and spirit, and devout souls recognized and lived in the light of the inner principles, the spiritual truth which precise injunctions did but illustrate. F. W. Robertson says, “It was the business of Moses to teach maxims, and not principles; rules for ceremonial, and not a spirit of life. And these thingsrules, ceremonials, maxims, laware what the apostle calls here the letter<\/em>. <\/em>Thus, for instance, truth is a principle springing out of the inward life; but Moses only gave the rule: ‘Thou shalt not forswear thyself.’ It is impossible not to see how plainly inadequate this rule is to all that truth requires; for he who scarcely avoided perjury may have kept nevertheless to the letter of the Law! Again, love is a principle; but Moses said simply, ‘Thou shalt not kill, nor steal, nor injure.’ Again, meekness and subduedness before God,these are of the Spirit; but Moses merely commanded fasts. It was in consequence of the superiority of the teaching of principles over a mere teaching of maxims that the ministry of the letter was considered as nothing.” “The difference between the old covenant and the new was that the former prescribed, <\/em>the latter inspired; <\/em>the former gave written precepts, the latter the power to fulfil them; the former laid down the rules, the latter brought man’s heart into the condition in which such rules became a part of his nature.” In an educational point of view the letter must come first, the child must have precise direction of his conduct, and only through this will he be helped to grasp principles, and apply them himself to his conduct and duties. So that we must not undervalue the letter, but give it a proper place as a stepping stone to higher and better things. The distinction between the letter and the spirit may be illustrated in a variety of spheres.<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> EARLY<\/strong> MOSAIC<\/strong> RECORDS<\/strong>. The imaginative and the historical records of the first ages. Perplexities and difficulties abound when we force literal meanings. The first principles of morals and religion come to view when we read the spirit of them.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> JUDAIC<\/strong> RELIGIOUS<\/strong> SYSTEM<\/strong>. That does seem to be a round of formal injunctions, covering all the various family, social, and religious relations of the people, and yet our Lord taught us, in his sermon on the mount, to find spiritual principles within it. He showed that the spirit of hate underlay the sin of murder, and the spirit of purity assured the maintenance of right marriage relations. <\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> TEACHINGS<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> PROPHETS<\/strong>. It was almost the one essential thing in their work that they were to set free the spirit of the older revelation, which was in danger of being overcrushed by the letter of commandment and ceremonial rule. It may even be shown that, in the prophets, there was a tendency to undervalue the letter, <\/em>in the earnestness of their effort to get a right value set on the spirit <\/em>of obedience.<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> LIFE<\/strong> AND<\/strong> GOSPEL<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> LORD<\/strong> JESUS<\/strong>. Illustrate by our Lord’s parables, and by his teaching as in Joh 6:63<\/span>.<\/p>\n

V.<\/strong> IN<\/strong> THE<\/strong> APOSTOLIC<\/strong> MINISTRY<\/strong>. Especially illustrated in St. Paul’s teachings respecting the relation of the Judaic and Christian systems, and equally illustrated in St. John’s revelation of the inner and mystical meanings of the Christian truth and requirements. Conclude by showing how this distinction is still applicable to modern religious teaching.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. The “letter” is needed. In some stages of religious experience and attainment precise directions are the best helps.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. The mere “letter” may still be exaggerated, so as to become a mischievous bondage.<\/p>\n

3<\/strong>. The true teacher uses the formal “letter” only to carry the “spirit.” But the higher teaching of the very spirit of Christianity demands from the teacher a very marked and cultured spirituality, or spiritual insight.R.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:7-11<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The old covenant and the new.<\/strong><\/p>\n

In some sense it may be said that teachings respecting the relations between the older revelation in Judaism and the newer revelation in Christianity were special to the Apostle Paul. On this point he had direct revelations from Christ, and the liberal form which his teachings took exposed him to the peril of being misunderstood and misrepresented, and brought persecutions around him. No man could be found more truly loyal to the older revelation than the apostle of the Gentiles, but while he honoured it he saw clearly that it had its day and its mission. That day had now passed; that mission had been fulfilled. The older covenant had made open and plain the way for the new, and it was loyalty to the old for Paul to accept fully the new, in which it found its fulfilment, its completion, its glory; for the ministration of Jesus and the Spirit is but Judaism glorified, the gospel of the letter passed into the gospel of the spirit. Three contrasts are here dwelt upon. The old covenant and the new are conceived as<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> A MINISTRATION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> DEATH<\/strong> AND<\/strong> A MINISTRATION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> LIFE<\/strong>. St. Paul had said (2Co 3:6<\/span>) that the “letter killeth.” He meant that it crushed hope and effort, since no man could reach a perfect obedience. The old covenant condemned all who failed even in the least thing. It provided no life, <\/em>no strength in which obedience could become possible. On the other band, the new covenant provided a new life for the will and a new grace unto obedience. The old crushed down heart and hope, and made a man cry out, “I cannot.” The new cheered him, lifted him up, and made him say, “I can, through him who strengtheneth me.”<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> A MINISTRATION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> CONDEMNATION<\/strong> AND<\/strong> A MINISTRATION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> RIGHTEOUSNESS<\/strong>. The old covenant said, “Thou shalt not,” and it denounced its penalties on the offenders. The new covenant says, “Thou shalt,” holds before us the model life of obedience lived by the Lord Jesus, and provides grace unto changing us into his image.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> A MINISTRATION<\/strong> THAT<\/strong> WAS<\/strong> PASSING<\/strong> AND<\/strong> A MINISTRATION<\/strong> THAT<\/strong> WAS<\/strong> PERMANENT<\/strong>. (2Co 3:11<\/span>.) The older covenant was of necessity transitory. It had but a temporary and preparatory mission. The new is abiding, for there can be nothing higher than or beyond that spiritual righteousness which is its sublime aim to accomplish.R.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:17<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The liberty of the Spirit.<\/strong><\/p>\n

“The apostle assumes, almost as an axiom of the spiritual life, that the presence of the Spirit gives freedom, as contrasted with the bondage of the letterfreedom from slavish fear, freedom from the guilt and burden of sin, freedom from the tyranny of the Law.” Distinguish carefully between liberty and licence. Whether a man can have and use liberty depends entirely upon what a man is<\/em>. <\/em>Some men are better in bonds; they must be in bonds; their fancied liberty is but a delusion. The point urged by the apostle is that the man who is renewed in Christ Jesus can be safely trusted with his full liberty, because he is established in principles, and upheld by a power which guarantees that he will put his liberty into reasonable and righteous limitations. We observe some of the reasons why “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” <\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> BECAUSE<\/strong> THERE<\/strong> IS<\/strong> LIFE<\/strong>. A new life, a Divine life. Life can always be allowed its free and natural expression. It is disease that must be set in limitations and bondages. The forces and expressions of life <\/em>are evenly and harmoniously balanced; and order is preserved when life is permitted to be free. The expressions of the Christian life, the life of the Spirit, can only be true and beautiful and good.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> BECAUSE<\/strong> THERE<\/strong> IS<\/strong> FREEDOM<\/strong> FROM<\/strong> BONDS<\/strong>. That is, from the bonds of formal rules. The Spirit establishes principles, <\/em>and so frees us from rules<\/em>. <\/em>God’s laws are written by the Spirit in our minds and on our hearts. Illustrate by the passing away of schoolboy commands and regulations when manhood has come and principles are established.<\/p>\n

III.<\/strong> BECAUSE<\/strong> THERE<\/strong> IS<\/strong> KNOWLEDGE<\/strong> OF<\/strong> THE<\/strong> RIGHT<\/strong>. This the indwelling Spirit guarantees, because he takes of the things of Christ and reveals them unto us. He is our inward Monitor, our Teacher as well as our Comforter. Illustrate by the perplexity of life if we must control it by fashion and custom, deciding what we may eat and what we may not eat; what we may enjoy and what we may not enjoy; what is consistent and what is inconsistent. The Spirit shows the right; it is liberty to act on its great principle that we must everywhere be<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> true to God, and <\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> helpful to our brethren.<\/p>\n

IV.<\/strong> BECAUSE<\/strong> THERE<\/strong> IS<\/strong> DESIRE<\/strong> FOR<\/strong> THE<\/strong> RIGHT<\/strong>. He who is without the Spirit may “know the better but follow the worse.” That is saying he is in bondages of self-will and evil which he cannot break. The indwelling Spirit controls the will and affections so that we desire what is right, and therefore are tree to follow the right <\/em>of which we may know.<\/p>\n

V.<\/strong> BECAUSE<\/strong> THERE<\/strong> IS<\/strong> QUICK<\/strong> SENSITIVENESS<\/strong> TO<\/strong> THE<\/strong> WRONG<\/strong>. So that it is detected and its slavery resisted. The liberty of the Spirit is such that it cannot be taken at unawares. From these considerations plead for the importance of keeping our minds and hearts ever open to the Spirit’s love and lead, as the secret of maintaining the only liberty that is worth calling such. For the liberty that is assured to man by the gospel, see Joh 8:32<\/span>; Rom 6:18<\/span>, Rom 6:22<\/span>; Rom 8:2<\/span>; Jas 1:25<\/span>; Jas 2:1-26<\/span> 12<\/span>; 1Pe 2:16<\/span>.R.T.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:18<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The vision of God in Christianity.<\/strong><\/p>\n

This passage contains evident reference to an incident occurring in the life of Moses. He had tarried on the mount for forty days, in some mysterious manner within the immediate radiance of the Divine glory, holding some very near, yet very secret, fellowship with God. We might expect to find an influence from such converse resting on Moses’ spirit ever after, and we could not wonder if some traces of it were left upon his very face. Such was the case. Unknown to himself, the skin of his face shone, and when the people of Israel saw it they were afraid to come near him. Partly to shadow the glory from them, and partly, as St. Paul tells us in this chapter, that they might not see the glory fade and die away, he covered himself with a veil. This glory on the face of Moses had two great lessons in it for the Jews and for us.<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. That the vision of God has a transforming power on human souls.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. And that this glory of Moses was a symbol of the passing and preparatory character of the Old Testament dispensation. St. Pauls argumentative use of his reference to Moses may be thus traced. He is exalting his office as a minister of the new covenant. He argues that if a glory was shed upon the ministration of the Law, a Law Written in letters and graven upon stones, much greater must be the glory which rests upon the ministration of the Spirit, which ministration is permanent. Being the minister of this more glorious covenant, St. Paul says he may speak and act with boldness, without disguise. He need not spread a veil over his face, as Moses did, in order that the sons of Israel might not see the end of that fading brightness. And this reminds him that, when he wrote, the minds of Israel were still blinded, a veil was on their hearts, so that they imagine the glory lies still on Moses and his system; they cannot see that the older covenant has done its work, that the Law has given place to love. When their hearts turn to the Lord Jesus, the veil is rent away; they have the vision of the Lord the Spirit; their bondage gives place to freedom. “We <\/em>all, while with face unveiled we behold in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are ourselves transformed continually into the same likeness; and the glory which shines upon us is reflected by us, even as it proceeds from the Lord the Spirit.” Two questions invite attention. <\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. How is the vision of God granted to us? <\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. What influence does the vision of God exert?<\/p>\n

I.<\/strong> HOW<\/strong> IS<\/strong> THE<\/strong> VISION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> GOD<\/strong> GRANTED<\/strong> TO<\/strong> US<\/strong>? Man can never find rest for head or heart save in God. The deepest longing of every human soul is the vision of God. Idolatry is the expression of the desire to find and see God. Humanity in all ages is knit together as one man in this cry for God. Illustrate by references to Enoch, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Job, Isaiah, Stephen, and the Apostle John, who says, “We know that, when he doth appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.” These, indeed, are all cases of good <\/em>men, but the universal efforts to make a religion show that all men are alike in this, they would behold the glory of God. The vision is given us:<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>. By the inner ministration of the Spirit. This is the meaning of the “open face, unveiled.” St. Paul had just said, “We use great plainness of speech;” that is, in our ministry we can speak with freedom and boldness, without any disguise or veil, because we are ministers in the power of the Spirit<\/em>. <\/em>So, he would say, we all need no veil, we have openness, to behold the glory of the Lord in the leadings of the Spirit; for “where the spirit of the Lord is, there is [this] liberty;” veils are removed, hindrances are taken away, we can “behold as in a glass the glory of the Lord.”<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. By the outward mirror of the Christ. “Beholding as in a glass.” God’s actual glory can be seen by no created eye; it must be reflectedit can only be seen as mirrored. We cannot look on the sun; we can see its image in a pool, we can find its reflected glory in the tinted flowers, and in the glorified clouds of the sunset. So our pained, strained, spiritual eyes rest delightfully upon the “Man Christ Jesus,” who is the “Brightness of the Father’s glory, and the express Image of the Father’s person.” The infinite excellences of the Divine character are exhibited in Christ in a form comprehensible by men. What the virtues and moral excellences of God are we could never know, but Christ shows them to us as if they were the graces and virtues of a man. Illustrate thus God’s holiness, justice, mercy, and love.<\/p>\n

II.<\/strong> WHAT<\/strong> INFLUENCES<\/strong> DOES<\/strong> THIS<\/strong> VISION<\/strong> OF<\/strong> GOD<\/strong> EXERT<\/strong>? “Changed into the same image.” Moses could not see God and be the same man that he was. It changed his soul somewhat into the Divine likeness, even as his face lost its natural expression and shone with the glory. The sight of God is ever a transforming sight. It is seen to be so in the case of the transfiguration. The disciples saw our Lord’s very raiment white and glistering, and glory all overspreading his frame. When a man sees God there is an inner change, of which that is the symbol Illustrate by the way in which a close and trustful friendship makes the friends grow alike. As the Christian man maintains his daily relations with Christ the mirrored God, as he “dwells in the secret place of the Most High,” he finds a transforming and transfiguring work is being carried on: the mind of God is coming to be his mind; the work of God is coming to be his work; the very life of God is coming to be his life. And this further result comes. They who are changing into the likeness of God are gradually reflecting the glory of God out upon men. They are becoming themselves, in turn, mirrors of God, glasses in which men may behold the glory of the Lord. We hardly know which is the more gracious and surprisingthe change that is wrought in us by the constant communion of God and our souls, or the infinite condescension which permits us, in our earthly lives, to be light bearers for God, mirrors to reflect the glory and attraction of his saving grace, so that men may be won to him. Conclude by showing<\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> that the heart must be a veiled heart which resists the ministration of the Spirit;<\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> that from such a veiled heart must ever be hidden the glory of the redeeming God.R.T.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Do we begin again to commend ourselves?<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> This is a plain indication that St. Paul had been blamed among them for commending himself; as the next clause seems to intimate that their false apostle had got himself recommended to them by letters, and so had introduced himself into that church. <\/p>\n

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1<\/span> . ] namely, through what was said in 2Co 2:17<\/span> , regarding which Paul foresaw that his opponents would describe it as the beginning of another recommendation of himself. It is interrogative<\/em> , not to be taken, with Hofmann, who then reads , as an affirmation<\/em> , in which case a logical relation to the question that follows could only be brought out by importing something. [155]<\/p>\n

] belongs to <\/em><\/strong> .<\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> .<\/em><\/strong> , and refers to experiences, through which Paul must have passed already before, certainly also in respect to his last Epistle (1 Corinthians 1-4; 1Co 5<\/span> ; 1Co 9<\/span> ; 1Co 14:17<\/span> , al.<\/em> ), when the charge was made: <\/em><\/strong> ! As to the reason why<\/em> he regards the to be such a reproach, see 2Co 10:18<\/span> .<\/p>\n

In the plural<\/em> he in this chapter includes also Timothy, as is clear from expressions such as immediately occur in 2Co 3:2<\/span> , ., and 2Co 3:6<\/span> , <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> .<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/em><\/strong> ] as at Rom 16:1<\/span> . Hence <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> or <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> (Arrian. Epict<\/em> . ii. 3. 1; Diog. L. v. 18, viii. 87), letters of recommendation<\/em> . Regarding their use in the ancient Christian church, see Suicer, Thes<\/em> . II. p. 1194; Dought. Anal.<\/em> II. p. 120.<\/p>\n

. . .] nisi<\/em> , i.e. unless it possibly be, that<\/em> , etc. Only if this exigency takes place with us, can that be asserted of us. Such epistolary<\/em> recommendations, indeed, we should not have, and hence we should have to resort to self<\/em> -praise! The expression is ironical<\/em> in character, and contains an answer to that question, which reveals its absurdity. Comp. Xen. Mem<\/em> . i. 2. 8. Hence is not to be taken, with Reiche, as siquidem<\/em> or quia<\/em> , and as negativing the <\/em><\/strong> (as if it were <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> .<\/em><\/strong> ).<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> ] as some people<\/em> (comp. 1Co 4:18<\/span> ; 1Co 15:12<\/span> ; Gal 1:7<\/span> ), certainly a side-glance at anti-Pauline teachers, who had brought to the Corinthians letters of recommendation, either from teachers of repute, or from churches, [156] and had obtained similar letters from Corinth at their departure thenc.<\/p>\n

, ] In the former case, it might be thought that we wished to supply this need by recommendation of ourselves; in the latter case ( ), that we, by our self-recommendation, wished to corrupt your judgment, and to induce you to recommend us to others. Both would be absurd<\/em> , but this is just in keeping with the irony<\/em> .<\/p>\n

[155] The question that follows with would mean: “ or do we not withal need?<\/em> ” etc., which does not fit in with when taken as an affirmation. Hofmann, however, imports the thoughts: whoever is offended al this<\/em> , that Paul has no scruple in recommending himself, to him he offers to answer on his part the question, whether<\/em> he and his official associates have any need of letters of recommendation.<\/p>\n

[156] According to Gal 2:7-9<\/span> , but hardly from the original apostles<\/em> or from the church of Jerusalem<\/em> under their guidance as such. This, however, does not exclude the possibility that individual members<\/em> of the mother-church may have given such letters. We do not know anything more precise on the point: even from , Gal 2:12<\/span> ff., nothing is to be inferred.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

VI. HE MEETS CHARGE OF SELF-RECOMMENDATION BY POINTING TO WHAT HE HAD DONE AT CORINTH. THE DIVINE SOURCE OF HIS CONFIDENCE; EXCELLENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT MINISTRY AND ITS SUPERIORITY TO THAT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-11<\/span><\/p>\n

1Do we begin again to commend ourselves?1<\/span> or2<\/span> need we, as some others [om. others<\/em>], 2epistles of commendation to you, or [om. letters<\/em> of commendation3<\/span>] from you? Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: 3<\/em>forasmuch as ye are<\/em> manifestly declared to be [being manifested that ye are] the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables [or tablets] of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart [on hearts which are<\/em> tablets of 4flesh].4<\/span> And [But] such trust have we through Christ to God-ward: 5not that we are sufficient [om.<\/em> of ourselves] to think anything [from, ourselves]5<\/span> as of [out of, ] ourselves; but our sufficiency is<\/em> of God: 6who also hath made us able [sufficient as]6<\/span> ministers of the New Testament [Covenant]; not of the [a] letter, but of the [a]7<\/span> spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 7But if the ministration of death, written and engraven [engraven in letters] in stones was glorious [in glory ], so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory<\/em> was to be done away [is passing away, ];8<\/span> 8How shall not [rather] the ministration of the spirit be [om.<\/em> rather] glorious [in glory]? 9For if the ministration9<\/span> of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed [abound, ] in10<\/span> glory. 10For even that which was [has been] made glorious had [has been having, ] no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. 11For if that which was done 11<\/span>[passing, ] away was<\/em> glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious [abideth is in glory, ].<\/p>\n

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL<\/strong><\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-3<\/span>. What the Apostle had said in 2Co 3:15-17<\/span> was liable to misinterpretation by ill disposed persons, on the ground that it was a boasting or a commendation of himself. He guards against this by reminding the Corinthians that he felt no necessity of recommending himself to them or to others, inasmuch as the work which Christ had accomplished by him in their city was a sufficient recommendation for him in every part of the world.Do we begin to commend ourselves.<\/strong> is capable of an invidious meaning, such as might be insinuated by an opponent; do we presume etc. (comp. Luk 3:8<\/span>). qualifies the infinitive, and refers to something which might be regarded as self-commendation either in his first Epistle (1 Corinthians 2-4, 1Co 7:25<\/span>; 1Co 7:40<\/span>; 1Co 9:14; 1Co 9:18<\/span>;1Co 15:10<\/span>), or in his earlier discourses or letters.Or need we like some, epistles of recommendation to you, or from you?<\/strong>The verb () signifies: to bring together, to introduce, to commend (Rom 16:1<\/span>, and frequently in our Epistle). Self-commendation in the sense of praising ones self, is mentioned with disapprobation also in 2Co 10:18<\/span>. In the following sentence, if we accept of as the true reading, we must suppose that a decidedly negative and ironical answer was presupposed in it, or that the previous question goes on the presumption of an absurdity, [Jelf. Gram.<\/em> 860, 5. Obs. Webster Synt. and Synn. of N. T.,<\/em> chap. 8. p. 126.] q. d.:<\/em> unless it be that we need, i.e.<\/em> only under such a presumption could such an idea be entertained. This reading is not really more difficult than the strongly authenticated , although the latter is grammatically incorrect, inasmuch as nowhere else in the New Testament does occur in such a question after a , which must necessarily exclude all which precedes it. It makes very prominent the absurdity of the question: or do we not yet need? and it may be regarded as combining together the two constructions and [Without the , the previous question (which we might expect the Apostle to repel by a decided ), remains almost entirely without notice, and a new one is started which only inferentially negatives it. If is taken (as all usage requires it to be,) in the sense of nisi,<\/em> (unless) the interrogative character of the sentence it introduces (according to our English version) ceases, and it notices the previous question in the only way it deserved notice, viz:<\/em> ironically or even derisively. The sense would be: I can need no commendation either from myself, for that would be introducing myself, or boasting where I am already well known; or from others to you, for none know me better than you; or from you to others, for your conversion and present state are better known as our work than anything you can say. Surely then the mere mention of such a thing is enough to show its absurdity.] We often read of in the church after the death of the Apostles. When members of the church travelled from place to place they were usually recommended from one bishop to another, and the letters thus given became a means of maintaining fraternal intercourse between the bishops and their congregations. [Paul himself appears to have recognized the commencement of such a custom. In Gal 2:12<\/span>, he speaks of some who came from James, as if even then some authority was expected from the Apostolic College at Jerusalem. Two years before, Apollos passing into this very city of Corinth, did<\/em> bring letters from the brethren of Ephesus (Act 18:27<\/span>); and as many of the Corinthians professed to be followers of Apollos, it is no impossible thing that such were here aimed at. The 13th 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 (Epistol Commendari,<\/em>) from their own bishop. Comp. Neander, Chr. Rel. vol. I, pp. 205, 360 ff. In the Clementine Homilies Peter warns his hearers against any apostle, prophet, or teacher, who does not first compare his preaching with James, and come with witnesses; where Paul seems especially aimed at, and we have perhaps a specimen of what Paul was contending against in our epistle.] W. F. Besser: Were the Corinthians inclined to reckon their own Apostle among those strangers who needed such letters? The absurdity implied in the question lay in the supposition that the Apostle [] who was well known not only at Corinth but everywhere, should need<\/em> any commendation from others or from himself, as if he were a stranger. By the words he evidently alludes to those antipauline teachers, who, as his readers well knew, had brought letters of recommendation to Corinth, and had taken such letters from Corinth when they departed. He thus not only shows that he needed no such letters, but he shows this in a way which throws confusion upon his opponents, while it honors and encourages the Corinthians themselvesour Epistle,<\/strong> i.e.,<\/em> the Epistle of commendation (gen. possess.; not: which we have written, for he speaks not of his own part in composing it until 2Co 3:3<\/span>, but which we have) is yourselves.<\/strong>By placing the predicate first he makes it more emphatic and connects it more immediately with the preceding verse. The close collocation of the emphatic with is also very significant. A similar arrangement of words may be seen in 1Co 9:2<\/span>. The large Church which had been founded by him, and which had become so rich in spiritual gifts, was a glorious work of the Holy Ghost, and so a Divine Epistle which would commend him to all the world without any letters from men. Besser: it was an Epistle of a peculiar kind, for Paul was at the same time its writer and its receiver.This metaphor he carries out in the subsequent verses in accordance with the nature of his subject, noticing first the complete certainty which he and Timothy possessed (this is the reason that is in the plural as in 2Co 4:6<\/span>; 2Co 7:3<\/span>) for the commendation of their work, and then the general notoriety of this work in all the churches:written in our hearts.<\/strong>In these words his own feelings are alluded to, inasmuch as he speaks of the writing in his own () and not their () hearts (although may be found in some authorities of no great importance, comp. Meyer).12<\/span> Paul meant that he carried this Epistle, not in his hand to show at any time, but continually with him, inasmuch as he bore the Church upon his heart. It is not of his love that the Apostle is here speaking (as in 2Co 7:3<\/span>, and Php 1:7<\/span>), and it would seem altogether inappropriate to make him allude here to the official breast-plate of the high priest (olshausen). On such an interpretation we could trace no connection between it and the following sentence, [in which the Epistle is said to be known and read, not by God, but by men]. The phrase: in our hearts, is equivalent to: in us, and the meaning of the whole expression is: So inscribed upon us and so carried about with us everywhere, that it becomes known to all. This idea is yet further defined and explained in the words:known and read by all men:<\/strong>it is a work which will be universally recognized, a letter which every one will know to be his, and which all will read as his [Grotius: the handwriting is first known<\/em> and then the Epistle is read<\/em>] (Ewald: read within and without, thoroughly). Events which had taken place in one of the principal cities of the world would necessarily have a world-wide notoriety (comp. Rom 1:8<\/span>).In this prominent relation to all the world we must not suppose that the Corinthians were themselves included, as if the of 2Co 3:1<\/span> were here again referred to, for as the Epistle was made up of the Corinthians, they would not be likely to be included also among its readers.Forasmuch as ye are manifested to be an Epistle of Christ, ministered by us,<\/strong> (2Co 3:3<\/span>).Grammatically the participle: manifested (), the object of which is to give a reason for their being known and read of all men, is to be connected with the nominative of the previous sentence ( ). in is the gen. of the author, and it is implied that the Epistle came from Christ, for it is of the origin and not of the contents nor of the proprietorship of the Epistle, that the Apostle is speaking. He now speaks of himself in the words: ministered by us,<\/em> as Christs instrument in the composition of the Epistle; and he no longer thinks of it as a letter of commendation, but simply as an exhibition of the way in which their faith had been drawn forth and their Church had been founded. It had been prepared and sent by the Apostle and his companions, acting as the ministers and servants of Christ (comp. 1Co 3:5<\/span> ff.). is here used as it is in 2Co 8:19<\/span>. The difference between this and any ordinary Epistle was evident from the materials with which and on which it was written.written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tablets of stone, but in fleshy tablets of the heart.<\/strong>The Epistle itself, the new spiritual life they had experienced, had been produced by the Holy Spirit, whose continual agency is here pointed out. This agency wrought with great power, so as to renew their hearts, but through the instrumentality of the Apostles and their testimony respecting Christ. It seems inappropriate and altogether too dogmatic to find in the ink here spoken of the figure of those lifeless and impotent means which were sometimes made use of, such as the law and those doctrines which have no quickening power, or the shadows and ceremonies of the Jewish ritual. Some representation of the Jewish law and the Sinaitic legislation must, however, have been floating before the Apostles mind, when he brought out the additional figure of the tablets of stone. This representation is not strictly consistent with the metaphor of an Epistle and of ink, and we can explain it only by the recollection that the Apostle was contrasting the work of the Spirit under the New Testament with the work of the law under the Old Testament, i.e.,<\/em> the effecting of a Divine life in the heart by the Spirit of the living God, with the outward engraving of the Divine precepts upon tables of stone. There may also have been in his mind some recollection of such passages as Jer 31:31-33<\/span> (comp. Heb 9:4<\/span>). The phrase occurs in the Sept. of Pro 7:3<\/span>. Fleshy (.) in contrast with stony (), designates a living susceptibility (comp. Eze 36:26<\/span>). [The ending refers to the substance or material of which a thing is made, in distinction from which refers to that which belongs to that thing. Our Lord was (fleshy, of human flesh subsisting) but not (fleshly, subject to fleshly lusts and passions). The word is used only in this place according to the Receptus, but it is given for by many MSS. in Rom 7:14<\/span>, and Heb 7:16<\/span>. Trench, Synn., Series II., p. 114; Webster, Synn., p. 232, and Web. and Wilk. Com.]. The word hearts () expresses also more definitely the nature of the substance made use of. In speaking of their spiritual life, he could very significantly say: ye are an Epistle (a writing) inscribed upon heart-tablets. He does not exactly say: your<\/em> hearts ( ) but generally , and he thus describes the peculiar nature of the Epistles of Christ, i.e.,<\/em> they are Christ dwelling in the heart by faith (Eph 3:17<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4-6<\/span>. In 2Co 3:2<\/span> f. Paul had expressed great confidence with respect to what had been accomplished at Corinth through his instrumentality, and he had claimed it as an evidence of his Apostolic power. In what he now says he recurs to his assertions there:Such confidence, however, we have, through Christ towards God.<\/strong>The same word, , occurs in 2Co 1:5; 2Co 8:22<\/span>; 2Co 10:2<\/span>. is stronger than would have been. The reference here may be to 2Co 2:17<\/span>, or 2Co 2:15<\/span> ff.; at least so far as 2Co 3:1<\/span> ff. may be giving the reasons for what is there said of the Corinthian Church, but not so as to make 2Co 3:1-3<\/span> either a parenthesis or a digression.He intended to say that he owed this strong and joyful confidence of which he was speaking (Neander: a confidence that we are able to work such results) entirely to Christ; for it was Christ whom he served and under whose influence he accomplished every thing he did; and it was therefore through Christ that he had such confidence in what he could do.But he had this confidence, he says, towards God ( ), i. e.<\/em>, not before God, as a matter which was right in Gods sight, but in the direction of, or in respect to God (Rom 4:2<\/span>) the Author of the work and the One to whom all the results were due (Osiander, Meyer).Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing of ourselves, as if from ourselves,<\/strong> (2Co 3:5<\/span>). Here is used as in 2Co 1:24<\/span>. If this sentence had been intended to be the object of , or to be simply a development, of the thought contained in , the phrase ought to have been . Even if he gave God the honor of governing and guiding all the circumstances and accomplishing all the results of which he had spoken, he might still without impropriety have referred to his personal qualifications and have commended, and had confidence in, what he had done. On the other hand, he is on his guard here and he gives to God all the praise. He more particularly defines what this sufficiency orability is ( occurs also in 2Co 2:16<\/span>) by , (Lachmann: ) . . , etc.<\/em> signifies to consider, to reflect upon [with the notion of a result, to make out by reasoning], and refers here to that which proceeded from him and properly belonged to himself as an Apostle, in distinction from the results which depended upon the Divine blessing (1Co 3:6<\/span>). It was the discernment of the best means and the best manner for the performance of his official duties, and a fixed purpose in the accomplishment of them (Meyer); or more comprehensively, the intellectual and moral qualification for his dutiesthe thoughts which were indispensable to the proper performance of his Apostolic work (Osiander). On no construction can we regard him as here ascribing this and his for maintaining it to God, as if his object was to say that God was the source of this trust and of his confidence in his own qualifications [Rckert]. Nor should the assertion be limited to his work of instruction, for this is required as little by the context as is the doctrine which our older dogmatists were accustomed to derive from this passage, respecting the inability of the natural man generally to think any thing right or good.13<\/span> The which makes their ability dependent upon themselves, is more clearly defined by , which designates the original source or efficient cause; as if our sufficiency had its origin in ourselves (Meyer). [Hodge: There is a difference in the prepositions: : not from<\/em> ourselves, as if out of<\/em> ourselves. We should express much the same idea by saying, our sufficiency is not in<\/em> or of<\/em> ourselves]. The belongs not exclusively to , nor to , but to both of them in conjunction. If we accept of the reading (with B. F. G. et. al.<\/em>), we should translate: as those who are sufficient of themselves ( etc.<\/em>). The positive assertion contrasted with this is:But our sufficiency is of God<\/strong>.The word sufficiency here () refers to the same object with respect to which they were sufficient as does. With this sentence must be connected the relative sentencewho also hath enabled<\/strong> () us as ministers of a new covenant<\/strong> (2Co 3:6<\/span>).The object of is not to introduce a new, higher, or more general thought in contrast with , for then the expression would have been: . , but to introduce a sentence to confirm and explain what had gone before: who has even (or truly) made us sufficient, etc.<\/em> [Conybeare: comp. (2Co 2:16<\/span>) (2Co 3:15<\/span>) and (2Co 3:6<\/span>). Ad. Clarke: a formal answer to the question: Who is sufficient for these things? God (replies the Apostle) hath made us sufficient as ministers]. (ministers) is a concise expression for , etc.<\/em>, (to be ministers), or (for the ministry, comp. in Col 1:12<\/span>).The object of the ministry [i. e.<\/em>, . , the new covenant] is put in the genitive, as in 2Co 11:15<\/span>; Eph 3:7<\/span>; and Col 1:23<\/span>, and is without the article because it is the genit. of quality. [The article is wanting also before and ] i. e.<\/em>, of a new covenant. It was new because it was altogether different from the old covenant which Moses founded. The basis of the former covenant was the law (), whereas the later, covenant was founded wholly on grace and reconciliation in Christ; the condition of salvation in the former was obedience to the law, whereas in the latter it was faith in Christ (Rom 10:5<\/span> ff.). [Neander: is not to be explained here according to its pure Greek signification (arrangement, will), but in accordance with the Heb. , which denotes a mutual transaction, an agreement (covenant) in which God promises something on condition that men fulfil what He requires of them]. This ministry of a new covenant is explained immediately by an antithetical sentence:not of the letter, but of the Spirit<\/strong>.As this expression is in explanation of and in apposition with the phrase, a new covenant, it must depend not upon (covenant) but upon (ministers). Comp. 2Co 3:7-8<\/span>. We have here the same contrast as in Rom 2:29<\/span>; Rom 7:6<\/span>. The ministers of the Old Testament were busied principally with a letter, an inflexible, lifeless and written law; and they were bound to present and to inculcate with much zeal the duties of that covenant; whereas the ministers of the New Testament were concerned mainly with the Spirit. They had to do generally with a Divine power which wrought in the mind, renewed the heart and brought men into fellowship with God; and their work was to induce as many as possible to enter into this covenant and participate in its blessings. These two ministries gave a peculiar character respectively to the two covenants.In the sentencefor the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life<\/strong>we have the reason for what had just been said, viz<\/em>: God has made us sufficient for a ministry which is not of the letter but of the Spirit, for the letter kills, etc.<\/em> (Flatt: what was written killed, but the Spiritual quickens into life). The connection must be sought by referring to the great aim of the Apostolic work, which was, as Pauls readers well knew, to bring men into a holy fellowship by a Divine life (comp. Rom 1:16<\/span> f. et. al.<\/em>). There is no need therefore of suggesting in addition that the ministry of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit, must be higher and far preferable, for, etc.<\/em> The reason which the Apostle assigns is not that the ministry of a higher economy requires higher qualifications; nor, that under this higher economy the ministers must have a capacity for higher endowments (Osiander). Neander: These words have been commonly applied to the contrasted literal or spiritual understanding of Christian truth. But Paul says nothing here directly on this subject. His words strictly refer merely to the law as a letter which gives commands, and the spirit of faith which makes alive. But probably this relation of the letter to the spirit may be applied to every precept of a merely ethical nature, with which Christianity, as the religion of the Spirit, is contrasted. Light is thrown upon the whole passage by recollecting that the Apostle had in his eye those Judaizing teachers whose motives were derived from the law, and who vaunted themselves over Paul because he proclaimed nothing but grace. Such teachers were in danger of leading souls astray by pretending that their influence was salutary, while his was dangerous and corrupting. In opposition to such he gives the reason why God had qualified him and his fellow-laborers to be ministers of a new covenant which was not of the letter but of the Spirit. Exactly the opposite of what they pretended was found, in fact, to be true. The letter to which they devoted their energies killed, while the Spirit to whose service he was addicted made alive. This killing refers, not merely to a negative powerlessness or inability to awaken that life in the soul through which men freely perform works pleasing to God; nor merely to the introduction of a moral death, i. e.<\/em>, an opposition to the Divine will, produced by the sense of guilt which the commandment excites; nor even to a killing in a spiritual sense, because sin is the death of the soul; but to the sentence of condemnation and the exclusion from all hope of life and salvation which the law pronounces. Such is the idea of death () in Rom 6:21<\/span>; Rom 6:23<\/span>; Rom 7:5<\/span> et. al.<\/em> This death is indeed occasioned by those moral influences (Rom 7:7<\/span> ff.), and is in other passages pointed out under the phrases: the curse of the law (Gal 3:10<\/span>), and, the law worketh wrath (Rom 4:15<\/span>). This introduces also a death of the heart which paralyzes all moral power (Bengel, Osiander). The question, however, is, whether the Apostle has reference to this in our passage. He certainly had no thought of bodily (physical) death, as the wages of sin (Rom 5:12<\/span>), and produced and demanded by the law (1Co 15:56<\/span>; Rom 7:9<\/span>), for such a death takes place also independently of the law (Rom 5:13<\/span>); nor as a penalty of the law, for such a killing () would not be a proper antithesis to the giving of life (). But the giving life or quickening is the effect of the eternal life ( ) which is quickened in the soul (Rom 8:2<\/span>; Rom 6:10-11<\/span>), or of the introduction of the soul into that fellowship with God which is completed in the resurrection.14<\/span><\/p>\n

2Co 3:7-11<\/span>. The Apostle now proceeds () to show that the ministry of the New Testament was far preferable to that of the Old, both in the effects which it produces and in the spirit which it reveals. For the sake of comparing them he brings them face to face with each other, and then from the glory of the Old Testament service which appeared with such splendor in Moses face, that the children of Israel could not look upon him (2Co 3:7<\/span>), he draws a conclusion, a minori ad majus<\/em>.But if the ministration of death, engraven in letters upon stones, was in glory<\/strong> (2Co 3:7<\/span>).Instead of the simple designation the ministry of the letter, which he had used in 2Co 3:6<\/span>, he now uses the phrase, the ministry of deathwhich works in favor of, or as it were, under the direction or authority of, death. He thus attributes the consequences of the letter directly to the ministry under it, and so anticipates the reason for the inferiority which is set forth in 2Co 3:9<\/span>. The definition: engraven in letters upon stones, shows that we must not here think of the Levitical priestly service (Rckert); and the express mention of Moses leads us to understand the ministry of Moses himself. We are to regard him, not as a mediator in contrast with Christ, but as a minister () representing all teachers under the law in contrast with the Apostles and ministers of the New Testament. By a bold turn of expression he combines the ministry itself with its object, and designates the whole as one which was engraven in letters upon stones (the only point on which we can here agree with Meyer, who regards the Decalogue as Moses commission or matricula officii<\/em>).15<\/span> The ministration of Moses and of all his successors consisted in the presentation and enforcement of the law whose letters had been engraven upon stone (tablets). In this way he brings out in strong language the stiffness and externality of the ancient service. Neander: The article before was designedly left out by the Apostle, because he intended to imply that a ministration which was conveyed only by letters must have been of a very general nature. If (or ) were connected directly with , as Luther and some others contend the words should be [the ministration of death in letters, or the ministration which produces death by means of letters], the article would have been required ( ). The predicate , is essentially the same as if it had been . . But we are here evidently directed to the divine glory () within whose radiance the ministration was performed. Of an essential dignity or eminence the Apostle was not in general speaking, for in the next sentence:so that the children of Israel could not keep their eyes fixed on Moses face<\/strong> (2Co 3:7<\/span>), there is no representation of the consequences or of the visible tokens of the glory, but of the remarkable degree in which this ministration participated in the divine radiance. In 2Co 3:8<\/span> also ( ) it is the heavenly glory which is spoken of. [Webster and Wilkinson think that the refers to the future, not from the time of writing merely, but to a future from past time, or rather a future of inference, as, if that were so, what will<\/em> this be:] Then, amid the glories of the great day of revelation, when the kingdom of God shall be perfected, and when all external form shall correspond with essential excellence, the dignity of the New Testament ministration will be especially manifested. The narrative in Exo 34:29<\/span> ff. is rather freely quoted, inasmuch as we are there merely informed that when Aaron and the children of Israel saw that the skin of Moses face shone they were afraid to come near him. But everything essential to Pauls, and even to Philos account, is there. For even the , the fixed gaze upon his face, was too much for them. The reason for this is further given when it is addedfor the glory of his countenance<\/strong>but with the important additionwhich was to be done away<\/strong>.This addition gives us a new point in the comparison, and places the inferiority of the legal ministration in a strong light (comp. 2Co 3:11<\/span>; 2Co 3:13<\/span>). Neander: In this Paul discovers a symbol of the fading glory of Judaism. But he has not yet commenced speaking of the discontinuance of the ministration and its glory, but only of that fact in which he saw a hint of this. He there makes use of no purely present participle (Luther: that which nevertheless is ceasing), but, in accordance with the history, an imperfect participle signifyingthat which was passing away. The Apostle presumes that this radiance was transitory; and with great justice, since it always became visible when Moses came from the Divine presence [Estius: passing away when the occasion was over]. The inference from this is briefly and simply expressed in 2Co 3:8<\/span>how shall not the ministration of the Spirit be yet more glorious?<\/strong>In the Apostle resumes the subject of the ministration of the Spirit in 2Co 3:6<\/span>, which had been interrupted by the enlargement in 2Co 3:7<\/span> with respect to the letter: engraved in letters upon stones. But the idea is not that the Spirit rests upon this ministration (though this is silently presumed), but that the ministration was the medium through which the Spirit, and the life he bestowed were communicated and enjoyed (in opposition to , comp. 2Co 7:6<\/span>). [The verbs and are here brought into striking contrast; . Bengel: , fio, et<\/em> sum<\/em>, are quite different. Stanley: , came into existence. Ellicott (on 1Ti 2:14<\/span>): the construction occurs occasionally, but not frequently in the New Testament, to denote the entrance into, and existence in, any given state. Webster: =was made to be in glory for a time; =shall be in glory permanently (Synn. sub. .)]. As leads the mind to the future (comp. this hope in v. 22), we-must not refer the glory () to the miraculous endowments and works of the Apostles. , however, need not be regarded as the fut. consequenti<\/em>, or as equivalent to esse invenietur<\/em> (si rem recte perpenderis<\/em>), and we are hardly safe in understanding it of a progressive development. In the Apostles mind the second advent of Christ (Parousia) was so constantly present, that it would seem to him needless to give a more particular explanation of his language. The kind of ministration of the spirit, which he had in view, and the argument from the less to the greater, which he applies to it, will be accounted for or confirmed when he comes to explain more particularly the two ministrations, the first, as a ministration of condemnation, and the other as a ministration of righteousness.For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more does the ministration of righteousness abound in glory<\/strong> (2Co 3:9<\/span>).[If Lachmanns reading ( ) be adopted, the translation would be, if to<\/em> the ministration of condemnation be glory, etc.<\/em>, but the sense would not be essentially altered]. Here the former corresponds to the killing<\/em> and the death<\/em>, and the latter to the making alive<\/em>, of 2Co 3:6-7<\/span>. The condemnation refers to the curse of the law. The ministration which was employed in the enforcement of the letter, i. e.<\/em> the Old Testament law, was compelled to denounce condemnation against transgressors (comp. Deu 27:26<\/span>), and by its enforcement of a law which brought the sinful passions into active opposition to its requirements, it brought men under the curse. The righteousness, which is here contrasted with the condemnation, is the same as the being just (or righteous) before God, and is the great object of the proclamation of Divine grace under the New Testament ministration. Under that ministration, faith is awakened, and mans relations to God are rectified, so that he can be justified, and attain everlasting life in the Divine kingdom (comp. Rom 1:17<\/span>; Rom 3:22<\/span> ff, Rom 3:22<\/span>; Rom 3:30<\/span> et al.<\/em>) The Apostle, however, partially modifies what he had thus said of these two ministrations, by withdrawing all reference to time in the use of and . Instead of we have the nominative , with understood. The meaning is the same, and the expression is more forcible than the adjective would have been (comp. Rom 8:10<\/span>; ). On the other hand the expression is strengthened by the use of , signifying: overflows or abounds in glory.For even that which, has been glorious, is not glorious in this respect, on account of the glory which excels<\/strong> (2Co 3:10<\/span>).Here the previous idea is further strengthened by saying that the glory of the contrasted ministration was abolished, although that ministration had previously been declared to have been made in glory ( ), or to have been glory (, 2Co 3:7<\/span>; 2Co 3:9<\/span>), on account of the superabundant glory of the other. The (even) indicates a climax and qualifies the verb: is not glorious, or has no glory ( ), which expresses a single idea (that which is deprived of glory), and goes beyond the minus<\/em> of the comparison. A more particular explanation of the idea is given in , which signifies: in this particular, i. e.<\/em> with respect to the relation which the Old Testament ministration bore to that of the New Testament.The phrase, that which has been glorious ( ), [shows a strange use of the perfect (as does ), and is taken from Exo 34:29<\/span>; Exo 34:35<\/span> of the Sept. Stanley]. It does not stand here for the whole Old Testament economy, but simply the Mosaic ministration, or that which was surrounded by, or shared in a Divine radiance.Having said that this was not glorious in this respect, the Apostle adds the reason for that deprivation, by saying that this was on account of the surpassing glory. He here refers to what he had said of the ministration of righteousness abounding in glory ( ). Before the superabundant glory of the ministration of the New Testament, the glory of the Old Testament ministration entirely disappears as the moons splendor vanishes in the suns radiance. There is, therefore, no necessity of taking the phrase, that which has been glorious, in a general and abstract sense (Meyer), without an allusion to the Mosaic service in the concrete sense, until it comes up in the predicate, where has the sense of: in this respect (i. e.<\/em> when we compare the glory of the Mosaic ministration with the Christian, 2Co 3:9<\/span>) the glorified becomes unglorified. In 2Co 3:11<\/span> the expression, the surpassing glory ( ) is still further justified by the introduction of a new element into the comparison, although it had been symbolically suggested in 2Co 3:7<\/span>.For if that which is transitory was with<\/strong> (passing through) glory, much more that which abides is in glory<\/strong>.This new element is the permanent in distinction from the temporary, that which is vanishing: on account of the super-abounding glory. For each ministration there is presupposed an economy or dispensation, one of which is passing away, and the other is abiding. The Old Testament ministration with the law itself, is supposed to pass away with the entrance of the New Testament ministration (comp. Rom 10:4<\/span>). The latter must remain until the second coming of our Lord, when it will be eternally, glorified in His heavenly kingdom. [Neander: The Apostle probably had a special design when he used the different prepositions () and (). . designates a point of transition and hence implies that the thing spoken of, was passing and transitory, while implies that which is permanent.] signifies strictly that the glory merely accompanied the object [Winer 51, i. p. 306. Webster (Synn. p. 166) says that it indicates particularly an object in a state of transition, while passing through a state] whereas implies that the object continued in glory. Sometimes, however, even is used to designate the fixed condition or state of a thing (2Co 2:4<\/span>; 2Co 5:7<\/span>), and hence it is possible that Paul used both expressions as nearly equivalent, for we know that he not unfrequently changed his prepositions even when he referred to the same relation. In either case seems appropriate to the , and to the . In the translation, the distinction can with difficulty be made perceptible (comp. Osiander).<\/p>\n

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL<\/strong><\/p>\n

When nothing but Christ, and Christ in his completeness, is preached, and when the preachers know by experience the reality of what they preach, all who have learned the deadly condemnation and inefficiency of the law to save the soul will feel the power of truth, will be rescued, forgiven and renewed by Divine grace, and will become animated by a spiritual life which will know no limit but the perfection of God. Such results will need no proof that they are from God, for all who have eyes to see will not only commend the human laborer but give honor to the God who bestowed both the success and the power to labor. Those legal task-masters who exalt themselves so much above the preachers of free grace, will never disturb the common security nor bring anything to real order; and in due time, even in this world, it will not be hard to distinguish between the preaching which saves and that which destroys the soul. But a day is coming when all things shall be made especially manifest, when those who have turned many to righteousness shall present before the Lord a great company of enlightened, justified and sanctified ones, who shall shine as the stars forever and ever; while those who preached nothing but the law shall (Dan 12:3<\/span>) be filled with unspeakable horror and confusion, as the lamentable and fatal consequences of their course shall be fully brought to light.<\/p>\n

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL<\/strong><\/p>\n

Starke:<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1<\/span>. No one needs a better letter of credence than that testimony of mens own consciences and works which are sufficient to praise him.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:2-3<\/span>. Every believer is an epistle in which the Holy Ghost reveals the knowledge of God in Christ; he is an open epistle in which all can learn something of what God can produce in the heart; and he is an epistle of Christ, for the hands and tongues of all true teachers are the instruments which the Holy Spirit uses to form him into the Divine image. If Gods writing is in the heart, the willing heart, the faithful obedience and the ready tongue will not fail to discourse of God. In such cases there will be real life, and not mere letters upon stone. Preachers should never doubt, that when they perform their parts, the appropriate fruits of their labor will infallibly follow.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:5<\/span>. No one can speak of God as he should, until he has been taught of God (Joh 6:45<\/span>). Whatever gifts we have, and whatever praise we gain, should therefore be ascribed entirely to God (Jam 1:17<\/span>). Oh how many make idols of themselves.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span>. Luther:The letter is to teach us, that while the mere law of God and our own works give us knowledge, they cannot show us that God can be gracious; but it shows us that everything we are and do is condemned and worthy of death, since without Divine grace we can do nothing. The Spirit, on the other hand, is to teach us that grace without law or personal righteousness gives us knowledge, but in such a way as to give us life and salvation. Hedinger:The Gospel is accompanied by a penetrating life, which enlightens and gladdens those who are awakened and condemned to death; it is therefore from the Spirit and is the source of spirit and life. Every word of God, as it comes from the Divine heart and hand, has some special design and a power of its own. In some cases it is to command and in others to produce obedience; in some it is to threaten and in others it is to comfort; in some it is to chastise and wound, and in others it is to heal and revive. To every work which His wisdom has ordained He has also adjusted just that measure of power which is precisely adapted to the end he has in view. The word which created the world is not the word which creates a new heart. For this is needed a word of far greater power (Eph 1:19<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:7<\/span>. Hedinger:The law also has power and light. It has a terrible thunderbolt for those who have awakened consciences, and where Christ does not comfort them and anoint them with His Spirit, they are struck down to the mouth of hell. Those who would partake of the Divine nature must mount up in spirit often to God, become familiar with Divine things, converse much with God in prayer, and listen in their most secret souls to Gods voice in His word, and it will not be long before their souls will be full of Divine light.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:8<\/span>. The Gospel is indeed a quickening and a saving power, by means of which Christ is glorified, and rises like a clear morning star (2Pe 1:19<\/span>) to shed upon His peoples hearts the full beams of His eternal glory (Rev 21:23<\/span> ff.).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:9<\/span>. Hedinger:When the word of the kingdom casts its clear light upon thee, look steadily upon it. Many love darkness and shun the light (Joh 3:19<\/span>). Walk in the light lest darkness come upon thee (Joh 12:35<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:10<\/span>. The Gospel is the source of an indescribable glory when it is truly applied to the hearts of Gods people, for the glory of the Lord is even now shed forth upon them; but when Jesus, who is their life, shall be fully revealed, their glory will be complete (Col 3:4<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:11<\/span>. The spirit of life is better than death, righteousness than condemnation, and that which is permanent than that which vanishes away; how much better then is the ministration of the New Covenant than that of the letter?<\/p>\n

Berlenb. Bible, 2Co 3:2<\/span> :Real candor and frankness of manner can spring only from a consciousness of innocence. A preachers success must be estimated not from the multitudes who attend upon his ministry, but from the sound conversions which take place under it. Many may, and certainly will condemn him; but this is no evidence that he is wrong. Let us only be concerned that we are begotten by the Word of truth to the glory of God, and that men may say of us: The Lord hath created and formed them for himself.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:3<\/span>. The minister who fails to point men from himself to Christ, is trying to make himself a pope. We should never stop at what is external, but press forward to the inward spirit of everything. Let men see that those hearts of ours which were once of stone, are now fleshly tablets, and that this is the Lords work. The heart which takes no impression from the Gospel, has no part in the New Covenant.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4<\/span>. True confidence in God, is not of ourselves, but comes through Christ.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:5<\/span>. The spiritual man finds that a union with Christ gives him an invincible power, in proportion as he sees that he is not sufficient of himself to do anything, as of himself, i. e.<\/em>, to know and overcome the subtle assaults of spiritual pride and self-will. Few persons possess this power, because they never thoroughly know themselves, or understand how utterly insufficient they are even to think anything which will convince them of Gods grace and truth. This is wholly a spiritual and divine work, and can be accomplished only by divine instruments. When this fact is fully recognized, we can no longer endure in ourselves those contrivances and counterfeits which the ingenuity of man has devised; for every degree of credit we take to ourselves, only hinders the growth of grace in our hearts. Whatever benefits the renewed man attains, is in consequence of his new creation, and never will he hesitate to cast the crown at the feet of God and of the Lamb. And yet this subjugation of the vile spirit of self-love, self-sufficiency, self-flattery, etc.<\/em>, requires the severest struggle to which our natures are ever called. If Christians in general need to be divested of all confidence in themselves, surely those who lead them should seek to be especially free from it.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span>. The letter which supplies nothing but intellectual knowledge, can impart no lifebut inasmuch as it reveals only condemnation and death, it must actually kill the soul. The law can never be anything but a dead work to those who regard it in a Pharisaic spirit, and set it in opposition to the Gospel. Hence the great object of the Gospel (and the law itself, when properly used, shuts us up to the same result Gal 3:24<\/span>), is to reveal to men a Redeemer, in whom they may find life. The spirit of the Gospel of grace, of faith and of the Lord, gives us life, opens to us a way of righteousness and reconciliation in Christ, and makes us able to receive and use the benefits of Christs kingdom. This living voice of the Lord stirs the sinners heart, so that he must hear and obey. Those who have been slain by the law, will penitently recognize Christ, and the Holy Spirit will glorify the Father and the Son in their hearts, and make intercession there with groanings which cannot be uttered. The law alone produced disobedience, opposition, and consequently wrath; but, the Spirit works nothing but a cheerful obedience, life and love, blessings and blessedness. The more Christ requires of us, the more he does for us. Under his influence we become conscious of new movements and new motives; our whole nature is renewed, and we take delight in those divine, pure and innocent enjoyments, which we never had, and could not have before. Then we shall gradually attain an incomparable treasure of divine life in a refined and good heart, from which we can derive light and power, victory over all sin, motives to diligence in every duty, and comfort and strength for every extremity. In a word, we have the whole power of the Holy Ghost, to make us partakers of the divine nature (2Pe 1:3-4<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:7<\/span>. Not unfrequently, rather than stand on the ground of the Gospel, men prefer going out of their way to Mosesthe glory of whose face at a distance attracts them; but they soon find that that glory is too strong for them, and shows those who love darkness rather than light, as in a glass, how great is their corruption. Thus God sometimes finds a way to accomplish his own work. The old dispensation of the letter must always be forsaken, that we may attain a true evangelical state in the new dispensation of the Spirit. This requires an honest recognition and confession of the truth, and a sincere repentance.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:8<\/span>. Such is the glory of the spiritual word, that even the angels love to study it. Where once it enters the heart, it remains forever. The glory of the Lord so brightly illuminates it, that everything which speaks and acts without the Spirit will seem like utter darkness. Under such a dispensation everything begun or promised before, comes to its fulfilment; there is no abolition of the law and its various ordinances, but only an exaltation of them all into something spiritual and everlasting. And yet it often costs us much before our consciences apprehend the true distinction between the law and the Gospel, and the main power of the new covenant in the heart depends upon the clearness with which the promises are understood.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:9<\/span>. So sublime and excellent is the glory of Christ in the new covenant, that no sooner does any man apprehend it, than he will feel humbled in utter amazement, as he beholds the majesty, the holiness, the wisdom, and the goodness of God; and thus God receives back from restored and redeemed man the honor of which sin robbed Him.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:10<\/span>. From the nature and origin of the Mosaic law, it would not be hard to infer that it would necessarily come to an end. Equally evident is it, that the Gospel contains what must endure forever; and all the assaults of its enemieshaveonly served to evince its perpetuity. It is therefore called an everlasting Gospel, and the redemption it proclaims is an eternal redemption. As what is good may not be permanent, we should not be satisfied until we have found what can never be moved. As everything else is passing away, the soul can never find complete rest until it receives that word which lives and abides forever.<\/p>\n

Rieger, 2Co 3:1-2<\/span> :Gladly would we so speak and act that no one should take offence, but no one can always be so circumspect as to be beyond suspicion. It is well, therefore, sometimes to meet those misunderstandings which we know have arisen respecting us. The first in his cause is righteous, but his neighbor cometh and searcheth him (Pro 18:17<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:3<\/span>. What God has joined together, should never be put asunder. Among these are: preaching and the word of Christ; the Spirit which glorified that word, and the ministry through which that Spirit is shed forth. Stone tablets are comparatively easy to be written upon, for only the surface needs to be changed. But only the finger of God can write His law upon the heart, since the soul itself must be softened and subdued, not only at first, but continually. We need not therefore be surprised that the dispensation under which God has promised to do this is the highest, and that every thing which preceded it was only preparatory for it (Jer 31:33<\/span>; Eze 36:25-27<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4-5<\/span>. When a man really holds communion with God, he will be so emptied of all confidence in himself and so united to the source of all light and power, that even when he is triumphing in a Divine sufficiency, no words can express his consciousness of utter insufficiency in himself.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span>. Even in connection with the law and other clearer declarations of Gods will and of His claims, many promises of the Spirit were given through the prophets, so that the New Covenant was already partially developed in the Old. All who made a conscientious use of the letter of the Old Covenant found in it abundant directions to the Spirit, and through the Spirit breathed forth many sighs for the New Covenant. And yet the Spirit was not in it, for before our Lords return to the Father that Spirit was not fully given, and the ministration of the Old Covenant was necessarily a ministration of the letter. Such a fact, however, is no reason for despising that dispensation, but rather a ground for praising that grace which reaches its perfection by successive periods of progress.To slay the sinner who is living without the law in a worldly course of life, is really to prepare him for life and health. Unless the process stops there, he will be brought to a state in which he is willing to renounce the law and his own righteousness, and he will seek for that Gospel through which the Spirit is imparted.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:7-8<\/span>. The more any institution or worship gives evidence that it came from God and leads to God, and the more the Lord uses it to reveal and communicate Himself to men, the more it can be called glorious. Hence that ministry which was set up at Pentecost, proclaiming peace through the blood of the cross, and imparting the Spirit, which is the only source of spiritual freedom and power, is possessed of a transcendant glory; for it has most plainly evinced its Divine origin, and its power to control the heart and bring the soul to God.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:9<\/span>. It was a terrible thing to preach nothing but condemnation; and yet under the law such preaching was glorious. May we learn to make a right use of the law; not to show us the way of salvation, but to drive us through the door of mercy which the Gospel opens for us to the righteousness in which there can be no condemnation, but peace with God, the law established, and the Spirit of life dwelling continually in the heart!<\/p>\n

2Co 3:10-11<\/span>. The law was originally designed to be only a provisional dispensation to prepare a way for the Gospel. Its fragmentary revelations of truth must unquestionably find their completion and their termination in the Gospel; and yet the law itself can never lose its place in every subsequent dispensation, and it will find its absolute perfection when God shall reveal Himself to His creatures without a veil.<\/p>\n

Heubner, 2Co 3:1<\/span>; 2Co 3:3<\/span> :However disagreeable it may be to a Christian to commend himself, if his personal interests are connected with Gods cause, he may without vanity vindicate his character before his fellow-men. When his merits are manifest, he may dispense with letters of commendation, and certainly he will never truckle or beg for them by low arts. To be really useful, especially in the work of saving souls, will be our best commendation and will generally be the best known; for what work can be more honorable than that of transforming and impressing a new character upon the very spirit of a fellow-man?<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4<\/span>. God will be the friend of all who are endeavoring to honor Christ. All such therefore have the best of reasons for confidence in God.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:5<\/span>. Our sufficiency for every spiritual act is from God; for when He withdraws His Spirit from our hearts, they are lifeless, barren, and incapable of any good thought.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span>. Even among Christians (papists, coldly orthodox), the letter is served with slavish fear, where Gods will is known only<\/em> from the written word without the Spirits testimony. In such cases nothing but precepts and threatenings are dispensed, and the written word is believed and obeyed from a regard only to authority and from terror without inward conviction and persuasion. In contrast with this stands the ministration of the Spirit; under which the will of God and His grace is cordially accepted; an inward witness accompanies the word, and under the leadings of the Divine Spirit, faith and obedience are delightful, sincere and earnest.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:7<\/span>. That which is external and legal has frequently more influence upon rude dispositions than that which has more intrinsic grandeur.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:8-9<\/span>. A judicial and admonitory severity has a dignity which is by no means to be despised, but unspeakably greater is that of a love which has compassion on the miserable and seeks to save them and give them spiritual life. No honor, therefore, is like that of the minister of the Gospel, under whose labors Gods Spirit is communicated, and righteousness, pardon and grace are afforded to all men. Contrast between Deu 27:15<\/span> ff; Deu 28:15<\/span> if.; and Mat 5:3<\/span> ff. (Cursed, etc.<\/em> Blessed, etc.<\/em>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:11<\/span>. If, then, Gods glory is reflected from all who proclaim His love, how glorious must be that ministration which proclaims nothing but love.<\/p>\n

W. F. Besser, 2Co 3:3<\/span> :As the savor of Christ diffuses Christ Himself, so a congregation of real Christians are an Epistle in which Christ is Himself inscribed and communicated to men. The letters which He writes are deeds and men (Psa 45:1<\/span>, My tongue is the pen of a ready writer).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span>. The whole ministration () to which the public servants of the Church are regularly called, is simply for the purpose of presenting and applying the New Covenant or the treasures of grace which are promised through Jesus Christ to men.Our sufficiency is not conferred by the office, but must be brought to the office itself. Those whom God calls to it are able to teach others, or are endowed with a sufficiency when they are called (2Ti 2:2<\/span>).The letter kills, and even ought to kill, that the Spirit may quicken those who are dead.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:9<\/span>. The glory of the ministry of the letter was terrible, because every letter of the law was emblazoned with tokens of Divine wrath (Rom 4:15<\/span>). As the executioner of Gods curse against transgressors (Gal 3:10<\/span>), it can proclaim nothing but condemnation. But now, when grace abounds and is much stronger than wrath, the ministration of the Spirit is proportionably more glorious; for now even righteousness proclaims that God must absolve the guilty when they are reconciled to God through the blood of Christ (2Co 5:18-20<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:10<\/span>. The glory of the legal ministry was by itself intolerable for its brightness; but when the ministration of condemnation and the ministration of righteousness are combined together, that which was so glorious becomes unglorified, and Sinais radiance vanishes before that of Golgotha.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:11<\/span>. The ministry which vanished away passed through<\/em> glory, and its glory was extinguished when the law had accomplished its end in Christ and His people; but the ministry which remains until the coming of the Lord abides in<\/em> glory, that the whole world may behold its inherent excellence.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4-11<\/span>. Lesson for the 12th Sunday after Trinity. Heubner:I. The glory of the evangelical ministry: 1. In its origin: a<\/em>. It rests upon Christs own institution (2Co 3:4<\/span>); b<\/em>. Christ alone can qualify us for it; 2. In its object: it is not of the letter, but of the Spirit; 3. In its means: it relies upon, not an external glory, which for a while blinds the eye and then vanishes away (2Co 3:7<\/span>), but the coperation of the Holy Ghost (2Co 3:8-9<\/span>); 4. In its reward: a<\/em>. even in this world it has more glorious rewards than any other employment (2Co 3:10<\/span>); b<\/em>. but finally it conducts to eternal blessedness. II. The superior glory of the Church under the New Testament above that of the Church under the Old Testament: 1. It was founded by the Son, and not merely by the servant of God; 2. It is the ascendancy of the Spirit, and not of the letter; 3. Its worship and dignities are of a spiritual nature, and are sustained not merely by worldly influences; 4. It will continue forever.Oettinger:The glory of spiritual instruction and the weakness of that teaching which has reference merely to morality, the law and the outward letter (Serm. on the Epist. for the 12th Sunday after Trinity).A. F. Schmidt:We should never separate by arbitrary and nice distinctions what God has wisely and graciously arranged together; especially: a<\/em>. letter and Spirit (2Co 3:6<\/span>); b<\/em>. the preaching of the law and of the gospel (2Co 3:3<\/span>); c<\/em>. confidence in God and despair of ourselves (2Co 3:4-5<\/span>); d<\/em>. fidelity to our calling and an assurance of success.<\/p>\n

Footnotes:<\/strong><\/p>\n

[1]<\/span>[2Co 3:1<\/span>.Two important MSS. (B. and D.) et al.<\/em> have which is accepted by Lachman: but is better authenticated, and is now almost universally received.]<\/p>\n

[2]<\/span>2Co 3:2<\/span>.Rec. has according to A. B. et al.<\/em> and it is preferred by Reiche, Meyer, Osiander, [Bloomfield and Wordsworth. Our author is wrong in inferring (e silentio<\/em>) that the Vat. favors the Rec. Its authority (as revised,) is with C. D. E. F. G. and Sin. et al.,<\/em> the Ital. Syr. Vulg. (aut numquid<\/em>) and Arab. Verss. Theodt. and the Lat. fathers, decidedly in favor of , which is adopted by Alford, Stanley and Tischendorf (7th ed.) The interrogative would seem to a transcriber more natural after a question and easier of explanation than the conditional . It is remarkable that all our Eng. verss. (Bagsters Hexapla,) though following the Rec., translate the passage as if the text were . Wycliffe has: or whether we need; Tyndale, Cranmer, Geneva and Amer. Bib. Union, have; or need we as some, and the Rheims has: or do we need etc.]<\/p>\n

[3]<\/span>2Co 3:1<\/span>.The second is probably an explanatory gloss, to which some MSS. [F. and G.] add still further . [Tisch. retains , but most critics reject both words.]<\/p>\n

[4]<\/span>2Co 3:3<\/span>. has strong manuscript authority in its favor, but it was probably a mistake of some transcriber. [The MSS. evidence may well be called strong, for A. B. Sin. C. D. E. G. L. have . Meyer calls it an error of the pen, and Bloomfield a critical correction, but Alford thinks the internal as well as the external evidence is too strong in its favor to be rejected, as it is the harsher word and the more difficult of construction.]<\/p>\n

[5]<\/span>2Co 3:5<\/span>.The position of after is sustained by the best authorities. Rec. puts the words after , but B. C. [and Sin.] place them before . [Tisch. agrees with our author, but he has changed after into on the authority of only B. F. G. et. al.]<\/p>\n

[6]<\/span>[6 2Co 3:6<\/span>.Rec. has with B. et. al. and Orig. Tisch. and Alford have with F. G. K., and Sin. Lachmann from conjecture gives us , and he is followed by Stanley; but A. C. D. E. L. have . Meyer, Bloomf. and Words, follow the Rec.]<\/p>\n

[7]<\/span>2Co 3:7<\/span>.Lachm. on the authority of B. D. (first cor.) F. G. has , but the reading was probably occasioned by the sing, of 2Co 3:6<\/span>. [Alford and Stanley adopt it, but Tisch. on the decisive authority of . C. D. (2d and 3d Corr. ) E. K. L. and Sin., with nearly all the Ital. Vul. Syr. verss. and Greek and Latin fathers, agrees with the Rec. and most continental critics in giving us .]<\/p>\n

[8]<\/span>2Co 3:7<\/span>. before is not genuine; the best authorities are against it.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/span>2Co 3:9<\/span>.Lachmann on important authorities [A. C. D. (1st Cor.) F. G. Sin. with some Greek fathers and verss.] has , but this reading was probably an attempt to remove a difficulty, and to explain the text. For a similar reason others have or instead of .<\/p>\n

[10]<\/span>2Co 3:9<\/span>.The best authorities leave out before . It may have been brought from 2Co 3:11<\/span>. [It is not found in A. B. C. Sin., (though 3d Cor. inserts it and 1st Cor. has ), and it nowhere else follows ; and yet Tisch. after wavering in his different editions restores it in his 7th. and regards the evidence as decisive in its favor here. Lachmann, Alford and Stanley cancelled it as brought from in 2Co 3:8<\/span> and 2Co 3:11<\/span>.]<\/p>\n

[11]<\/span>2Co 3:10<\/span>.Rec. has . The weight of evidence is decidedly in favor of ; the in was probably taken from the first syllable of .<\/p>\n

[12]<\/span>[Since our author wrote, the Sinaiticus has added its authority to that of two cursives of the 12th cent., one copy of the Vulgate, the Aeth. of the Horn. Polyglot, and one Mss. of the Slavonic, in favor of . But as the Corinthians were themselves the Epistle, they could hardly be confounded by the Apostle with the material on which it was written.]<\/p>\n

[13]<\/span>[Though the context<\/em> does not oblige<\/em> us to interpret this assertion of any thing but Apostolical sufficiency, yet it is quite consistent with Pauls usual freedom, to break from a special to a general subject. The language is quite general ( ), and the word refers to the lowest form of human mental activity: it is not merely to judge or determine, but to think<\/em> (Hodge: much easier than to will or do.)]<\/p>\n

[14]<\/span>[The Apostle intends no disparagement of a written law, or of the letter of either Testament. God was the author of both, and both are perfect for their proper objects. The letter of the N. T. was not written when Paul wrote this, and the contrast was therefore more striking. Chrysostom (Hom. VI., 2Co 3:5<\/span>; and VII., 2Co 3:8<\/span>) notices that the law itself was spiritual (Rom 7:14<\/span>), but the Apostle here means that it does not bestow<\/em> a spirit, but only letters, whereas the Apostles were intrusted with the giving of a spirit. The law only punishes the sinner, the Gospel saves him and gives him life. Paul does not say that the law itself, but only the ministration under it, produces death; it is sin alone which produces death, and the law only shows what sin is and then punishes it. As instrumentalities of grace, forms and ministers and letters are indispensable. For the historical facts and the objects of its faith, Christianity is as dependent upon the letter as Judaism. But these and all educational influences are as dead and unquickening as syllables engraven on stones, without the spirit; and yet the spiritualism which would do without them will be as dead and destitute of the Spirit as the deadliest letter of Rabbinical Judaism. A religion with only a letter is powerless, but without that letter it will have no spirit or life. It was the very written word which has since been a stereotyped revelation, which the Apostles made a judge of conscience (Act 18:11<\/span>; 1Pe 4:11<\/span>.)]<\/p>\n

[15]<\/span>[Our Engl. verss. have here written and engraven in stones, which is hardly a literal translation even of the Rec.( . ). A literal rendering would be: In letters engraven on stones. But on Lachmanns reading ( ,) the reference would be to the general writing of the whole ministration, whose essential germ however, was in the Decalogue. The plural seems to imply that there were two tablets used.]<\/p>\n

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

CONTENTS<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

In this Chapter, which is but short, though sweet, the Apostle appeals to the Hearts of the Corinthians, as Proofs of his Ministry. He draws a beautiful Comparison, between the Ministration of the Law, and the Gospel; to shew the vast Superiority of the latter.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

(1) Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you? (2) Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: (3) Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. (4) And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward: (5) Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God; (6) Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

What a very high proof of the truth of Christ’s Gospel must that be, which makes an immediate appeal to the hearts and consciences of men? And what can a Church or People desire more, than when their servants (for the highest Apostles are no more) bring those credentials with them, that they are sent of God? Reader! pause over the Apostles’ statement, for it holds good, as much now, as in the days of the Apostles. Where God the Holy Ghost hath a people, the Lord will send servants to minister to that people in divine things. See, in confirmation, that promise, Jer 3:15<\/span> . And where the Lord sends his servants, the same Lord will give testimony to the word of his grace, Isa 52:6-9<\/span> . And do observe, the beautiful figure Paul makes use of, to prove his Apostleship by. Ye are our Epistle (said he) written in our hearts; known and read of all men. Yes! For when the Lord the Spirit, who sent the Apostle and his fellow servants to the Corinthians, and gave them a door of utterance to the truths of God, gave also a door of entrance into his people’s hearts; and by his regenerating grace, awakened them to the knowledge of sin, to the cordial reception of, and belief in, the Lord Jesus Christ: these precious things proved, that the Gospel they preached, was not a yea and nay doctrine, but that all the promises of God, in Christ Jesus, were Yea, and Amen, unto the glory of God by his servants’ ministry. This was a demonstration of the word, and power. This manifested both the people’s interest in Christ, and the servants’ being sent by Christ; and mutually tended to comfort and rejoice the heart, both of the minister and people, giving such decided testimony to the truth as it is in Jesus; when the Gospel came, not in word only, but in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance. 1Th 1:4-10<\/span> .<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Reader! I beseech you, do not dismiss the subject, to which this statement of the Apostle leads, without first framing from it a rule, to estimate every Church of Christ upon earth. Depend upon it, as the Church of God is the same in all ages of the world, the same standard for decision, concerning the truths of God, will be found a faithful, and unerring rule, to form just, and infallible conclusions. Where Christ hath a people to gather from among the carnal world, and where he sends his Gospel to be instrumental to gather them; those blessed effects will follow. What Jesus said upon another occasion, in relation to the judgment of men at large, holds equally good, in ascertaining the characters of his sent servants. Ye shall know them by their fruits, Mat 7:16<\/span> .<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The servant of the Lord, and of the highest order in that service, and endued with the greatest gifts, considers himself but as the servant of the Lord’s people. So commanded Jesus: and so all faithful ministers know. Whosoever will be great among you, (said that humble Lord,) let him be your minister; and whoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant. And then, as if to endear the charge still more, Jesus added: Even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many, Mat 20:26-28<\/span> . We are stewards, said Paul, not Lord s, over God’s heritage. Servants, not masters. One is your Master, even Christ, 1Co 4:1<\/span> ; Mat 23:8<\/span> .<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

And as in character, so in office. They who are Epistles in the hearts of the Lord’s people, are they that feed the flock, not fleece it. They that preach Christ Jesus the Lord, not themselves, 2Co 4:5<\/span> ; 1Pe 5:2<\/span> . Regenerated in their own souls, before they go forth as instruments in the Lord’s hand, to the service of others, whom the Lord will regenerate; they hold forth the word of life. And, ordained by the Holy Ghost to the immediate work of the ministry, before they labor in the word and doctrine; they watch for men’s souls as they that must give account, Act 13:1-4<\/span> ; Heb 13:17<\/span> . So that if the Reader be earnest, as that he need be earnest, (for nothing this side the grave can be equally earnest,) to ask of Jesus, as the Church did: Tell me, 0 thou whom any soul loveth, where thou feedest, where thou makest thy, flock to rest at noon? Son 1:7<\/span> . These are the Shepherds’ tents, to which the Lord directs. The people are the ministers’ epistles; known and read of all men. Both minister and people are taught of God: and great will be the peace of the people, Isa 54:13<\/span> . They know the joyful sound, in the everlasting love of God the Father; the grace, blood-shedding, righteousness, and finished salvation of the Lord Jesus Christ with all the blissful gifts, and manifestations of God the Holy Ghost. These form indeed, a joyful sound, and they are blessed in knowing it; for they walk in the light of God’s countenance, Psa 89:15<\/span> . Paul might well call the people so taught, his Epistle. We are, said he to them, your rejoicing, as ye also are our’s, in the day of the Lord Jesus, 1Co 1:14<\/span> .<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Reader! while I recommend the subject, in the most affectionate manner, to your most serious consideration, I entreat you not to overlook what the Apostle so frequently in his Epistles dwells upon; his own weakness, and the sense he had of his own insufficiency, in ministering in the service of the Lord. This view of Paul indeed, will only strengthen yet more what went before. For if so highly taught, a servant of Christ refers all the success of his labors, into His sovereign power, who alone could make him an able minister, of the New Testament; how needful must it be, in all inferior servants of the Lord, to see that all their sufficiency is of God?<\/p>\n

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:3<\/span><\/p>\n

Dr. Deissmann speaks of ‘the beautiful figure in 2Co 3:3<\/span> , according to which St. Paul has a letter to write for Christ This characteristic expression includes a parallel to the technical term “letter of Augustus,” i.e.,<\/em> Imperial letter, which is found in an inscription of the Imperial period at Ancyra.’<\/p>\n

Light from the Ancient East,<\/em> p. 379.<\/p>\n

References. III. 3. J. G. Greenhough, The Mind of Christ in St. Paul,<\/em> p. 194 Expositor<\/em> (5th Series), vol. ix. p. 14.<\/p>\n

Our Sufficiency<\/p>\n

2Co 3:5<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Apostle Paul occupied so peculiar a position that it cannot be doubted that he stood in need of peculiar assistance and guidance. His life was laborious, his duties were responsible, his difficulties were many, his influence was vast. He evidently felt that he was dependent upon the grace and sufficiency of God, and that whilst of himself he could do nothing, he could do all things through Christ Who strengthened him. Every true Christian, however slender his abilities, however obscure his position, feels in need of the grace which was sufficient for the Apostle of the Gentiles.<\/p>\n

I. Insufficiency of Human Strength for Spiritual Service.<\/strong> In the case of the Apostle, whose words are before us, this insufficiency was very conspicuous. It was his office to preach to civilised and barbarian, to Jews in the synagogue, to Gentiles in the marketplace, to Christians in upper rooms; to travel and to brave dangers by land and sea; to endure imprisonment, stripes, and violence; to defend himself and the Gospel before magistrates and before multitudes; to expound the truth, to combat error, to oppose false teachers, to detect false brethren; to write epistles both to fellow-labourers and to congregations; to direct and control the actions of Christian communities. Well might he exclaim, Who is sufficient for these things? This insufficiency is as real, if not as obvious, in the case of Christians in ordinary stations of life, and of Christian labourers called to ordinary service. To maintain a Christian character and to display a Christian spirit, to present a witness of power to the truth, to commend the Gospel by argument, by persuasion, by conduct all this cannot be done by the use of resources merely human.<\/p>\n

II. Sufficiency of Divine Strength and Grace.<\/strong> This sufficiency is imparted by the clear manifestation of Divine truth<\/em> on God’s part, and by its clear apprehension on ours. Not by entrusting a secret, but by revealing great truths and principles, does the Lord qualify His servants for their work. Here was the instrument for Paul’s work, the weapon for his warfare. And here all Christ’s servants must seek their sufficiency. Pastors and evangelists, teachers and parents, should bear this in mind that their competency for their several ministries depends first upon their grasping Christian truth, and embodying it in their spiritual life, and using it as their means of spiritual service. This sufficiency again is enjoyed by the sympathetic reception on our part of the Holy Spirit’s grace.<\/em> Strength, wisdom, forethought, gentleness, and patience are all needed in the service of the Redeemer. These are the fruits of the Spirit’s presence and operation. Christian labourers need a heart open heavenwards to receive all sacred influences by prayer, by fellowship with God, by true receptiveness of attitude. A Divine, unseen, but mighty agency is provided for all true servants of Christ. And, assured of this, they may well lose sight of their personal weakness and ignorance and utter inadequacy, and be content and glad to be participators in the sufficiency which is of God.<\/p>\n

References. III. 5. F. W. Farrar, Christian World Pulpit,<\/em> vol. xliv. p. 233. J. Keble, Sermons for Sundays After Trinity,<\/em> pt. i. p. 457. A. Goodrich, Christian World Pulpit,<\/em> vol. lvi. p. 248. Expositor<\/em> (6th Series), vol. x. p. 373. III. 5, 6. Spurgeon, Sermons,<\/em> vol. xxxvi. No. 2160.<\/p>\n

Spirit and Letter<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

‘The letter killeth’ in all things. In merchandise, in the statute book, in the family, in reading, in literature, the letter killeth; no man can live on cast iron: but the spirit giveth life the poetry, the meaning, the purpose, the inmost intent and content; there you have immortality. Let us see how far this can be simplified, and especially how far it can be applied; because if we could get into the music of this text we should all be living Christians, ecstatic saints, glorious forerunners of the coming Lord.<\/p>\n

I. We may have the right letters, but the wrong word. There is absolutely nothing in the letters except under certain conditions, and these conditions we are prone to overlook or to undervalue. Everything depends upon the letters being brought into the right relation. Every letter must not only be in the right place, but it must be uttered singly and collectively in the right tone. If people understood this the whole world, in the event of its being practically applied to conduct, would be full of light, full of music; we should realise a new brotherhood, we should be almost in heaven. We may deliver the right words in a wrong tone. The soul gives the tone. We may deliver the right words, in the right order, but in the wrong tone; and may preach the Evangelical Gospel without the Evangelical spirit: and a morning without dew is like a morning without a blessing.<\/p>\n

II. Secondly. We may be correct in our letters and utterly wrong in our words. Can a man be both right and wrong at the same time? Certainly; that is what we are doing all the day. We must psychologically understand this if we would recover ourselves from the disease of heart-folly. Observe what the proposition is: We may have the right letters, and yet have the wrong word. The letter is nothing; the letter is confusing; the letter needs companionship, atmosphere, historical relationship, and, above all, a penetrating and uplifting, a redeeming and sanctifying spirit. Let us grope our way into the meaning of this strange paradox, that we may have the right letters and yet the wrong word; the right letters, and yet the wrong sermon; the right letters, and a doctrine degraded from a revelation to a profanity.<\/p>\n

III. We know what this means in relation to work, to the common work of the common day. A workman may not do the work in the spirit, and therefore it is poorly or badly done. If a man shall take no pleasure in his work he cannot do it, except in a perfunctory and utterly unsatisfactory manner. Men who do the work only in the letter are liars and thieves and anything but patriots. When the right estimate of labour goes down, the country goes down. When men go to their work at the rate of three miles an hour and leave it at the rate of seven, they are not patriots, and they ought not to win any battles; the God of order is against them, the spirit of the spring condemns their action and dismisses them from all holy and responsible relations. And this holds good in the pulpit and out of it. Unless a man really love his work and long for it, he cannot do it. We cannot live on painted fire. No man can continue the holy ministry of the cross for a lifetime and have as much joy in it at the end as at the beginning, except in the spirit of the cross that he preaches; then he will be eternally young an amaranth that no snow can chill into death. This holds good, therefore, in all sections, departments, and relations of life.<\/p>\n

If we could receive these instructions we should have fewer Bible readers, but better; we should know that the letter killeth, but that grace and truth give life and hope and music to the soul. We must get rid of the literalists, the men who only read the iron letter, and do not read the Bible in the Bible’s own atmosphere. What do we want? I will tell you: the Holy Ghost; he only can read the book which he only wrote; we must become acquainted with the Author before we can read His writings with deep spiritual, lasting advantage. If any man lack wisdom, let him ask of God.<\/p>\n

Joseph Parker, City Temple Pulpit,<\/em> vol. II. p. 185.<\/p>\n

References. III. 6. C. Kingsley, The Good News of God,<\/em> p. 124. J. Keble, Sermons for Sundays After Trinity,<\/em> pt. i. p. 477. Llewelyn Davies, The Purpose of God,<\/em> p. 16. Expositor<\/em> (6th Series), vol. iv. p. 358; ibid.<\/em> vol. xi. p. 63; ibid.<\/em> (7th Series), vol. v. p. 497. III. 7-9. J. Baines, Twenty Sermons,<\/em> p. 255. III. 8. J. Clifford, The Christian Certainties,<\/em> p. 243.<\/p>\n

From Glory to Glory<\/p>\n

2Co 3:2<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

It is of more than passing interest to note that the law of development, or, in modern scientific terminology, the law of evolution, was clearly grasped by the Apostle Paul, and applied by him with true philosophic breadth to that great department of thought to which he has so richly contributed, viz.,<\/em> the sphere of spiritual truth, of the problems that deal with God’s ethical relation to the world. The evolution of theology is no modern discovery. Let us then consider, How Paul related himself to the old theology, and, What he declared to be final and eternal in the new.<\/p>\n

I. How Paul related himself to the old theology. (1) It is to be noted that Paul manifests a deep and sympathetic appreciation of the glory<\/em> of the old. Renan says that before a man can give a true estimate and history of any faith, he must have once believed it, but now ceased to believe it The former part of this statement is certainly true, but the latter part is either untrue or inaccurately expressed. There can be no true estimate without a continued<\/em> belief, for the true value of any faith lies in its living relation to the life.<\/em> It is impossible for us to estimate any religion or any creed except in as far as we discover in it elements such as have powerfully influenced our own lives, and in developed forms are still influencing them. No faith can be nobler save that which is deep rooted in the old, and has received birth from it. (2) Paul grasped clearly the permanent element in the old theology. He clearly distinguishes between the ‘passing elements’ and the permanent substratum.<\/p>\n

II. But while Paul recognised the law of development in theology, he finds that, with the appearing of Christ, this law receives new and definite limits. The permanent factor is now manifested in such a form that it dwarfs the transient forms; so that, in an important sense, Paul finds himself already at the final stage of theological development. Paul presents this final and permanent factor in two forms, an abstract and a concrete. (1) The abstract form is the conception of Liberty, the Freedom of the Spirit. There is no liberty in uncertainty and in detachment from the past. It is the eternal truth which we find in the past that makes us free. (2) That this was Paul’s conception is made clear by the concrete form in which he presented this permanent element The concrete and eternal heart of theology is Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n

John Thomas, Myrtle Street Pulpit,<\/em> vol. II. p. 68.<\/p>\n

Saved By Hope<\/p>\n

2Co 3:12<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

St. Paul says, ‘we are saved by hope’. He puts in one sense a higher value on this than either on faith or love. He never says we are saved by faith, or we are saved by love.<\/p>\n

I. Now, what does Hope say? It says, ‘I know that there are certain rewards laid up in the kingdom of heaven for those that have fought the good tight and persevered to the end. I know that of my own self I cannot conquer in that fight, I cannot win in that race, I am nothing and can do nothing. But I also know that all the promises which I read in the Bible, promises of help, comfort, strength, are made to me, weak and sinful and miserable though I am; they are made to me if I will but lay hold on them; they are made to me as much as if there was not one other person besides me in the world. Therefore, in that confidence I will fight, because I know that if I do I shall conquer; I will run in the race, because I know that if I do I shall win the prize. I will fight and I will run cheerfully; what matter all little troubles, or inconveniences, or sorrows, if I have but such a hope to look forward to hereafter?’<\/p>\n

II. But then, no one can really have such a hope who lets himself as a habit constantly be discontented, be dismayed, be put out, as we say, by the things of this world. How would it sound if we said, ‘I know that whatever affliction I suffer here is but light, is but for a moment. I know that the crown laid up for me on high is imperishable and eternal; and yet, all the troubles of the world I will<\/em> lay to heart; all its sorrows I will<\/em> complain about; all its difficulties I will<\/em> make the most of.’ Whatever feeling this may be it is not hope. The feeling which comes nearest that which we ought to have is that we have in an inn, when we are on our way to a dear home. It may be full of inconveniences, but we match them directly with some of the delights of our own house. The people may be uncivil and surly: well, we shall be loved enough at home The rooms may be inconvenient; that will matter little when we get home. We should reason thus in earthly matters, but when it comes to matters beyond this world, we reason so no longer. Then we think about the inconveniences of the way, the difficulties of the journey, the unkindness of our companions. And if ever we think of our future home, it is only as a kind of make-up for whatever difficulties we may find here.<\/p>\n

If we believe that in our Father’s house there are many mansions, that our Lord is gone to prepare a place for us; that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens; if, I say, faith teaches us these things, why cannot our hope lay hold on them and take them to ourselves, so as to despise and cast aside all earthly fear, yea, the very dread of death itself, and the terror of the judgment. For He that loved His own, loveth them unto the end, and ‘Hope maketh not ashamed’.<\/p>\n

J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in Sackville College Chapel,<\/em> vol. II. p. 229.<\/p>\n

References. III. 12. Expositor<\/em> (4th Series), vol. x. p. 211. III. 16. T. F. Crosse, Sermons,<\/em> p. 52. J. Keble, Sermons for Sundays After Trinity,<\/em> pt. i. p. 442.<\/p>\n

The Liberty Which Christ Gives<\/p>\n

2Co 3:17<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

I. The soul of man pants for liberty as a hungry child cries for food. It is, indeed, the hunger of the soul. Every age and condition asks for it. The child’s conception of manhood is a vision of freedom. He dreams of a time when he will be able to go his own way, and do his own pleasure, with no check or restraint imposed by parents and schoolmasters. Every youth clamours for freedom, to be his own guide and his own master, to follow his own bent, to employ himself and enjoy himself according to the dictates of his own will, with none to interfere. He asks for liberty to play, or work to do or leave undone, to walk in any path which seems desirable, to think his own thoughts and pursue his own ends, with no chains of authority to hold him back. We all feel the chains more or less. We are under law.<\/em> And nobody loves law; he only submits to it. Necessity drives, compulsion spurs. We go as we are ordered, but we go kicking. We have to do a thousand things which self-love resents, which pride and dignity recoil from. Not what we like, but what we must, is for all of us, more or less, the inevitable lot. And the human heart is always groaning under its limitations and bondage, and crying for more room, crying for liberty! And here comes the Gospel answer to the cry: ‘Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty’.<\/p>\n

II. Now I do not suppose that any man will leap up to embrace that answer<\/em> at once. We have to think twice, and many times, before we can understand that the Christian life is a life of liberty. If you look at it from the outside it does not seem to afford or promise any great amount of freedom. You are rather inclined to think that it forges a great many additional chains instead of breaking those which bind us already, and that it imposes new restrictions without sweeping away the old ones. Yes, it would never occur to you to come into the Christian life to gain your liberty. For its first appearance points all the other way. Yet it leads to higher freedom, and the only perfect freedom which man can have on earth. ‘Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.’<\/p>\n

III. Look for a moment at the Lord Himself.<\/em> You get in Him, and from Him, the first and most complete interpretation of these words. You get a vision of noble, beautiful, untrammelled liberty. He came not to do His own will, but the will of His Father. He was under authority, under orders. That was one side of His life. But the other side was one of perfect freedom, for His own will and the Father’s will made one music.<\/p>\n

IV. There is freedom in thought and freedom in conduct where the mind, or Spirit, of the Lord is. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there comes, not bondage of mind, but glad, glorious liberty, freedom of thought and freedom of conduct. For in proportion as we have the mind of Christ we do all right and noble things, and we shun all base and degrading things, of our own free and deliberate choice<\/p>\n

J. G. Greenhough, The Mind of Christ in St. Paul,<\/em> p. 38.<\/p>\n

True Freedom<\/p>\n

2Co 3:17<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Christianity is a religion of liberty.<\/p>\n

I. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom from sin.<\/p>\n

II. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty in the service of God.<\/p>\n

III. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom from men. Where the Spirit is not,<\/em> there is slavery like that of some nations where despotism has so long been the rule that men know not what freedom is. ‘If the Son make you free ye shall be free indeed.’<\/p>\n

A. Maclaren.<\/p>\n

References. III. 17. J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in Sackville College Chapel,<\/em> p. 406. Spurgeon, Sermons,<\/em> vol. i. No. 9. S. H. Fleming, Fifteen Minute Sermons for the People,<\/em> pp. 30, 35. H. P. Liddon, University Sermons,<\/em> p. 61. E. Bayley, Sermons on the Work and Person of the Holy Spirit,<\/em> p. 119. III. 17, 18. Expositor<\/em> (4th Series), vol. viii. p. 277; ibid.<\/em> (5th Series), vol. ii. pp. 174, 253; ibid.<\/em> vol. iv. p. 425; ibid.<\/em> (4th Series), vol. ii. p. 111; ibid.<\/em> (5th Series), vol. ix. p. 350.<\/p>\n

Transformation Into the Lord’s Image<\/p>\n

2Co 3:18<\/span><\/strong> ; 1Co 13:12<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/em><\/p>\n

Observe the principle which St. Paul enunciates. The mirror is before you: look into it, look steadfastly, believingly, and lovingly; and a miracle will be wrought. The glory of the Lord reflected there will be photographed upon you, and you will be transformed into the same image.<\/p>\n

I. And this is no mere fancy. It is a spiritual law which, like every spiritual law, is just a natural law at its farthest reach. It is ever thus with the doctrines of Christianity. You find, when you consider those high mysteries and penetrate into the heart of them, that they are not mysteries at all, but familiar principles of daily experience operating beyond the domain of experience. And this, it seems to me, is not the least of the evidences of Christianity. It is rooted in the soil of earth; it is in line with the natural order, following its laws and carrying them to loftier issues. Look at the principle which St. Paul here lays down, and do you not recognise it as a law of common experience? You know, for example, how one personality impresses itself upon another, if there be mutual trust and affection and admiration. Think of a revered teacher and his students how they catch his spirit, assimilate his thought, and reproduce his teaching. He creates ‘a school,’ and you recognise its adherents by their likeness to the master. It is told of the later disciples of Pythagoras that they were accustomed to publish their books under his name, thereby confessing, with generous self-effacement, that they owed all to him. His teaching was the source of their wisdom. They simply reflected his glory. And you know how love transfigures, putting its imprint not simply on the soul but on the very flesh. Have you never noticed the miracle which is wrought upon a husband and wife who ‘have lived and loved together through many changing years’ how they come to resemble each other, not merely in their habits and ways of thinking, but in their very look, as though a gentle hand had kept smoothing their faces day by day and transforming them into the same image? There is no kinship between them; it is Love that has wrought the miracle; and it almost startles you. It is all so much alike the tone of the voice, the light in the eyes, the play of expression.<\/p>\n

II. Our transformation into the Lord’s image, St. Paul is careful to explain, is a gradual process. We are ‘transformed from glory to glory’ first a little glory, then more, and at last the perfect likeness of our blessed Saviour. This is the final consummation, and we shall never attain it here; we shall never attain it until we get home and see His face. It is not His face that we see here, but only His reflection. The mirror is before us, and He is standing, as it were, behind us, and we see His image in the glass. But the mirror is often dim and uncertain, and the reflection obscure and broken, and we have to guess what He is like. ‘Now we look in a mirror puzzlingly.’ But one day we shall turn round and see Him ‘face to face’; and then the transformation will be complete. ‘We shall be like Him, for we shall see Him even as He is.’<\/p>\n

III. Such is St. Paul’s doctrine of Sanctification, and it is fraught with splendid encouragement. See how he emphasises a truth which we are apt to forget, thereby missing the way and disquieting our hearts the truth that our transformation into the Lord’s image is not our own work but the operation of the Holy Spirit. ‘We are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit.’ There is a crucifix known as the Volto Santo<\/em> in the Cathedral of Lucca, and the story of it is a parable. It is said that Nicodemus was charged by an angel to fashion an image of the Lord; and he went to the forest and, hewing down a cedar, addressed himself to the task. It baffled his skill, and, wearied with his ineffectual labour, he fell asleep. And, when he awoke, behold, the work was done. The crucifix was before him, carved by angel hands. And thus we are ‘transformed into the Lord’s image from glory to glory’. It is not our own work; it is the Holy Spirit’s, and we do not further it by striving and fretting. Is it by its own effort that the earth is clothed with verdure? Ah, no! it is by the sweet influence of the sunshine and the rain and the dew from heaven, and the earth has only to spread its breast and receive the benediction.<\/p>\n

David Smith, Man’s Need of God,<\/em> p. 199.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:18<\/span><\/p>\n

Change, the strongest son of life,<\/p>\n

Has the spirit here to wife.<\/p>\n

Meredith.<\/p>\n

References. III. 18. Basil Wilberforce, Christian World Pulpit,<\/em> vol. li. p. 136. A. E. Belch, Preacher’s Magazine,<\/em> vol. xvii. p. 359. E. W. Moore, The Record,<\/em> vol. xxvii. p. 770. C. D. Bell, The Saintly Calling,<\/em> p. 143. J. C. Nattrass, Preacher’s Magazine,<\/em> vol. xix. p. 219. E. Bayley, Sermons on the Work and Person of the Holy Spirit,<\/em> p. 261. J. B. Lightfoot, Cambridge Sermons,<\/em> p. 96. J. Laidlaw, Studies in the Parables,<\/em> p. 243. Expositor<\/em> (4th Series), vol. ii. pp. 49, 285; ibid.<\/em> vol. iii. p. 93; ibid.<\/em> vol. ix. pp. 91, 209; ibid.<\/em> vol. x. pp. 210, 271; ibid.<\/em> (5th Series), vol. iv. p. 119; ibid.<\/em> vol. vi. p. 254; ibid.<\/em> (6th Series), vol. x. pp. 194, 371. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture,<\/em> p. 307.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

The Two Ministrations<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

2Co 3:9<\/p>\n

What is the meaning of the expression, “ministration of condemnation”? The answer is in the seventh verse of this chapter, “But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away;” whence it is obvious hat the phrase “ministration of condemnation” relates to the law which Moses received amid the pomp and majesty of Sinai. That law is also called “the ministration of death.” The Apostle is presenting a contrastive view of two systems under which it has pleased God to develop and test moral life; hence those systems are antithetically designated “the ministration of death,” and “the ministration of the Spirit,” as also “the ministration of condemnation,” and “the ministration of righteousness.” As the method of argument is entirely antithetical and contrastive, the definition of one term suggests the definition of the other; so that, as “the ministration of condemnation” signifies the law which came by Moses, so “the ministration of righteousness” signifies the grace and truth which came by Jesus Christ. The simple form of the text, consequently, is this “If the law of Moses be glory, much more doth the Gospel of Christ exceed in glory.”<\/p>\n

Why should the law be described as “the ministration of death” or “the ministration of condemnation”? Are not the terms unnecessarily harsh? Do they not suggest a false idea of the dignity of law? My first object is to defend a negative answer to this inquiry. The very fact of penal law being established presupposes either power or disposition to do that which is wrong. Not only so; it is the peculiar function of penal law to define and abridge the so-called liberty of man. “By the law is the knowledge of sin.” In delineating his spiritual life, in all its struggling and victories, through all phases which moral being could possibly assume, the Apostle gives us to understand how law operated in the settlement of his convictions and duties: “I had not known sin but by the law; for I had not known lust except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” The simplest of illustrations shall bring the meaning of the assertion, that law defines and limits liberty, within the comprehension of a child. For a length of time you have been in the habit of regarding certain fields as common property; again and again you have struck your course across them to shorten or vary a journey. You were totally indifferent as to their proprietorship. The idea that you were trespassing never occurred to you. So far as you knew, there was no law whatever in the case. In process of time, however, the pro prietor determines to assert his right to his own land. With this end in view, he gives public intimation that all persons found upon his property will be dealt with as trespassers. He proclaims a law. He sets up in his field a ministration of condemnation. From that hour the whole question of your liberty undergoes a fundamental change. The altered circumstances compel all who have been in the habit of traversing the land with impunity to say, in effect, “In this case we had not known transgression, except the law had said, Thou shalt not trespass.” Yet, why should the law be designated “the ministration of condemnation” and “the ministration of death”? When the law is based on rectitude, what possible relation can it sustain to death or condemnation? The terms, though severe, are distinguished by the most precise accuracy. All punishment stands on the plane of death. Death, absolutely so called, is the ultimate penalty; but the very gentlest blow, nay, the very shadow of a frown, is death in incipiency; that is to say, it belongs to the kingdom of death, and not in any sense to the kingdom of life; death is in the penalty as truly as the plant is in the seed. The judge who imprisons a criminal for a month, or even for a day, gives that criminal as much of death as the nature of the offence is deemed to require. Why, what is death? You say that a man is dead when his heart ceases to beat. I tell you that a man may be dead even while his heart is pulsing with the vigour of perfect health! The hardened wretch who climbed the scaffold with a smile, and swung across the invisible barrier with a curse on his curled lip, is not, if the expression be allowed, half so dead as the fair young creature on whose cheek there burns the memorial of a first disgrace. The death I speak of is a question of moral consciousness. The physical heart continues its beating, but the better heart, which it enshrines, withers and dies.<\/p>\n

That law is correctly designated “the ministration of condemnation,” and “the ministration of death,” may be shown by another simple illustration. Let me suppose that as heads of houses you had not for a long time felt the necessity of requiring all the members of your households to be at home by a fixed hour. Had they returned at seven, eight, or nine, they would have been received with equal cordiality. In the working of your family life, however, you find it necessary to determine an hour at which every child shall be with you. To that effect you proclaim your law. In process of events, I further suppose, one of your children is a mile off when the well-known hour strikes. What is the consequence in his own experience? He hears stroke after stroke without alarm, until, alas! the legal hour is pealed off. How that stroke shakes him! how harsh the vibration! how reproachful the shivering tone! A week before, he could have heard the same hour strike, and could have sung to it. Nothing would have alarmed him. No ghostly accuser would have been upon his track. He now feels that the law is “the ministration of condemnation.” He says, “I am late; I should have been at home; my father’s eye will reprove me: I had not known sin but by the law, for I had not known irregularity in time, except the law had said, Thou shalt be punctual.”<\/p>\n

Take the world’s first case of law. There was law in the Edenic life. There was a “Thou shalt not” in the programme of the world’s first experience of manhood, and over it fell the shadow of threatened death. Liberty was made liberty by law. Up to the very moment of touching the forbidden fruit, Adam knew not what was meant by the “ministration of condemnation”; but the moment after, how vast his knowledge! The taste of that fruit could not be expelled from his mouth; it was there as a malignant poison, for which no plant in paradise held the cure; the very tree looked hell at him, and a leaf from its desecrated branches might have crushed him to the earth. Why all this? The explanation is in the law. The law said nothing to Adam of “condemnation” until he had broken it. So long as he kept the law, he knew nothing of death, except by observation. What it was for man to die it was impossible he should know; but when the forbidden sap entered him, the inner man fell back blind, chilled, dead! Fools are they who cavil because Adam did not physically expire. Is life a question of perpendicularity? Is death a question of frozen marrow? Is manhood a question of bones? Every man knows the killing power of sin. In darkness you have done some deed of iniquity. The red mark of guilt is on the palm of your right hand. Your heart condemns you. When you come forward to the light, you feel yourself dead; your moral vitality is gone; your eye can no longer return the inquiring glance of society; you would knit your own shroud of fig leaves, and would gladly escape God as you seek to return to the dust. Ah! death is a process of the soul. Dead men walk on their own graves. The soul is in the chambers of death long ere the body yields up the ghost.<\/p>\n

Another inquiry is now suggested. Under circumstances so appalling, how can “the ministration of condemnation” be said to be “glory?” for that is the royal word of the text. What “glory” can there possibly be in “the ministration of condemnation” and “the ministration of death?” I answer, the glory is not in the condemnation and the death, except in their immediate connection with law. That there is glory in law is open to decisive demonstration. The establishment of law implies authority on the part of the lawgiver. Law is the declared will of the superior. I wish it to be felt that this is true not only in the highest regions of legislation, but necessarily as true in the simplest relations of social life. How is it amongst ourselves? Does the servant give law to the master, or the master to the servant? By whose authority is the table of regulations put up in all your great hives of industry? The principle that authority is with the superior is essential to the consolidation and government of society. Relax it, and society is at once disorganised! We must be governed, and we must be governed by one another; and of necessity society will gravitate around its highest forces. I repeat, then, that law implies authority on the part of the lawgiver. Carry these illustrations forward to the case argued in the text, then the “glory” will at once kindle upon us, and, like the children of Israel, we shall need the protecting vail. Recall the dread days of Sinai. Almighty God alights, and the mountain shudders at his presence. There, amid thunderings and lightnings, the “Thou shalt” and the “Thou shalt not” of Infinite Wisdom are given to man, accompanied by an institutionalism as gorgeous as it is complex. Every utterance of the eternal mind must have its own peculiar glory; alike the utterance designed to produce physical results, and the utterance intended to operate in the moral kingdom: each shines with a glory distinctively its own, and in proportion as the moral is superior to the physical, so does the glory of the one exceed the glory of the other. The Israelites were hemmed in by law. They were beset behind and before, and the hand of the legislator was laid upon them. When they turned to worship, there was a “Thou shalt” that exterminated all idols, and shut the worshipper in with one God. When they associated with families, there was a “Thou shalt” that demanded filial reverence. When they were thrown together in masses, there were regulations intended to preserve the integrity, and purity, and blessedness of the vast population. In such a law, brocaded with the most gorgeous ritualism, there must have been “glory.” It was the utterance of the Infinite Intelligence. It marked a distinct epoch in the moral training of the world. It was a protest, in flame and blood, against every form of error. It declared, by more than implication, that there was immense evil in the world, and that moral life among men was under the immediate scrutiny of God. That solemn law was a vital part of the education through which God was conducting the young and wayward world. That law was alike a standard of rectitude and a prophecy of a judgment day. From the very beginning, man was given to understand that all things should converge to a great judicial crisis, and that whoso broke through the groundwork of Divine law would find, when he reached the under side, that he had arrived in the unbottomed abyss of death! Yea, there was nothing between man and death but the “Thou shalt” and the “Thou shalt not” of Divine legislation 1 Just that. There was but a step between man and death. When, therefore, I contemplate the dread issue of an infraction of God’s law, I can understand the Apostle when he calls that law “the ministration of condemnation”; and as I further contemplate the sublime purpose of that law, I can understand how, upon such a “ministration,” there shone a “glory” which must have beamed from heaven!<\/p>\n

The Gospel is described as “the ministration of righteousness,” and is affirmed to “exceed in glory.” In giving the law, God did not accommodate himself to human weakness by imposing easy or elastic conditions and regulations. He declared that which was absolute in rectitude. There was no tampering with righteousness. There was no shortening of the standard. You inquire, then, who could keep this rigorous, inflexible law? Could apostate man rise to the required sublimity of obedience, and from the summit of an unimpeachable life take wing for the holy heavens? The answer is, Never. “By the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.” Note this word “justified.” Let me suppose that man could perfectly fulfil the law from this moment forward; I have then to ask, What is to be done with the life that is past, a life lived in hatred to that law? Granted, though the postulate is a moral impossibility, that from this instant man could pay “the uttermost farthing”; I demand who is to pay the accumulated arrears? Man can never do more than is right. He has no power to produce surplus virtue; so that, even granting, for the sake of clearness and emphasis, that man could henceforth fulfil the law in its most punctilious requirements, it remains to be explained how he is to atone for a life that has been prostituted to the devil. The Apostle pronounces upon the case with elaboration and authority: “That no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith…. The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.” The law rendered supremely important service to man if it did nothing more than bring him to the consciousness that he was powerless to fulfil requirements so holy. The law showed him the height to which he must ascend, and he trembled, and owned his weakness. “Do we make void the law through faith? God forbid. Yea, we establish the law.” “The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” The law was not designed to give life. It had but a schoolmaster’s work to do. It was preliminary and introductory; “for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.” We see, then, that the law was not a final act in the development of the Divine purpose; it was not clothed with resurrectional or regenerative power; it was a link in a chain; it had to train the consciousness of the world to acknowledge its own utter weakness, for “the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” There was an epoch of law; there is now an epoch of faith. Faith is younger than law; hence, “before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.”<\/p>\n

As the law was antecedent to faith, so also it stands in perfect contrast; the one being “the ministration of condemnation,” the other “the ministration of righteousness.” Yet what is meant by asserting that the law was antecedent to the gospel? I mean antecedent merely in the order of open manifestation. The promise that Christ should come into the world takes precedence of all other promises: this is recognised by the Apostle in the argument of his Epistle to the Galatians, “And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.” The Lamb was slain before the foundation of the world. Far back in the infinite depths of unbeginning being, the atonement was the vital centre of God’s moral plan in the re-creation of humanity. Merely, therefore, in the order of public disclosure was the law antecedent to the Gospel. Love is from everlasting, law is but of yesterday; law is for a season, love is for ever; law is a transient flame, love an eternal orb. Sublime beyond full comprehension is the fact that the Gospel is “the ministration of righteousness.” Those who exercise repentance towards God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ are not merely pardoned; that would be much, infinitely more, indeed, than the law could ever do, but they are made righteous; they are cleansed; they are sanctified; they are transformed into the image of God. “Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.” Here is a work far beyond the range of law. Law could not enter the heart with purifying power. Law had no blood in its iron hand to apply to the depraved and guilty nature of man. It is impossible that law could forgive; law only can condemn. You may address the broken law, but will it speak to you? Will mercy ooze out of the iron letters in which it stands forth before your streaming eyes? Never! You must appeal from the law to the Lawgiver. Only a heart can forgive; therefore “what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son (his own infinite heart) in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.” Here is the moral contrast in all its breadth. The law is weak, the Gospel is mighty; the law touches the outer man, the Gospel penetrates the heart. “The law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.”<\/p>\n

The ministration of righteousness exceeds the ministration of condemnation “in glory.” This is in strict harmony with God’s general method of government. He never goes from the greater to the less, but ever from the less to the greater: “He is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think.” We thought nothing could exceed the splendour of Sinai, yet it was eclipsed by the transcendent magnificence of Calvary. We were amazed at the eminence of Moses, and the radiance of his transfigured face; but “we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.” We felt that human nature was honoured when Moses was called a “servant;” but “beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be.” When the law was announced, the people exclaimed in consternation, “Let not God speak to us any more, lest we die.” But Jesus Christ hath brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel; he hath “come that we might have life, and that we might have it more abundantly.” The law was veiled under types and shadows; but the Son of God has been crucified before our eyes, and we are crucified with Christ: nevertheless we live; yet not we, but Christ liveth in us: and the life which we now live in the flesh we live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved us and gave himself for us. Is not the contrast perfect? Is not the glory of the first economy paled by the noontide splendour of the better dispensation? A question of infinite importance arises here. Did the law exceed the Gospel in its condemnation of sin? You know the answer. I speak with trembling reverence in declaring that God could not have shown his infinite hatred of sin so clearly by any method as by giving his only-begotten and well-beloved Son to pour out his soul unto death. When I wish to understand how God regards sin, I do not look at the quaking slopes of Sinai; I do not listen to the thundering or to “the voice of words”; I steal away at midnight across the brook Cedron, and listen to the wail of sorrow that bursts from the breaking heart of the lonely Redeemer; I listen as he pleads for release, and then falls into filial resignation to his Father’s will; I watch him up the “dolorous way”; I see him stretched on the accursed tree; I hear his groan, and it makes my heart sore with unutterable grief; I see the gushing blood, the quivering limbs, the languid eye, and hear the voice of despair amid the darkness of premature midnight and in all this I come to apprehend that sin is the abominable thing that God hateth. The exceeding glory of the Gospel, then, is seen in this, that while it comes to condemn sin, it also comes to destroy its power, and save those whom it has brought into bondage. The Gospel has no word of pity for sin, or of extenuation for error, but it melts with infinite compassion as it yearns over the sinner. The law never had a loving word for the transgressor it was stern, inflexible, rigorous; but the Gospel speaks with entreating tenderness to erring man offers him rest, offers him joy, offers him heaven. “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” Jesus never temporises with sin; but who ever addressed the sinner in words so full of love, and mercy, and hope? You have never seen him spurn the vilest malefactor from his pierced feet. When such malefactor has gone up to the law, he has been met by thunder and lightning, and tempest and vengeance; but when he has crept to the Cross, Jesus has wept over him, and offered him pardon, and peace, and righteousness. Does not, then, the ministration of the Gospel “exceed in glory” the ministration of the law? So greatly does it exceed, that we may exclaim with the Apostle, “Even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.” This method of working fills me not only with wonder, but with hope. It gives me a glimpse of what shall go forward during unending time. No more, indeed, shall there be need to interpose on account of sin; no hill in heaven shall be surmounted with the Cross on which shall be outstretched an atoning Saviour; no more sin, no more sorrow, no more sacrifice; but still ever-expanding and ever brightening revelations of the Divine character; our knowledge shall increase, our love shall deepen, our strength shall strengthen, and heaven itself will be the last but inexhaustible expression of “the ministration of righteousness.” We do well to think of heaven in this light. But for “the ministration of righteousness,” heaven would have been inaccessible to man. The Cross opened heaven on the side which darkened towards the earth. The Christian, therefore, does not cease his connection with the Cross when he waves the signal of triumph over the last enemy. The ministration of righteousness does not terminate at the grave; it stretches across the troubled river of death; and when the believer enters heaven he instantly joins the song of honour, and power, and blessing, to “the Lamb that was slain.” When he reaches that city of rest, beholds the indescribable Majesty, stands face to face with his Lord, whom he has loved and served, he will know all that is meant by the exceeding glory of the ministration of righteousness.<\/p>\n

Some are endeavouring to reach heaven through obedience to the law. Are you wiser than God? Is the atonement a mistake? “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” “If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?” Can the law “purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” Go to the law, as given to Moses, examine yourselves by it word by word, and say whether every requirement has been fulfilled; and if the letter has been fulfilled, go deeper, and see how far the spirit has been apprehended and realised. Have you loved the Lord your God with all your heart, and soul, and mind, and strength? and enclosed your neighbour in the folds of an all-loving philanthropy? What is the answer which conscience forces upon you? The blush of guilt is on your cheek; the fire of self-condemnation is kindled within you. Do not attempt to scale the sides of Sinai; there is nothing there for guilty man but “condemnation” and “death.” Climb the hill on which the Saviour bleeds. Tell Jesus that you have broken the law; tell him how guilty and weak you are; ask him to pity and save your soul; and he will surely take you up into his infinite heart!<\/p>\n

As man passes from one “ministration” to another, and so is brought nearer and nearer to God, we should remind ourselves that the advancing ages multiply our responsibilities. We cannot live under the “exceeding glory” without incurring proportionate obligations. It is more awful to live now than to have lived in the opening youth of the world. Today is the mighty sum of all yesterdays! He who lives in the nineteenth century has nineteen centuries’ experience and history as his dowry. The developments of Divine purpose have a practical bearing on every man’s destiny. We are not permitted to trifle with the dignity of the epoch under which we live. Man’s privileges affect man’s judgment. A birthday is taken into account in the judicial examination of human history. According to the breadth of light which shone upon our span of life, shall be the rigour of the judgment by which we shall be judged: “for if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven.” These words make me tremble. So many of us have lived a life of frailest infancy, instead of vigorous manhood. We have lived as though God had done nothing for us, forgetting that he hath come in our likeness, and suffered in our stead! Need more be said to penetrate us with horror, and awaken us to duty?<\/p>\n

Prayer<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Almighty God, we are still in thy keeping. Thou dost love us with an unchanging love; we are not thine to-day, and our own tomorrow, we are always thine; for thou didst make us, and not we ourselves; thou hast redeemed us, not with corruptible things as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Jesus Christ thy Son. Thou wilt not forsake the work of thine own hands; thou dost watch us with love, thou dost redeem us with love, thou dost surround us with love: so now we know and say, God is love, and in his love we live, and die, and rise again, and abide through all duration. All thy ways concerning us are full of mercy; it is hard to see the judgment, because the compassion is so great; if now and then we see nothing but darkness, it is that we may be surprised by a great glory; we will not surrender our faith in the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Thou art our portion, yesterday, to-day, and for ever; we cannot be forsaken whilst thou art with us; the clouds are but veiling an intolerable splendour, and the winds that blow from heaven bring with them the fragrance of the better land. How wondrously hast thou opened for us the gate that was locked; how in a moment hast thou levelled the mountain that was high; and how suddenly have the rough places become plain. Thus we have seen thee in our own life, thus is thy name written upon our whole consciousness and observation and experience; so now we can be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might; we are no longer children tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine; we stand upon eternal verities, we are sure that the rock beneath us can never be moved; here we may build for eternity, for an eternal security is ours. We bless thee for the new visions of life which we see day by day; we are a wonder unto ourselves, we marvel that we carry within us so great a mystery as life, a perpetual surprise, a daily miracle. May we know ourselves to be the Temple of the Holy Ghost; may we no longer trifle with ourselves as the creatures of a moment; may we rather look upon our humanity as redeemed by the blood of Jesus, sanctified by the Spirit of the living God, and made meet to partake of the inheritance that is above. Now we can bless thee for our tears; at the time we shed them they were hot and bitter, they were full of burning; but now we see how good thou wert in bringing us to drink of sorrow, and to bow down in humiliation before thee; now we bless thee for our estate in the cemetery; we thank thee on behalf of those who having left us are still with us, whose graves grow the brightest flowers to be found in all the lap of the summer, whose memory is a perpetual inspiration, whose example is often a gentle rebuke, but more frequently a noble encouragement: for the enthroned and crowned ones we bless the Cross of the Risen Christ. We commend one another to thee; for such commendation we always need: some are old and weary, some are troubled sorely with the anxieties of a life they cannot measure or control; others are in constant fear, so that they eat their bread with difficulty and drink their water with pain; others are needlessly anxious, but they cannot turn aside the threatening shadow; thou knowest their frame, thou understandest their constitution, thou didst make them and not they themselves. According to our need and pain, our joy and sorrow, our opportunity, our conflict, our triumph, order thy blessing to rest upon us, for without that blessing there can be no beauty, no strength, no duration of gladness. Visit our sick ones: they are sick unto death, they long to die; the bitterness of death with them is past, and they long for the last command, that they may join the free and happy in heaven. Upon the whole world let thy smile rest; upon all mankind let some token for good abide; make all ministers of thine strong in truth, tender in grace and love, rich in human sympathy; stir thy Churches as with Pentecostal blessing and inspiration; and upon all efforts made for the dispersion of darkness, and the displacement of ignorance, let thy blessing come down like a plentiful rain: thus may thy kingdom come, and thy will be done on earth as it is done in heaven. Amen.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

XXVII<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

THE TWO COVENANTS<\/p>\n

2Co 1:21-3:18<\/span><\/strong> .<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the last of 2Co 1<\/span> there is one passage that we need to discuss: “Now he that established us with you in Christ, and anointed us, is God; who also sealed us, and gave us the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.” Some words used here a Christian ought to understand. For instance, “anointed,” “sealed,” “earnest.” In the Old Testament, prophets, priests, and kings were anointed with the “holy anointing oil” whose recipe Moses gave in Exo 30:22-33<\/span> . As a ceremony it signified their consecration, or setting apart, to office. As a symbol it signified the influence of the Holy Spirit which qualified them to perform their official duties. In the New Testament it means that the Holy Spirit, received by faith, qualifies every Christian to be a priest of God, to offer spiritual sacrifices. The word “anointed,” I say, refers to the influence that comes upon the Christian in the sense of setting him apart for the work of Christ and qualifying him to do it. As the Old Testament priest, prophet, and king were anointed for an office, so is every Christian. We are all kings and priests unto God. Without the Holy Spirit we cannot acceptably serve God.<\/p>\n

The word “seal” has a different signification.<\/p>\n

It is quite common in Pedo-baptist literature to refer to baptism as a seal, but in the Word of God baptism is nowhere called a seal. On the contrary, we are expressly said to be sealed by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n

The object of a seal is to accredit or designate ownership. For instance, a man writes a letter and puts the mark of his seal on it; that authenticates the letter. If a seminary confers a degree or sells a piece of property, neither degree nor deed is valid unless it bears the corporate seal of the seminary. We are said to be sealed by the Holy Spirit. That simply means this that the gift of the Holy Spirit to a Christian authenticates that Christian as God’s property. Suppose I address a communication and put my seal on it; that seal is designed to keep the communication intact until it gets to its address. So we are sealed unto the day of redemption.<\/p>\n

That is a very strong argument in favor of the final preservation of the saints. The imprint of the Holy Spirit on us is a mark that we belong to God and will be delivered to God on the day of redemption. If the seal of God does hold (and there is no power that can break it) that is demonstrative that the Christian will reach his destination.<\/p>\n

There is still another word “given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.” An “earnest” is something of this kind: The holy land was promised to the Israelites. Spies were sent to look out the country and sample it. They brought back a bunch of grapes, and the people were enabled to eat those grapes before they got to the country where the grapes grew. They were the same in kind, but not the same in quantity. God intends that our promised land shall be heaven; but before we get to heaven he gives us foretastes in kind of what we are to get when we reach heaven; the joy, peace, and glory that often comes to the Christian heart here on earth is an earnest of what heaven will be. It is a little piece of heaven, sent down to us beforehand. How often in a great revival we hear brethren say, “This is heaven on earth! We are getting foretastes of the glory of God.” The sense of forgiveness, the sweet peace that comes in the heart on reconciliation with God, the joy of the converted soul anything of that kind is an earnest of heaven.<\/p>\n

The first part of 2Co 2<\/span> is devoted to a case of discipline. In the first letter he had written very sharply in a way to bring grief to their hearts because they had allowed an awful sin, committed by one of their members, to go unrebuked. He is now explaining to them why he made them sorry: “If I make you sorry, who then is he that maketh me glad but he that is made sorry by me? And I wrote this very thing, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is the joy of you all. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be made sorry, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you.” That sharp letter he wrote was prompted by love. He saw that they were getting themselves into trouble. He adds, “But if any hath caused sorrow, he hath caused sorrow, not to me, but in part (that I press not too heavily) to you all. Sufficient to such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by the many.” When they came to expel that man they could not get a unanimous vote, for some stood for him.<\/p>\n

That conveys this lesson to us, that in expelling a man it is not necessary that the vote should be unanimous; a majority vote is sufficient for expulsion or any discipline whatever.<\/p>\n

It is different in the reception of a member. Pastors and churches sometimes have to show why it is that a majority vote is sufficient to expel a man, and here is the text. The word “many” means majority. This case also contains another important lesson on discipline: “Sufficient to such a one is the punishment inflicted by the majority; so that contrariwise ye should rather forgive him and comfort him, lest by any means such a one should be swallowed up with his overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you to confirm your love toward him. For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye are obedient in all things. But to whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also; for what I also have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, for your sakes have I forgiven it.”<\/p>\n

That raises the question: What is the object of discipline? To gain the offending brother. Even when we exclude him, if he be a Christian, and his exclusion is conducted properly, it will likely have that effect on him. It had that effect in this case. When this man saw that this church by a majority vote decided that he was living in a, sin of such heinousness that it disqualified him for membership in a church of Jesus Christ, it broke his heart and he repented of his sin. Paul says, “Let that punishment of expulsion be sufficient, and on his repentance forgive him and take him back again.” That is the point in discipline.<\/p>\n

All the rest of the letter until we come to 2Co 8<\/span> is on Paul’s ministry: “Now when I came to Troas for the gospel of Christ, and when a door was opened unto me in the Lord, I had no relief for my spirit, because I found not Titus, my brother; but taking my leave of them, I went forth into Macedonia.” The thought is that a man who loves to preach the gospel and is holding a meeting where the door of success is open, may yet have such a burden on his heart about other matters that he cannot fulfil his duty as a preacher. Paul is distressed to death about that case at Corinth for fear that the church should go astray and be lost from the churches of Jesus Christ, as he says elsewhere that the case of all the churches was resting on his apostolic heart. Many a time when the preacher preaches he carries a burden that nobody else knows anything about. Sometimes he has a burden on him right in the midst of a meeting that does not touch the meeting, coming from circumstances elsewhere that divert his mind and press on his heart.<\/p>\n

Then he says, “But thanks be unto God, who always leadeth us in triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest through us the savor of his knowledge in every place.”<\/p>\n

Notice that always and in every place the true preacher triumphs.<\/p>\n

Paul explains how that is: “For we are a sweet savor of Christ unto God, in them that are saved, and in them that perish; to the one a savor from death unto death; to the other a savor from life unto life.” Some preachers think if they preach, and people are not saved, they have failed. If the preacher preaches God’s gospel where he wants him to preach, he wins a victory over the lost if not over the saved.<\/p>\n

In other words, God intends that the terms of mercy contained in his gospel should be submitted to people whether they receive it or reject it, and that there is no responsibility attaching to the preacher in the issue.<\/p>\n

If they reject it, the gospel is to them a savor of death unto death, and of life unto life, if they accept it. I do not know any other part of the Scriptures so little understood as that statement.<\/p>\n

One night, when I was a young pastor, a brother pastor came to see me, very much distressed. He said, “My ministry is a failure.” I said, “I am disposed to question that.” He said, “I cannot disguise it from myself; it is a dead failure. I have preached for a solid year in tears and in earnestness and nobody in my community has been convicted of sin.” I said, “That does not prove that you have failed. If you had preached without praying or studying or asking God to give you the right message, I would agree with you that your ministry is a failure. But if you have preached in faith, in tears, in prayer, faithfully holding up the gospel, you have won the victory,” and I read this passage. He was so impressed that he got right down on the floor at my house, and such a thanksgiving I never heard. He said, “Do you know that you have saved my life? I felt like quitting the ministry because I was in such despair.” Generally, we should look for success in the salvation of men, and that should be our principal desire in preaching, and generally that will be the result, but sometimes it will not. “But always in every place God causeth us to triumph.”<\/p>\n

2Co 3<\/span> commences with a reference to letters of recommendation: “Are we beginning again to commend ourselves, or need we, as do some, epistles of commendation to you or from you? Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men; being made manifest that ye are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in tables that are hearts of flesh.” He uses two figures about the letters: First, in his heart it is written; second, Christ, using him as a penman, wrote a letter on their hearts, and that letter that Christ wrote could be known and read of all men not written with ink and pen, but with the Spirit. It was not written like the commandments of Moses, on tables of stone, but on the fleshly tables of the heart. He says, “I don’t need a letter of recommendation, as some other people do. The Jewish brethren came bringing letters from the Jerusalem church, and they had stirred up all this trouble. They needed letters of recommendation. You heard the gospel through me. I built on no other man’s foundation, but led you to Christ. If you want to know where my letter of recommendation is, look on yourselves. Christ dictated; I wrote the letter, and it is a long ways better than a letter written in ink.” An ink letter oftentimes means very little.<\/p>\n

Once a man came into my office and asked me for a letter of recommendation. I said, “I do not even know you.” He said, “That is all right; you can tell them about me.” I said, “Why do you not tell them about yourself? Your word would mean as much as my letter. You have come to the wrong place; I never write a letter of recommendation unless I know what I am writing about.” Again, a certain man wanted me to commend a book. I said, “I have never read that book.” “Well, I will show you its prospectus,” said he. “But the prospectus is not the book. Do you think I would commend a book that I have not read, and do you think I would trade my name for a single book?” “Well,” he said, “other people do that way.” “Yes,” I said, “and that is the reason that their letters of recommendation are not worth anything.”<\/p>\n

It is a suspicious thing for a man to carry his valise full of recommendations. I once knew a preacher who carried around a scrapbook in which he had preserved every foolish thing that had ever been said in his favor by the newspapers. My father used to say, “Whenever you see a chimney with a big log up against it, you may know that it is a weak chimney, and needs to be propped.” The object of a letter of recommendation is simply to give a person an introduction, and then let him stand for himself.<\/p>\n

The poorest preacher and the poorest pastor I ever saw had twenty-three letters of recommendation and several degrees from colleges.<\/p>\n

The most important thought in connection with these letters of recommendation is that, after all, everything must be judged by its fruits, and every man must be known by his works. What is Christianity? Christ wrote a letter. Where is that letter? That Corinthian church. Is there anything different between what they are now and what they were before their conversion? Yes, a great deal of difference, and all that difference is in favor of the Christian religion that worked the change. We may tell a man about the effects of Christianity, and he will take all we say with a grain of salt, but if we show him actual cases of changed people, they become letters of recommendation for the Christian religion. If the one who joins the church remains as he was before, it proves nothing; but if Christianity makes better husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, and citizens, the whole wide world can read that letter.<\/p>\n

An infidel once said to me that there was one woman in my church who had really been converted, or changed, and that the change was for the better, and that was one argument for Christianity that he could not answer. The next thought is in 2Co 3:5-6<\/span> : “But our sufficiency is from God; who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the Spirit: for the letter killeth.” The lesson from that word “sufficient” should sink down into every preacher’s heart. It is not because a man is six feet tall; Paul was a low man. It is not because a man is pretty; Paul was ugly. It is not because a man is clear-eyed; Paul was dim-eyed. It is not because a man is sound in health; Paul was in ill health. It is not because a man is a rhetorician; Paul did not use his rhetoric. “Our sufficiency is of God.” We cannot put too much emphasis on that thought.<\/p>\n

I was stopping once in Louisville. The brethren, hearing I was there, sent for me to make a talk to the Seminary boys, and I combined two passages which say, “Good and able ministers of Jesus Christ.” I took that as my theme. What is a good preacher? This refers to character. What is an able preacher? This refers to efficiency. I do not think I ever made a better talk to preachers than I made that night.<\/p>\n

Now comes in the ministry of Paul, commencing at 2Co 3:7<\/span> , showing a distinction between the two covenants. We have already had one distinction, that the old covenant was written on tables of stone and the new covenant on tables of the heart. Here we have another: “But if the ministration of death, written, and engraven on stones, came with glory.” The old covenant was the ministration of death. The law gendered to bondage. The soul that sinneth shall die. The new covenant is the ministration of life. We cannot save men by the law. We can kill them, but we save men by the gospel. That distinction should be kept sharp in mind. It was a very solemn thing when God came down on Mount Sinai, crested with fire, and shaken with thunder, illumined with lightning, and the beat of the angel pinions filled the air it was a glorious thing. But what is that to the ministration of life through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ? The law came by Moses, but grace and truth by Jesus Christ our Saviour, who abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. The law the ministration of death is written on cold rock, outside of man. The gospel the ministration of life is written on the warm heart, inside of man. Paul, in Heb 8:7-12<\/span> , says in speaking of the two covenants, “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second. For finding fault with them, ha saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, That I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers In the day that I took them by the hand to lead them forth out of the land of Egypt; For they continued not in my covenant, And I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel After those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, And on their heart also will I write them: And I will be to them a God, And they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his fellow-citizen, And every man his brother, saying, know the Lord: For all shall know me, From the least to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their iniquities, And their sins will I remember no more.”<\/p>\n

Then Paul adds, “In that he saith, a new covenant, he hath made the first old. But that which is becoming old and waxeth aged is nigh unto vanishing away.” The new covenant is internal, and nothing has been done until the writing touches on the inside.<\/p>\n

The glory of the old covenant was reflected in the face of Moses. When he came down from the mount his face was shining so that it dazzled the eyes of the people. But that was nothing like the shining of the transfiguration of Christ. The shining of Moses’ face was transitory. Moses put a veil over his face. He knew that the shining would pass away and his face would be as it was before. He veiled his face lest the Jews should see the end of the shining, and would not follow him. But the Jews believed that he veiled his face because it was too bright to look at, and that if the veil were lifted off, the face of Moses would outshine any face in the world. Mightily does Tom Moore bring out the thought in The Veiled Prophet of Khorasan<\/em><\/strong> , in Lalla Rookh. An impostor, wearing a veil, played upon the superstition of the people, saying that no mortal could endure the brightness of the splendor of his face, and in mercy to them he kept his face veiled. But he promised some day to uncover his face that they might see his glory. His object was to pre-commit them, and so bring them to absolute despair and ruin at the unveiling. One of the most pathetic things in poetry is where the prophet lifted his veil that the ruined Zelica might see his face; that she might see the horrible face of the demon who had deceived her. What must be the unveiling of the Law covenant to the lost dupes who have trusted it?<\/p>\n

The next point is, that the Old Testament is a ministration of condemnation: “For if the ministration of condemnation hath glory, much rather doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.” The word “righteousness” here should be rendered “justification.” The thought is that the old covenant condemns men; the new covenant justifies men. The preacher ought to be able to distinguish between those two points, condemnation and justification.<\/p>\n

The next point is that the old covenant was written in types, veiling the truth signified. He says, “Having therefore such a hope, we use great boldness of speech, and are not as Moses, who put a veil upon his face.” Moses set forth things in allegories and types. Boldness, or plainness of speech here, refers to absence of figures of speech. That is the difference between telling a thing in straight-out language, and in using parables. The gospel makes the way of life very plain, so that a fool cannot misunderstand. In much of the Old Testament we have to study so as to find the signification of the type or of the prophetic visions. They were but shadows.<\/p>\n

Notice again the old covenant dazzled the eye 2Co 3:18<\/span> : “But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit.” The verse preceding says, “The Lord is the spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” Mirrors in those days were made of hammered and polished metal) and made a dim reflection. The sun may be out of sight, but the moon is a mirror catching the light of the sun and reflecting it to the eye of the beholder.<\/p>\n

I am going to give you what I call a very impressive illustration. In Prescott’s Conquest of Peru, there is a description of the Temple of the Incas as Cuzco. This temple consists of three walls, north, south, west. The eastern side of the structure was open. The walls were smoothly cemented, and on the cement was put thinly hammered gold. The way they worshiped was this: They would come to the temple just before dawn and stand in that opening to the east, and facing the western wall a golden wall; on the left a golden wall; and on the right a golden wall. The sun would rise behind them, and long before they could see it directly they could see its reflection in the western wall, and be covered with the golden light. Their faces were illumined in the reflection. Now we all look into the mirror upon the glory of the Lord, and that mirror reflects it on us, and we catch the reflected image and are changed in it from glory to glory; as the sun behind those people rising higher, blazing brighter, bathed them more and more in its reflected light, so the Lord of righteousness, as he rises, brings healing in his wings. We look at Christ as in a mirror. He is not here, but we see him mirrored in the face of his saints. It is a law that we become like that which we steadfastly contemplate. If we steadily study about good, pure, and holy things, we become like them. If we study about evil things, vile and loathsome and slimy, we become like them. We steadfastly behold the glorious things of the gospel as in a mirror and become transformed ourselves, more and more like Jesus, and at last become altogether like him in image.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

QUESTIONS<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. What three important words in 2Co 1:21-22<\/span> which need to be understood?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

2. What the meaning and application of the word “anointed”?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

3. Discuss the word “seal,” showing its application by illustrations.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

4. What the meaning of “earnest,” what the illustration given, and what the spiritual significance of it?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

5. To what is the first part of 2Co 2<\/span> devoted, and what connection has this with the first letter?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

6. What the history of this case, and what important lesson for us in it?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

7. What lesson here as to the object of discipline, and how is it clearly shown in this case?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

8. To what is the next section, 2Co 2:12-7:16<\/span> , devoted, and what the lessons of 2Co 2:12-13<\/span> ?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

9. What the ground of Paul’s thanksgiving here, and how could Paul say, “God always leadeth us in triumph”? Illustrate.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

10. What lesson for us here on the question of letters of recommendation, and what the explanation of Paul’s two figures of speech relative to this matter? Illustrate.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

11. What the most important thought in connection with these letters of recommendation, and how does the author illustrate it?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

12. What lesson here as to our sufficiency, and how does this idea relate to “Good and able ministers of Jesus Christ”?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

13. What 2 distinctions here noted between the new covenant and the old?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

14. What prophet does Paul quote to show the difference between the old covenant and the new, where do we find this quotation, and how does this prophet show the difference?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

15. Give an account of the shining face of Moses, and illustrate with the incident of The Veiled Prophet of Khorasan.<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

16. How is the Old Testament a ministration of condemnation, in what does the ministration of righteousness exceed the ministration of the Old Testament, and what the meaning of word “righteousness” here?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

17. What difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament expressed in 2Co 3:12<\/span> , and how is this illustrated in the case of Moses veiling his face?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

18. What Paul’s mirror-illustration, and how is this illustrated by author?<\/p>\n

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

1 Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others<\/em> , epistles of commendation to you, or letters<\/em> of commendation from you? <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ver. 1. Do we begin again, &c.<\/strong> ] As we had done before, 2Co 1:12<\/span> .<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

To commend ourselves<\/strong> ] Quod magnificum referente alio fuisset, ipso qui gesserat recensente vanescit.<\/em> (Plin.) “Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth,” Pro 27:2<\/span> . Laus proprio sordescit in ore.<\/em> But the apostle was necessitated to it.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

As some others, letters of commendation<\/strong> ] As the false apostles, who carried it by testimonial; in giving whereof, many good people are much to blame. Beauty needs no letters of commendation, saith Aristotle; much less doth virtue, where it is known. If moral virtue could be seen with mortal eyes, saith Plato, it would soon draw all hearts to itself. <\/p>\n

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

1 3<\/strong> .] He disclaims a spirit of self-recommendation<\/em> .<\/p>\n

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

1.<\/strong> ] <\/strong> ., are we beginning?<\/strong> <\/strong> , alluding to a charge probably made against him of having done this in his former epistle: perhaps in its opening section, and in some passages of 1Co 5:9<\/span> and 1Co 14:18 ; 1Co 15:10 al.: see 2Co 10:18<\/span> .<\/p>\n

<\/strong> .] Or do we want<\/strong> (the gives an ironical turn to the question, which is more strongly expressed in the rec. reading , ‘unless it be thought, that’ ) as some<\/strong> (so , 1Co 4:18<\/span> ; 1Co 15:12<\/span> ; Gal 1:7<\/span> , of the teachers who opposed him. Probably these persons had come recommended to them, by whom<\/em> does not appear, whether by churches or Apostles, but most likely by the former ( ), and on their departure requested similar recommendations from the Corinthian church to others), letters of recommendation to you<\/strong> ( . are fully illustrated by Suicer, Thes. in voc. Among other passages he cites the 13th canon of the council of Chalcedon: <\/strong> ; and Epist. cclxxi. (al. xi.) of Basil, vol. iv. p. 417, which has this inscription: , “Eusebio sodali commendatitia Cyriaci presbyteri”) or from you<\/strong> ? The rec. at the end, as well as . , have probably been glosses, inserted (the ancient MSS. having no stops) to prevent . being taken with . following.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

CH. 2Co 3:1 to 2Co 6:10<\/span> .] BEGINNING WITH A DISOWNING OF SELF-RECOMMENDATION, THE APOSTLE PROCEEDS TO SPEAK CONCERNING HIS APOSTOLIC OFFICE AND HIMSELF AS THE HOLDER OF IT, HIS FEELINGS, SUFFERINGS, AND HOPES, PARTLY WITH REGARD TO HIS CONNEXION WITH THE CORINTHIANS, BUT FOR THE MOST PART IN GENERAL TERMS.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1-3<\/span> . THE CORINTHIANS ARE ST. PAUL’S “EPISTLE OF COMMENDATION”.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1<\/span> . .: are we beginning again<\/em> ( sc.<\/em> , as, for instance, in 1Co 9:15<\/span> ; 1Co 14:18 ; 1Co 15:10<\/span> , or possibly he alludes to 2Co 1:12<\/span> above; cf.<\/em> chap. 2Co 5:12<\/span> , 2Co 10:18<\/span> below) to commend ourselves?<\/em> His opponents seem to have made this charge, which he is careful to repudiate again (2Co 10:12<\/span> ; cf.<\/em> 2Co 12:11<\/span> ). The phrase (or , for both forms occur) is found four times in this Epistle (see reff.), and always in a bad sense, the prominent place of signifying that there has been undue egotism; on the other hand, , which occurs three times (see reff.), is always used in a good sense, of that legitimate commendation of himself and his message which every faithful minister will adopt. Neither form occurs elsewhere in the N.T. (unless Gal 2:18<\/span> , , be regarded as an exception). . . .: or do we need, as some do<\/em> ( i.e.<\/em> , the of 2Co 2:17<\/span> ; is his usual vague description of opponents; see 1Co 4:18<\/span> ; 1Co 15:12<\/span> , chap. 2Co 10:2<\/span> , Gal 1:7<\/span> , 1Ti 1:3<\/span> ; 1Ti 1:19<\/span> ), epistles of commendation to you or from you?<\/em> Greek teachers used to give (Diogenes Laert., vii. 87); for such commendatory mention cf.<\/em> Act 15:25<\/span> (of Judas and Silas to the Church at Antioch), Act 18:27<\/span> (of Apollos to the Church at Corinth), Rom 16:1<\/span> (of Phbe to the Church at Rome), chap. 2Co 8:16-24<\/span> (of Titus and his companions to the Church at Corinth); cf.<\/em> also 1Co 16:3<\/span> . St. Paul scouts the idea that he, who first brought the Gospel to Corinth, should need to present formal credentials to the Corinthian Church; and it would be equally anomalous that he should seek recommendations from<\/em> them ( ). He has testimonies to his character and office far superior to any that could be written on papyrus. These can be pointed to if any object that his Apostolic office was self-assumed, and that he delivers the Gospel message in his own way and on his own authority (Gal 1:12<\/span> ).<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2 Corinthians Chapter 3<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

From this the apostle turns in a peculiarly touching way to the saints at Corinth. His spirit felt that his last allusions to a triumph, in contrast with those who trafficked in truth (never then given out with genuine purity), might expose to unkind personality. He therefore, in disclaiming the need of human commendation in any form, lets out what grace forms in the heart before contrasting the law with the gospel.<\/p>\n

11 Begin we again to commend ourselves? or* need we, as some, recommendatory epistles unto you or from you? Ye are our epistle inscribed in our hearts, known and read by all men, being manifested that ye are Christ’s epistle ministered by us, having been inscribed, not with ink, but [the] Spirit of [the] living God, not on tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of [the] heart (or, hearts) . And such confidence have we through the Christ toward God; not that we are competent from ourselves to reckon anything as of ourselves, but our competency [is] of God, who also made us competent [as] servants of [the] new covenant, not of letter but of spirit, for the letter killeth but the spirit quickeneth.” (Vers. 1-6.)<\/p>\n

* (not as A K L P, etc., which follows) B C D E F G etc. The Auth. V. here rejects Er. Compl. St. Be. for the reading of Colinaeus and the Vulg.<\/p>\n

The second added in Text. Rec. following most MSS is rejected by the best witnesses.<\/p>\n

, half a dozen cursives, and versions too, exhibit the strange blunder of for . “in your hearts.”<\/p>\n

“hearts” in apposition with pl., “tablets,” is read by high authority ( AB C D E G L P, five and twenty cursives, etc.); the common reading “of the heart,” by F K, most cursives, and almost all ancient versions; etc.<\/p>\n

It is plain that there was then, as now, the practice of giving and receiving letters in commending stranger brethren to the assemblies. And a valuable means of introduction as well as guard it is, provided we hold it in spirit, not in letter: otherwise we might fail doubly, in refusing those who ought to be received, where circumstances have hindered the requisite voucher, and in receiving those who, being deceivers, can supply themselves with any letter which may the more effectually mislead. The aim of all such provisions is to afford adequate testimony to the assembly of God, which is in no way bound to a form however excellent, if wanting, provided perchance other means of godly satisfaction leave no reasonable hesitation to those who judge fairly and in love. It is mischievous when that which God uses for our mutual comfort is perverted by legalism into an instrument of spiritual torture, as may be sometimes the lack of a commendatory note, or some kindred informality.<\/p>\n

But the apostle turns, from the supposed imputation of seeking to commend himself, to foster in the Corinthian saints somewhat of the love which burned so warmly in his own bosom. If he, if an apostle, could be supposed to need a commendatory epistle, surely not Paul to or from the assembly in Corinth! As he adds, with as much beauty as affection, “Ye are our epistle,” not in process of being “written,” but this already done and abidingly () “in our hearts,” whereas it was but becoming “known and read by all men,” as was also their manifestation that they were Christ’s epistle, “ministered” as a past fact () by us, “written” as it has been and was () “not with ink, but the living God’s Spirit,” not on tablets of stone, but on fleshy tablets – hearts, or of the heart.<\/p>\n

It was a wonderful thing to call any company of saints in this world Paul’s epistle, that which set forth his mind and heart, the fruit of his testimony in the Spirit to the world. Such he declares the Corinthian assembly to be, no mere tongue-work this, but “written in our hearts,” yet without doubt intended for men generally to learn by, as he says, “known and read by all men.” Such is the church, not a thing of creedism, or a subscription to paper-and-ink articles, however pure in their place, but an epistle to set forth livingly what the apostle taught and felt. Here he goes farther still; for even of those saints, who had caused him such shame and pain, but now consolation and joy, he does not hesitate to say that they were manifestly showing themselves to be Christ’s epistle ministered by him. Paul might be the means, but Christ was the end; and just as God wrote the law on stone for Israel, so now does the Spirit grave Christ on the fleshy tablets of the Christian’s heart, that the world may read Christ in the church. It will be noticed too, that this epistle says they are; it is no mere question of a duty, but of a positive relationship which is the ground of the duty. If we are Christ’s epistle, as the apostle declares to the Corinthians, we should assuredly convey His mind and affections truly and without blot. The truth abides for us, which wrought on them; and so does the Spirit of the living God; and thus we are inexcusable in our failure. At least may we own and feel it, that grace may work in us as in those who had fallen so short!<\/p>\n

“And such confidence have we through the Christ toward God.” Christianity not only excludes despair but gives assurance, and this on the firmest ground with God, even Christ, whose work puts the believer into the same acceptance, nearness, and favour as our Lord enjoyed through His own personal relationship and perfection as man. This is the meaning, aim, and effect of a Saviour such as He is: less than this would be to slight Him and His work, and the new creation and relationships which are the fruit of it. But here the apostle speaks of confidence as regards his ministry, which is no less true and flows from the same grace. For it is all the expression of God’s love in Christ to us and to Christ in the delight of His glorification of God; and in the power of one so able to give it effect as the Holy Spirit. Therefore the apostle could not doubt, but cherishes a confidence, measured by God’s estimate of what was due to Christ whom He had sent to testify and prove His love, and now had glorified on high in witness of the perfection of His work. But along with it goes the most earnest disclaimer of any intrinsic competency, while owning it given of God to serve in new covenant order, but even here of spirit, not of letter. For literally it remains to be applied to the houses of Israel and of Judah, though the blood is shed and accepted, on which its efficacy rests. But this only the more suits the genius of Christianity, where the principles stand out in the light, and the truth is told plainly as here: “for the letter killeth, but the spirit [that is, the mind of God couched under the forms which unbelief never seizes] quickeneth.” And this is universally true; for if the letter were more glaringly perilous of old, there is always the danger of deserting the spirit for it, even under the gospel.<\/p>\n

The apostle proceeds next, in a long parenthesis (7-16) to contrast the respective services of the law and of the gospel, the ever rising debate wherever Christ is named and known. And no wonder, for sovereign grace is not natural to the heart, though it alone reveals God fully. The believer himself never keeps grace fresh, pure, or even true, save as consciously in God’s presence, with Christ before him. As in Christ thus, it is simple and appreciated as the one principle and power which suits either God on the one hand, or those He saves on the other. Grace alone puts each in the place which befits them. But the effect or assumption of the mind even in the believer to take up grace and reason it out, apart from present dependence, is as bad or worse than misuse of the law; for conscience answers to the law when it condemns every evil way, but faith is needed for grace. Outside God’s presence it is but allowance of sin. In His presence grace deals with sin far more overwhelmingly than law, as is evident in the cross of Christ. Only there can the believer enjoy grace safely, happily, and holily: and there is no possibility of having peace in His presence but through grace – grace reigning through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.<\/p>\n

“But if the ministry of death in letter,* graven on stones, came in with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently toward the face of Moses for the glory of his face, that was to be done away, how shall not the ministry of the Spirit more be in glory? For if the ministry of condemnation [have] glory, much more doth the ministry of righteousness abound in glory. For even that which hath been glorified, hath not been glorified in this respect on account of the surpassing glory. For if that to be done away [was] with glory, much more what abideth [is] in glory. “<\/p>\n

It is of moment to notice that the apostle reasons here on Exo 34<\/span> not on Exo 20<\/span> as in Heb 12<\/span> It is a question, not of law pure and simple, when God’s voice shook the earth, with a sight of terror which caused even Moses to be full of trembling; but of law when given the second time, accompanied by the mercy which not only forgave but accepted mediation. It was a mixture of law with grace, and precisely what people now conceive to be Christianity. But this is what is designated the ministry of death in letter, engraven on stones. For on the second time, not on the first, it was introduced with glory ( ) and then, not before, was there any difficulty for the sons of Israel steadily to gaze at his face. Only then are we told that the skin of the face of Moses shone (Exo 34<\/span> ), and that the Israelites were afraid to come nigh him. It was the glory of Jehovah which caused his face thus to shine, an effect entirely peculiar to the second occasion. Nevertheless this is styled “the ministry of death.” The mercy which had spared Israel did not alter its character, nor did the glory which shone in the Mediator’s face. How different is that which the Spirit now ministers in a dead, risen, and glorified Christ! The reflection of glory in Moses’ case was but a passing fact: it was neither intrinsic nor permanent, but to be done away. Not so Christ’s. Here all that is the fruit of His work abides. It has everlasting value. It is no question of letter, nor of graving on stones, but of a divine Saviour yet a man, who has glorified God atoningly as to sin, not in living obedience only but up to death, the death of the cross, and is thereon glorified in heaven, yea, in God Himself, and gives the believer, once a wretched, guilty, and lost sinner, now washed, sanctified and justified, a righteous title to stand in perfect grace, to be with Him in glory, one with Him even now by the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. This is the gospel, this the ministry of the Spirit which abides and is assuredly abundant “in glory.”<\/p>\n

* (sing.) B D F G, Pesch., Arm.; (plur.) in much the more numerous copies, and versions, and all the fathers.<\/p>\n

. A C Dp.m. F G, Syrr., etc.; but . most MSS., versions, etc.<\/p>\n

the best MSS. and versions and Fathers; Text. Rec. following many cursives. etc.<\/p>\n

But the law requires righteousness, and man being a sinner cannot yield it. The law is necessarily, therefore, a ministry of death (ver. 7), and the more brightly God’s goodness shines, the worse it is for the sinner, for he is only the more proved worthless and guilty. In the gospel righteousness is revealed to faith, not required: for Christ Himself is the righteousness of the believer, and the work was done and accepted before God sent out the gospel of His grace to man. The Spirit, therefore, testifies to a man at God’s right hand, who suffered once for sins on the cross, and declared that by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which they could not be justified by the law of Moses. Hence the Holy Spirit, as He sealed Christ the righteous One without blood when on earth, now seals us when washed from our sins in His blood, and rests on us as the Spirit of glory and of God. (Ver. 8.) We are put, therefore, in association with Christ on high and await His coming to bring us there. The law, on the contrary, not only hills but condemns; it brings sense of guilt on the conscience, and God as a judge of the evil actually done. Hence it can only be a ministry of condemnation (ver. 9), as well as of death, whatever the glory that marked its enactment; whereas the gospel is the ministry of righteousness already accomplished in Christ and the portion of the believer; and that righteousness abides unchanged and glorious in Christ above. Hence the ministry of the Spirit is also that of righteousness.<\/p>\n

As the righteousness is a fact of free grace in One who loves no perfectly, so has the glory the same attraction, unlike the glory which alarmed Israel, even in the face of Moses. The light which shines from Christ glorified speaks of the efficacy of His sacrifice; the brighter the light, the clearer the proof that our every sin is cleansed away by His blood. It is the light of divine glory, doubtless, but flowing from redemption. His title to be in heaven is not His person only, but the work which God His Father gave Him to do, that as surely as we know Him in the Father, we should also know that we are in Him and He in us. Most wondrous! yet the simple truth of Christ and the Christian. But what is so wonderful as the truth? Yet Christ accounts for it all, and His work brings us who believe into it all. Such is grace in the ministry of the Spirit by righteousness.<\/p>\n

And as the glory of God’s grace in Christ completely dims by excess of brightness His glory in the law (ver. 10), so also does the transitory or temporary character of the latter proclaim its incomparable inferiority to the former which abides (ver. 15), as indeed it ought; inasmuch as it flows from and expresses the will of God, while the other only condemns and executes sentence on the evil of man already fallen and disobedient.<\/p>\n

A few details may be useful in helping the reader to appreciate the remarkably compressed phraseology of these verses. means that the law was introduced in or with glory, rather than that it existed in glory. The verb is changed when we come to the Spirit and His ministry, subsisting in glory. It is an error, however, to suppose that the future is one of time; it is rather of inference. There is no allusion here to the coming glory. The apostle points emphatically to what the Spirit is ministering now. It is hard to express, but important to bear in mind, the abstract nature of the contrast, and , the present participle of character, apart from time, not of actual fact.<\/p>\n

Lastly, it is at best oversight to affirm that and present a mere variation of expressions without a difference of meaning. Never does scripture thus change words without a fresh thought and a distinct purpose. . is admirably adapted when connected (not with , but) with , to set forth permanence of glory; . a mere accompanying condition of what was to pass away. Rom 3:30<\/span> ; Rom 5:10<\/span> , prove difference, not sameness, of force, whatever Winer may say (Moulton’s edition, pp. 453, 512), or the commentators misled by such laxity, as Alford, Hodge, etc.<\/p>\n

This leads the apostle in the Spirit to apply the incident of Moses with and without a veil, as before of the glory of his face. He glories that in the gospel all is open. It is no longer the unhappy though wholesome detection of sin in man, but the plain revelation of good from God in Christ, and this righteously through His cross, yea, gloriously in His place at God’s right hand in heaven: the ground of our association with heaven now, and of glory there not in spirit only but in body at His coming. In Judaism man could not bear to hear the truth, which was the sentence of death to flesh; in Gentilism all was doubt or deception. In the gospel we can speak plainly: it is God’s good news of His Son. There is no reason or motive for reserve, but just the contrary. We cannot be too open. So the love of God who gave such a treasure would have it. Leave darkness to Rabbis and philosophers, who love it rather than light.<\/p>\n

“Having then such hope we use much openness of speech: and not as Moses used to put a veil on his own face, that the sons of Israel should not look stedfastly unto the end of that to be done away, But their thoughts were darkened [lit. hardened]; for until this very day the same veil at the reading of the old covenant abideth unremoved [lit. unveiled], which in Christ is done away.* But unto this day when Moses is read, a veil lieth upon their heart. But whenever it shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken off.” (Ver. 12-16.)<\/p>\n

* Or, It not being unveiled (that is, revealed) that (or, because) in Christ it is done away.<\/p>\n

Christianity is no system of restraint on evil in the first man, with ordinances suited to the flesh in the world, and God afar off in the dark, but founded on the grace of Christ, who, after establishing righteousness by the cross, is gone up into heavenly glory, and is ministered by the Holy Ghost in power. Hence the unseen, the future, and the everlasting converge on the believer now; and having such a hope one can be thoroughly outspoken: there are the strongest motives for openness in every way, in contrast with the dimness, distance, and reserve of the law. Not only did God in Christ come down to man, but, now that his evil has been judicially and conclusively dealt with in the cross, man can go up – nay, has already sat down at His right hand – in the person of our Saviour and Head. The accomplishment of redemption, as it closed the ministry of death, opened the way and became the basis of the ministry of the Spirit, to abide in glory. The previous state of concealment, where man had such reason to dread the sight of glory according to the law, is set forth in Moses putting a veil on his face when he spoke with the children of Israel outside. whereas he in variably put it off whenever he went in before Jehovah.<\/p>\n

I am aware that the late Dean Alford affirms in his Greek Testament (ii. 645, 5th ed., 1865) that “a mistake has been made with regard to the history in Exo 34:33-35<\/span> which has considerably obscured the understanding of the verse [13]. It is commonly assumed that Moses spoke to the Israelites, having the veil on his face; and this is implied in our version -‘Till Moses had done speaking with them, he put a veil on his face.’ But the LXX (and Heb.) gave a different account: , . He spoke to them without the veil, with his face shining and glorified; – when he had done speaking, he placed the veil on his face: and that not because they were afraid to look on him, but as here, that they might not look on the end, or the fading of that transitory glory,” etc. But the mistake is in Dean A. following the Septuagint and at most the letter of the Heb. in verse 33, so as to contradict or neutralise the plain force of the context, and especially verse 35. The meaning ought never to have been questioned, that, while Moses talked to the people without, he covered This face, but removed the veil when he went in to speak with Jehovah. Verse 30 is clear that, because his face shone, the people were afraid to come nigh, and he therefore put on the veil which he took off when he went in before Jehovah till he came out. The Vulgate, like the Sept., sacrifices the sense to the letter; and the two have misled many.<\/p>\n

The christian position is in the fullest contrast with that of Israel, to which tradition and human thoughts of unbelief would ever in principle reduce us. It suits reason and conscience guided by it, and our estimate of self as well as of God, where Christ and His work have no distinctive and commanding place. Hence not only do the utmost extremes meet here, popish and puritanical, but also that via media, which pleases the moderate men of all parties, rationalist or nonconformist, who on the one hand rightly venerate the law as clothed with God’s authority, but on the other see not the wholly new position grace has placed us in by redemption, answering to Christ glorified on high, who has sent down the Spirit that we might enjoy it to the full, and walk accordingly. For we find our privilege Godward typified in Moses unveiled, not with the veil on. We behold Christ and His work in the ritualistic system, which conveyed to the Israelite only precepts to kill a lamb, a goat, or a bullock, with the blood brought in before God, and to sprinkle themselves with the water of separation, or the like. The law made nothing perfect. It (and not the speculative thought of the Greek, nor the political wisdom of Rome) was the true nursery of man in his nonage, the divine pro-paedeutic, shutting up to the faith about to be revealed.<\/p>\n

Israel through unbelief slighted grace when shown to them abundantly, and forgot the promises which God had made to the fathers, which faith would have remembered and felt the need of. They therefore doubted not for a moment their ability to keep His law, and so maintain their place with Him. Granted that this was their deepest ignorance, both of God as a judge according to law, and of themselves as guilty and powerless sinners; and that scripture reveals their ruin under law, that the Gentile should avoid the snare and find their resource, strength, and blessing, all and only in Christ by God’s sovereign grace. How awful then the darkness which has deliberately put Christendom back into the self-same position of law, as the rule of people to live by, after the proclamation of God’s mercy! This is what not only the multitude believe but the doctors have taught, Protestant no less than popish; this is the prevalent doctrine, alike Presbyterian and Prelatical, Methodist or Congregational. It is the mind active and exercised on what God used as a probationary system, but as unable to look to the end of it as the Jew of old, rebellious against its transitory character, and blind to the surpassing glory of what is now revealed in Christ.<\/p>\n

It is solemn to reflect on those once the people of God, now Lo-Ammi, in zeal for their forms rejecting Christ who gives them their real meaning and chief, if not only, value. But so it is and must be. How could the infinite gift of the Son of God, and then the witness of the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven, in virtue of redemption, have, if refused, any other consequence than utter ruin for those who have despised God? It is the rejection of God’s fullest grace and heavenly glory, not merely of the law which demanded and defined a man’s duty. God would be a partner to His own utter dishonour if He passed by the refusal of His Son dying in love for man’s sin, or despite to the Spirit of grace who testifies of it and Him. This the Jews did formally, before God swept them from their land by the Romans, not because the scriptures are not express as to Christ and His work, but because of their own unbelief. “But unto this day, when Moses is being read, a veil lieth upon their heart.” (Ver. 15.)<\/p>\n

It is humbling however to know that their hardening is but the shadow of a guiltier and incomparably wider unbelief which is settling down on Christendom, not profane only but even religious after the flesh, into more and more dense delusion and self-complacency in resistance of the Holy Spirit and an ignorant contempt of Christ’s glory as of our own portion in and with Him. So proceeded the Jew with his darkened thoughts till divine judgment fell on their temple and capital. Their (it was no longer God’s) house was left to them desolate; yet do they persist in their most ruinous infatuation, to be punished with a yet more awful tribulation, not (thank God) for ever but till they say, as they will ere long, Blessed He that cometh in the name of Jehovah, and own in their rejected Messiah their Lord and their God. “Whenever it shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken off.”* (Ver. 16.) Alas! it is not so with Babylon as with Jerusalem. For the Gentile city of confusion there will be exterminating judgment without Lope of recovery. It behoves then all the faithful to beware of the evils which end in such strokes from God; it becomes them to inquire whether they may not have fellowship with her sins, which dishonour the excellent name which He called upon them. To the law and to the testimony: if men speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in (or morning for) them.<\/p>\n

* Calvin in his comment on this verse indulges in a whimsical conceit, which is the more singular as it is meant for correcting other Greek and Latin writers who were in this nearer the truth than himself. “Locus hic male hactenus versus fuit: putarunt enim tam Graeci quam Romani subaudiendum nomen Israelis, quum de Mose loquatur Paulus. Dixerat velamen esse impositum Iudaeorum cordibus, dum legitur Moses. Continuo addit, Simulatque conversus fuerit ad Dominum, velamen ablatum iri. Quis non videt de Mose hoc dici, hoc est, de Lege?” (I. Calv. Nov. Opera Omnia, vii. 233, Amst. 1667.) It is quite true that the Jews in shutting out Christ lost the truth of scripture, its aim and scope; but the heart of Israel is the true subject, and not Moses as representing the law.<\/p>\n

“Until this very day,” says the apostle, “the same veil at the reading of the old covenant abideth unremoved, which in Christ is done away.” (Ver. 14.) So it was and so it is, but it is graver still and no less sure, that the same veil rests on the hearts of the baptised at the reading of the latest revelation of God, when they refuse to submit to the righteousness of God, and their eyes and hearts are turned away to self, or to the church so called, from the only true Light. They do not truly acknowledge the Son, nor own the present efficacy of His work. The veil will envelop the heart for them (perhaps we may say) no less than for Israel; and what greater danger can there be than that such darkness should prevail where Paul is read no less, yea, far more, than Moses? Is it not that, though it be for the Gentile the day of grace, their thoughts are increasingly darkened? Those born of God will no doubt come out of Babylon; for His grace will work, and it may be in ways we little anticipate, to extricate souls that they may await His Son from heaven. But there is no revival, no restoration, for corrupted Christendom. It is salt that has lost its savour, fit neither for land nor for dunghill, only to be cast out, or burnt with fire, recompensed at last as the great city recompensed during her unrighteous career. For strong is the Lord God that judges her.<\/p>\n

The central portion of the chapter, from verse 7, contains not only the remarkable allusion to Moses veiled and unveiled, but the contrast between the ministry of letter in the law with that of the Spirit. The parenthesis being closed, he forthwith recurs to that contrast of letter and spirit which preceded it. “Now the Lord is the spirit, but where the Spirit of the Lord [is, there is] liberty.” (Ver. 17) Scarce any scripture shows more instructively than this the necessity of understanding the mind of God, in order even to present it correctly in form. For it is an utter mistake to give “the spirit” in the first clause a capital letter, which would imply the Holy Ghost to be meant; and where would be the sense, where so much as the orthodoxy, of identifying the Lord with the Holy Ghost?* To me the meaning, without doubt, is that the Lord Jesus constitutes the spirit of the forms and figures and other communications of the old covenant. These, if taken in the letter, killed; if in the spirit, quickened. “The Lord” was their real scope; and now this comes out into the fullest evidence. Faith sees in Him contrast with Adam, analogy with Abel; the light of which shines even on Cain and Lamech. Yet more manifestly do we see types of Him in Joseph and Moses, and in that vast system of sacrifice and priesthood which, coming in by Moses, furnished those shadows so abundantly. Unbelief never laid hold of the coming One, faith always did; though it might not apprehend the bearing of all, nor perhaps fully of anything, till He actually died and rose. But “the Lord is the spirit,” and the new testimony is so precise, that there is no excuse for misapprehending the old longer. “The true Light now shineth,” and “we who were once darkness are now light in the Lord.” In the light we walk, and we ought to walk as children of it; and an immense help it is to our souls intelligently to apprehend the Lord in every part of the word. It is this which gives the deepest interest, and truest solemnity, and living power, to every part of the Old Testament. Thus only have we communion with the mind of God with positive and growing blessing to our own souls. Now that He is revealed, all is plain.<\/p>\n

* It is not denied that the Spirit is Lord, which seems to me conveyed in verse 18. Still this, if put in the form of a proposition. would be expressed by , and not in the reciprocal form which would exclude the Father and the Son from the same title. The fathers, therefore, who regarded this clause as an assertion of the Holy Ghost’s divinity, were as wrong grammatically as exegetically. Neither words nor context can admit of this interpretation. The late Dr. Hodge amazes one, on the other hand by saying that Christ is the Holy Spirit, in the same sense as the Lord says, “I and the Father are one.” There is not the least reason that the Spirit should mean the same thing in both clauses, especially as the phrase differs (“Spirit of the Lord”), which we have already traced in the burning, yet weighty, words of the apostle.<\/p>\n

But there is more than this, for “where the Spirit of the Lord [is, there is] liberty.” Here the truth requires that there should be a capital, for the apostle means not merely the true inner bearing of what was communicated of old, but the presence and power of the Holy Ghost now; and He is not a spirit of bondage unto fear, but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind; not a spirit of bondage, but the Spirit of the Son, whom God had sent into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Hence the effect is liberty, not alone because it is the Son that makes us free, but the Spirit of life in Him risen from the dead, after the mighty work in which God, sending Jesus in the likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh. Thus all was condemned that could be condemned, and we by grace are delivered – free indeed. “Where the Spirit of the Lord [is, there is] liberty,” as opposed to Gentile license as to Jewish bondage.<\/p>\n

It is liberty to do the will of God, “for sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under law, but under grace.” Yet do we yield ourselves slaves for obedience; and having got our freedom from sin, and become slaves to God, we have our fruit unto holiness, and the end eternal life. We are no longer in the flesh, and are clear from the law, so that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in oldness of letter. “Where the Spirit of the Lord [is, there* is] liberty.” It is not yet the liberty of the glory of the children of God; it is the liberty of grace before glory dawns at Christ’s coming.<\/p>\n

* in Text. Rec. is supported by many MSS., but not A B C D, etc.<\/p>\n

But we are creatures, though a new creation in Christ, and we need an object that we maybe kept and grow, and be formed and fashioned spiritually according to God, while here below. Without the cross of Christ all this were vain; yet are we not called simply to be at the foot of the cross, or to behold no object but Jesus Christ crucified, as men misuse the passage. Not so; “but we all beholding the glory of the Lord with unveiled face, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from [the] Lord [the] Spirit.” Such is the present business, we may say, of the Christian. It is alike the duty and the privilege of all Christians, not the perquisite of a favoured few who attain to it. It is not a state reached in a moment by an act of faith, but a gradual process, which ought to characterise every Christian all the way through. At the coming of Christ we shall be conformed to His image – that of the Son, the First-born among many brethren. Meanwhile thus does “the Lord the Spirit” (for such, I suppose, is the meaning in the last clause) work in us from glory to glory, as all that Christ is glorified on high becomes more familiar and real to our souls by faith. We need, most assuredly, the lowly grace which came down as a servant, obeying to the uttermost, even to the death of the cross, if we would have the mind in us which was also in Christ Jesus. But, blessed and indispensable as it is thus to know His love, faith in the Christian does not rest there, nor ought it, but, holding all this fast, to look on the glory of the Lord with unveiled face, and thus be changed, according to the Same image, from glory to glory. For the Spirit, though Lord equally with the Father and the Son, does not work independently of Christ, but by presenting Him to us, from first to last.<\/p>\n

means neither “reflecting,” nor “seeing in a mirror.” though this last be etymologically the source, but “beholding,” without reference to the mirror, as in so many words which thus cast their primitive shell.<\/p>\n

It is scarcely needful to add, that one rejects the translation of the closing phrase, which pleases Olshausen, De Wette, Meyer, etc., “Lord of the Spirit,” as being clearly against the truth of scripture – a serious fault in a Subject of this kind. So Macknight, who paraphrases it, “the Lord of the covenant of the Spirit,” but those who expect either spiritual intelligence or sound scholarship from that divine, must be bitterly and uniformly disappointed. Dr. Thomas F. Middleton, in his able “Doctrine of the Greek Article,” mistakes the margin of the Authorised Version, which agrees with my view against its own text. So Luther, Beza, etc., had rendered it. The reader may compare (Gal 1:2<\/span> ; Eph 6:23<\/span> ), and analogous phrases in many other passages.<\/p>\n

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: 2Co 3:1-3<\/p>\n

1Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some, letters of commendation to you or from you? 2You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; 3being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1 The grammatical form of both questions in 2Co 3:1 expects a “no” answer. It is hard to know if Paul is being sarcastic or heart broken.<\/p>\n

“to commend” This word is a compound of “to place” and “together,” which is used metaphorically to demonstrate, to frame together, or to recommend.<\/p>\n

1. to demonstrate (cf. Rom 3:5; Rom 5:8; 2Co 7:11; Gal 2:18)<\/p>\n

2. to endure (cf. Col 1:17)<\/p>\n

3. to commend (cf. Rom 16:1; 2Co 3:1; 2Co 4:2; 2Co 5:12; 2Co 6:4; 2Co 10:12; 2Co 10:18; 2Co 12:11)<\/p>\n

“as some” Paul uses this term often in 2 Corinthians because of the conflict with the aggressive false teachers from Palestine who tried to elevate themselves by contrasting themselves to Paul and his background and his gospel (cf. 2Co 3:2; 2Co 2:17; 2Co 10:2). He also used the same expression in a negative sense in 1 Corinthians to relate to the actions and beliefs of some church members (cf.1 Cor. 4:18; 1Co 15:12).<\/p>\n

“letters of commendation” The early church adopted the procedure of letters of recommendation to assure the orthodoxy and trustworthiness of itinerant ministers (cf. Act 18:27; Rom 16:1; 1Co 16:3; 1Co 16:15-18; Php 2:29-30; 3Jn 1:12).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:2 “You are our letter, written in our hearts,” Paul is asserting that he does not need a letter to recommend himself to this church (or from this church), because he is its spiritual founder as Christ is its savior and Lord. They were his flesh-and-blood letter (cf. 2Co 3:3).<\/p>\n

The phrase “written in our hearts” is a perfect passive participle. Paul loved this church. They were permanently in his heart and mind. The passive voice implies that God\/Christ\/Spirit is the agent (cf. 2Co 3:3), which produces Paul’s love.<\/p>\n

See SPECIAL TOPIC: THE HEART at 1Co 14:25.<\/p>\n

“known and read” There is a sound play between these two Greek words (i.e., ginskomen and anaginskomen, cf. 2Co 1:13). Both are present passive participles.<\/p>\n

“by all men” This is the use of the term “all” where it is not inclusive (cf. Rom 11:26). This is obviously a hyperbole, so common in Jewish literature (cf. Mat 5:29-30; Mat 5:38-42; Mat 6:24; Mat 7:3-5; Mat 23:23-24).<\/p>\n

2Co 3:3 “being manifested” See note at 2Co 2:14.<\/p>\n

“you are a letter of Christ” Believers are meant to clearly reveal Christ by their motives, words, and actions. How we live reflects on His reputation!<\/p>\n

“cared for by us” See SPECIAL TOPIC: SERVANT LEADERSHIP at 1Co 4:1.<\/p>\n

“the Spirit of the living God” The terminology referring to the Triune God is very fluid. The Spirit is often referred to as the Spirit of Jesus (cf. Rom 8:9; 2Co 3:17; Gal 4:6; 1Pe 1:11). Here the same type of fluidity is directed toward the Father. The title “living God” is a play on YHWH, which is from the Hebrew verb “to be” (cf. Exo 3:14). The descriptive title is common for the Father in the NT (cf. Mat 16:16; Mat 26:63; Act 14:15; Rom 9:26; 2Co 6:16; 1Th 1:9; 1Ti 3:15; 1Ti 4:10; Heb 3:12; Heb 9:14; Heb 10:31; Heb 12:22; Rev 7:2). In the OT the pagan idols were lifeless. They could not respond or they were dead part of the year (i.e., the winter) following the fertility cycles of nature. YHWH was the only truly alive, always-alive God!<\/p>\n

“not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts” This seems to relate to the giving of the law in Exo 31:18 and to the promise of a New Covenant (cf. Jer 31:31-34 and Eze 36:22-38). This is an obvious contrast between the Old Covenant as external law versus the New Covenant as internal (i.e., new heart, new mind, and new spirit, cf. Eze 11:19; Eze 36:26).<\/p>\n

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Do we, &c. = Are we to begin. <\/p>\n

again. He had done so in 1Co 9. <\/p>\n

commend. Greek. sunistano. See on Rom 3:5. <\/p>\n

some. Greek tines. App-124. <\/p>\n

epistles, &c. = commendatory (Greek. sustatikos. Only here) letters. Compare Act 18:27. <\/p>\n

to. Ge. pros. App-104, <\/p>\n

from. Greek. ek. App-104. Question preceded by me. <\/p>\n

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

CH. 2Co 3:1 to 2Co 6:10.] BEGINNING WITH A DISOWNING OF SELF-RECOMMENDATION, THE APOSTLE PROCEEDS TO SPEAK CONCERNING HIS APOSTOLIC OFFICE AND HIMSELF AS THE HOLDER OF IT, HIS FEELINGS, SUFFERINGS, AND HOPES, PARTLY WITH REGARD TO HIS CONNEXION WITH THE CORINTHIANS, BUT FOR THE MOST PART IN GENERAL TERMS.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Shall we turn tonight to the third chapter of II Corinthians.<\/p>\n

Paul the apostle, it seemed, had the detractors to his ministry, men that followed him around seeking to discredit him. There are always those, it seems, who are ready to come in upon another man’s work, and to reap the benefits of another man’s labor, but aren’t really willing to go out and to break fresh ground themselves. Those that endeavor to live off the body of Christ, rather than really developing the body of Christ.<\/p>\n

The body of Christ is not expanded by transferring people from one fellowship to another. The body of Christ is expanded when we become a witness to the world and we bring others to Jesus Christ who do not know Him.<\/p>\n

There were those who were willing to go around and follow Paul. To come into the areas that Paul had plowed, where Paul had planted, and seek to uproot Paul’s ministry, drawing people to themselves. Seeking to discredit Paul in the eyes of the people. Such was the case in Corinth. Those who followed Paul, putting down Paul and his message of the gospel of grace, seeking to bring the people under the law. Challenging Paul’s authority as an apostle. Lifting up themselves as the authorities and the authorized ones.<\/p>\n

And so it seems rather tragic that oh, blessed brother Paul was always, it seems, defending himself against those detractors, as though he needed to. And so, in chapter three we find this again the case.<\/p>\n

Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles [letters] of commendation from you? ( 2Co 3:1 )<\/p>\n

These people coming in and presenting their letters of authority, which were many times falsified. Spurious. Paul said, “Look, do I need to have letters of commendation when I come to you, or do I need to seek letters of commendation from you when I go elsewhere?”<\/p>\n

Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men ( 2Co 3:2 ):<\/p>\n

“Your faith in Jesus Christ, your existence as a church is all of the recommendation that I need. You are proof of my apostleship. You are proof of the validity of my ministry. The very fact of your existence is all that is necessary to prove the authenticity of my calling.”<\/p>\n

Now, the person who doesn’t have that kind of proof needs all kinds of phonied up documents to tell how great they are. I get a kick out of some of the letters that I receive. Enclosed with them, all of these letters of commendation. Your ministry itself bears witness to your calling.<\/p>\n

And so Paul said, “You are my letters of commendation. The fact that you exist, that’s all that’s necessary. That’s all the proof I need of my calling of God.” <\/p>\n

Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart. And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward ( 2Co 3:3-4 ):<\/p>\n

So, Paul just sort of lets it rest there. <\/p>\n

Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God ( 2Co 3:5 );<\/p>\n

Now, Paul in the last of the last chapter, you remember, cried out, “And who is sufficient for these things?” ( 2Co 2:16 ) There have been so many times when I have faced the issues of the ministry and I said, “Oh, Lord, who is sufficient for these things? Who’s able to do this?” And Paul asked the question, “Who is sufficient for these things?” And now he answers his own question: “Not that we think that we have any sufficiency within ourselves, or not that we are sufficient within ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God.”<\/p>\n

I believe that God deliberately allows us to come to the end of our own capacities and abilities in order that we might learn to trust in Him. In order that we might draw from that all-sufficiency from Him.<\/p>\n

God revealed Himself to Abraham as El Shaddai, which means the all-sufficient One. And it’s always good to know the all-sufficient One and to be able to rely upon the all-sufficient One to fill up that which I am lacking when I come to the end of my own resources. How many times we are driven to draw from that sufficiency that God has provided for us through Jesus Christ. And Paul said He is the One,<\/p>\n

Who also hath made us able ministers of the [new covenant or] new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life ( 2Co 3:6 ).<\/p>\n

Now, this is one passage of scripture that, unfortunately, is often quoted out of context, especially by those who are looking for a more experiential relationship with God. Who are looking for more exciting experiences in the things of God. So often you’ll hear them say, “Oh, but the scripture says, ‘The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.'” As though the word of God or the teaching of the word of God will kill you, but the Spirit or the moving of the Spirit and the experiences of the Spirit brings life. That is a gross misquotation, because it is taking the scripture totally out of its context.<\/p>\n

The Bible tells us concerning the word of God that it is alive and powerful, and it is sharper than a two-edged sword, and it’s able to divide between the soul and the spirit, the bone and the marrow ( Heb 4:12 ). The word of God, the letter does not kill. It’s alive. It’s powerful, and it brings life.<\/p>\n

The letter that kills is the letter of the law. And Paul here declares, “I am the able minister of the New Testament, the new covenant.” The old covenant was by the law, and the old covenant in the letter of the law does condemn us to death. If you want to be righteous before God by the keeping of the law, then it’s too late. It’s already condemned you to death. You’ve been destroyed. The letter of the law kills. For the law said, “He that does these things shall live by them” ( Rom 10:5 ). But also it says, “If you keep the whole law, and yet you violate in one point, you’re guilty of all” ( Jas 2:10 ). And thus, the law condemns every one of us to death. And it is the letter of the old covenant of the law that condemns us to death. But it is the Spirit in the new covenant that brings us life, spiritual life.<\/p>\n

And now he goes on to talk about,<\/p>\n

But if the ministration of death [under the law], [which was] written and engraven in stones, [it] was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away [passing away] ( 2Co 3:7 ):<\/p>\n

Now, there is a misunderstanding, many times, as the purpose of the veil. When Moses came down with the tables of stone, having met with God there on the mount, having been privileged to see the afterglow of God, God said to Moses, “What do you desire?” And he said, “Lord, show me Thyself.” And God said, “You can’t look at Me and live, but you stay there in the rock, I’ll pass by, and then you can see the afterglow.” And it was so glorious that Moses’ face shone for days after he came down from the mount with the tables of law for the people.<\/p>\n

But he put a veil over his face, not because they couldn’t look at the glory on the face, but because the glow was beginning to fade, and they didn’t want them to see the fading glow. But that was only a witness of the law that had been given, that it was going to be phased out that God might establish the new covenant through Jesus Christ. And so, the purpose of the veil was that they would not see the receding glory that was upon his face. We’ll get that when we get a few verses down.<\/p>\n

But this ministration of the law was glorious so that they could not steadfastly look at the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance which was fading away.<\/p>\n

How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? ( 2Co 3:8 )<\/p>\n

Or even more glorious. If the old covenant which condemn man to death was so glorious and given in such a glorious way, how much more this new covenant of life through Jesus Christ is glorious to those who have received it?<\/p>\n

For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth ( 2Co 3:9-10 ).<\/p>\n

In other words, there is really no way to compare the glory of the old covenant with the exceeding glory of the new covenant. That new relationship that we have to God through Jesus Christ excels in glory. Brings us into such glory.<\/p>\n

You see, the old covenant was predicated upon man’s faithfulness and man’s obedience. The purpose of the covenant is always to bring man into a relationship with God. That’s the primary purpose. The old covenant failed. Not because it wasn’t good, but because man was weak and man failed. It was predicated upon man’s obedience, man’s faithfulness.<\/p>\n

Now, this new covenant cannot fail, because it’s predicated upon God’s faithfulness to His word. A covenant predicated upon my faithfulness to the word of God failed; I couldn’t be faithful. But we know that God is faithful to His word, and thus, this new covenant whereby we stand tonight is certain, is sure. That’s why we can say with such assurance, “I know in Whom I have believed, and I’m persuaded that He is able to keep that which I committed” ( 2Ti 1:12 ). And I’ve committed my life and my future to Him, and I’m confident that He shall bring me into the fullness of His glory, because He is faithful to His word. His word cannot fail. He will not fail.<\/p>\n

So, the new covenant excels in glory, because it’s based upon God and His faithfulness. <\/p>\n

For if that which is done away [that is, the old covenant under the law] was glorious [was made glorious] ( 2Co 3:11 ),<\/p>\n

For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excels. Nothing to compare with. <\/p>\n

For if that which was done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great [boldness or] plainness of speech: And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end [or to the phasing out or the fading] of that which is abolished ( 2Co 3:11-13 ):<\/p>\n

You see, here it declares that it was because it beginning to fade away and they didn’t want them to see this thing fading out.<\/p>\n

But their minds were blinded: for until this day [there] remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ ( 2Co 3:14 ).<\/p>\n

So “blindness has happened to Israel in part, until the fullness of the Gentiles is come in” ( Rom 11:25 ). Even when they read the law, there is a veil over their faces, that they don’t really understand the law. A very sad thing has taken place among the Jewish people. For though they still verbally hold to the law, they do not practice or follow the law in establishing a righteous standing before God.<\/p>\n

Under the law, under the old covenant, it was necessary that there be a death of a substitutionary animal to atone for their sins. You would bring the animal to the priest. You would lay your hands upon its head. You would confess your sins over the animal, and then the priest would slay the animal and offer it as a sacrifice, a sin offering for you. And thus, your sins would be covered, and you would then be able to approach the holy God.<\/p>\n

Now today, the veil is over their faces, for they are endeavoring to approach God through their own good works, ignoring the fact that God required the sacrifice of an animal. “For the wages of sin is death” ( Rom 6:23 ). “And without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins” ( Heb 9:22 ). They have substituted, now, the sacrifice of the animal, and are trying to instead place their good efforts and their good works as the basis for their coming to God and their righteous standing before God. Nowhere in the law are substitutes ever suggested for the sacrifices. And thus, a veil is over their face even when they read the law today, as they think that by their good efforts and good works they can atone for their sin. But their minds were blinded. For until this day, there remains the same veil that’s not taken away. Their minds blinded to the truth. Israel is blind in part.<\/p>\n

Now, this veil is really done away in Christ. When you see Jesus Christ as our perfect substitute for our sins, our sacrifice, we come to an understanding of the righteousness of God being satisfied through the death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n

But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart ( 2Co 3:15 ).<\/p>\n

They are just blinded to the truth. <\/p>\n

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty ( 2Co 3:17 ).<\/p>\n

Though there are couple of passages here that the Pentecostal people really grab onto, this is the second one. The first one is, “The letter killeth, the spirit gives life” ( 2Co 3:6 ). This is another one that they latch on to, “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” And they interpret that in a very broad way. There is liberty to do all kinds of things. Liberty to scream out and to shout out and to run up and down the aisles, and you know, whatever happens to suit their fancy. Again, it is taking it out of context. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty from the law and from the bondage of the law. Free from the law, there is no condemnation, for Jesus provides a perfect salvation. And so, this is freedom from the requirements of the law. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”<\/p>\n

But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass [or as in a mirror] the glory of the Lord, are changing into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord ( 2Co 3:18 ).<\/p>\n

The work of God’s Spirit within our heart is to conform us into the image of Jesus Christ. When God first made man, He made man in His image. God said, “Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness” ( Gen 1:26 ). And so was man created in the image of God.<\/p>\n

But through sin, man fell and no longer was in the image of God. The image of God being a spiritual image. God is a spirit. Man was created a spirit being, dwelling in the body, possessing a consciousness. But God said, “In the day that you eat, you will surely die” ( Gen 2:17 ). When man sinned, his spirit died.<\/p>\n

And so, Paul writing to the Ephesians said, “And you hath He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins” ( Eph 2:1 ). God’s chief emotional attribute is love. God made man with a capacity to love, a need for love. God is light, and so God created man with a light and mind and a consciousness of God. But through sin, man came into darkness. His foolish heart was darkened. And so man made in the image of God, fallen from that image. But now, the purpose of God is to restore man into His image again. That man might receive a restoration of that which God intended him to be before he fell. And that is what the Spirit is doing in our lives tonight as we yield ourselves to the work of God’s Spirit within us. He is conforming us into the image of Christ.<\/p>\n

Now we all with open face or unveiled faces. The children of Israel have a veil. Every time they read Moses, a veil is over their heart and their eyes are blinded. “But we, with open faces as we behold as in a mirror the glory of the Lord.” As I am looking in the mirror, seeing my reflection, I can see the work of God that is taking place in my life as the Spirit of God is changing me and bringing me into the image of Jesus Christ. How beautiful it is to look at God’s work in our own life, and just to marvel at what God has done.<\/p>\n

There have been areas in my life, the old nature, that were extremely ugly. I used to have an ugly temper. Easily ignited at the slightest provocation. And it was ugly. And I didn’t like what I saw in me. I hated that nasty demonstration of that temper. And I tried to control it, but I just couldn’t. Things would happen, and before I knew it, poof, it was gone and I’d blown up. And here I was ashamed, embarrassed at the things I did and the things I said. Guilty, defeated. With all of my efforts, I couldn’t control it. And one day I said, “God, I’m sorry. I just can’t do it. I’ve tried, Lord. I just can’t do it.” And I gave up in despair ever hoping to have control over that temper.<\/p>\n

And then the Spirit took over. And He did for me what I couldn’t do for myself. And He took away the inward boiling, the inward steam. It wasn’t a thing of my keeping the cap on the pressure, seething inside, ready to just explode, but just holding tight and keeping the lid on, you know. But somehow, the Spirit from within took away the pressure, the steam. And I could look at a situation or I could experience a situation where at one time I would have exploded violently into that ugliness. And there were no more explosions. And as I look from the mirror, I saw the Spirit’s work in my life changing me into the image of Jesus.<\/p>\n

How glorious it is when God works in us by His Spirit, bringing to pass those changes, removing the ugliness of the self-life and of the old life and conforming us more and more into the image of Jesus Christ. And as David, “And I shall be satisfied, when I awake, in His likeness” ( Psa 17:15 ).<\/p>\n

Someday when I look in the mirror and I see the Lord, I’ll be in glory at that point, but what a day that’s going to be when the Spirit’s job is finished in my life and I am completely conformed into the image of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n

“Beloved, now are we the sons of God, it does not yet appear what we’re going to be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we will be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is” ( 1Jn 3:2 ). But thank God each day there are changes that are taking place, as the Spirit of God continues His work in my life, conforming me into the image of God’s dear Son.<\/p>\n

How does it happen? By just continuing to look to Jesus. When I look to myself, I can’t do it. When I look to others to aid me, they can’t do it. The only place that I can find really effective help is by looking to Jesus Christ. It seems that we want to look to man so quickly. “Oh, let’s run down and counsel with a pastor on this. Let’s see if he has some magic words that will change us.”<\/p>\n

We’re always getting calls. The story goes basically like this: “I’ve talked to seven other pastors and they haven’t been able to help me. Now I want to talk to Chuck.” Hey, I’m sorry, friend, but I don’t have any help either. I don’t have any magic formulas. I don’t have any magic words. Your changes that are so necessary are not going to come to pass through counseling sessions. Looking to man. Those changes that are necessary can only come to pass when you look to Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n

I don’t know where the church ever got messed up in these counseling programs. Getting people to depend upon the counselor to solve their problems. There is an interesting study that has just been released by, I think it’s the Sells Eisnick report. Oh, it’s really stirring things up something fierce. For they have made a pretty comprehensive study of people with mental problems who have turned to psychoanalysts to solve their problems. And they have found that when a person turns to a psychoanalyst to help them with their problem, in 45 percent of the cases, by the end of a year’s therapy with a psychoanalysis, only 43 percent could quit counseling, were helped enough that they needed no more counsel. Only 43 percent.<\/p>\n

Those who went to psychotherapists, it was a little better: 52 percent did not have to continue after a year. Those who could afford a psychiatrist came off a little better. For 61 percent who went to psychiatrists did not have to continue counseling after the year. However, those who didn’t go to anybody, 73 percent didn’t need any counseling at the end of the year.<\/p>\n

As I said, this study is turning the whole field of psychology on its ear right now. It’s really the big buzz through all the universities, the release of this report. But it’s just pointing out what I am telling you. Your help is going to come from the Lord. It’s looking unto Jesus that you’re going to find your answers. And as long as you’re looking unto man and trying to make a crutch out of some counselor, you’re not going to make it. You’ve got to turn to Jesus and find the help that He offers. So, “we with open face beholding the glory of the Lord are then changed from glory to glory into the same image,” as His Spirit is working within our hearts.<\/p>\n

The best thing any counselor can do is make you dependent upon Jesus Christ. The greatest service any counselor can do for you is to bring you to Jesus Christ and to a dependency on Him, because He’s the only One who’s going to bring you any help.<\/p>\n

Several years ago when I was counseling a psychiatrist, he made me a very lucrative offer to go into business with him. He wanted me to begin counseling in his offices. He had a clinic and he said, “I can give you the technical problem with that person. I can tell you what’s gone wrong.” But he said, “Having done that, I can’t do much more.” He said, “You have the answers. I want you to work for me.”<\/p>\n

But the answer is just pointing people to Jesus Christ. Get people to trust in Him. Get people to look to Him. “We with unveiled faces, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord are being changed from glory to glory.” The changes do take place as God’s Spirit works in my life. <\/p>\n

“<\/p>\n

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1. , do we begin?) A just reproof to some of those who had so begun.-, again) as was formerly done in the first epistle; so, again, ch. 2Co 5:12.-, to commend) after the manner of men; 2Co 12:19, by mentioning transactions that took place elsewhere.- ) unless. A particle expressive of conciliation [morata]. Is it thus and thus only that we are equal to the task of commending ourselves [i.e., by mentioning transactions that took place elsewhere], if we do not need [without needing] also letters? Some read .[15]-, some) of many, 2Co 2:17. In this respect also, he shows that he utterly differs from the false apostles. They did need letters of recommendation.- , from you) to others. This then was the practice at Corinth.<\/p>\n

[15] So CD()Gfg Vulg. (aut numquid). But AB (judging from silence acc. to Tisch: But Lachm. quotes B for ) read as Rec. Text.-ED.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1 <\/p>\n

Are we beginning again to commend ourselves?-[Paul does not mean by these words to admit that he had been commending himself; but that he had been accused of doing so, and that there were those at Corinth, who, when they hear such language as is in this epistle (2Co 2:14-17), will be ready to repeat the accusation, and obviously his enemies at Corinth had tried to turn the personal passages in the first epistle against him by saying: He is commending himself, and self-commendation discredits, instead of supporting a cause. Possibly he had heard of these malicious attacks from Titus, and in this epistle makes repeated references to them (2Co 5:12; 2Co 10:12; 2Co 10:18; 2Co 12:11; 2Co 13:6). He agreed with his opponents that self-praise was no honor-not he that commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth. (2Co 10:18). But he denied that he was commending himself. In distinguishing as he had done (2Co 2:14-17) between himself who spoke the word as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God, and the many who corrupted it, nothing was further from his mind than to plead his cause with the Corinthians as a suspected person. Only malignity could suspect any such thing.]<\/p>\n

or need we, as do some, epistles of commendation to you or from you?-He possibly refers to the Judaizing teachers (2Co 11:13) who had come to Corinth with letters of commendation from other churches; and when leaving that city obtained similar letters from the Corinthians to other churches. The letter Paul wrote commending Phoebe is a model: I commend unto you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the church that is at Cenchreae: that ye receive her in the Lord, worthily of the saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever matter she may have need of you: for she herself also hath been a helper of many and of mine own self. (Rom 16:1-2). Against the usefulness of such letters in general Paul here says nothing. Such letters of commendation deserve notice as an important element in the early church. A Christian traveling with such a letter from any church was certain to find a hearty welcome at any other. They guaranteed at once his soundness in the faith and his personal character, and served to give a reality of the brotherly love existing between those in Christ. [But false teachers sometimes used such letters to forward their unholy purposes, hence John gives the warning: If any one cometh unto you, and bringeth not this teaching, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting: for he that giveth him greeting partaketh in his evil works. (2Jn 1:10-11). It was absurd to suppose that Paul should ask for a letter of commendation to the church which he had built from its very foundation, and it was even more so to imagine that he, their father in the gospel (1Co 3:10), should need a letter from them to other churches.] <\/p>\n

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

The apostle declared that the Church is the supreme credential of the power of the ministry. The Corinthian Christians are “known and read of all men.” This, however, was not the deepest truth. They were the epistle of Christ. The author and the Writer of the living epistle is Christ; the pen or instrument is the apostle. The ink, or means of accomplishing the revelation, is the Spirit. The true credentials of Christian ministry are always such epistles.<\/p>\n

Then follows a comparison between the ministry of the old economy, which was of the letter, and that of the new, which is of the Spirit. What, then, is the difference between the letter and the Spirit? The letter reveals, the Spirit realizes. The revelation of the letter can do no other than destroy, for man, standing in its light, finds his own imperfection and becomes conscious of his own inability. The Spirit, realizing in man that which the letter presents to man, corrects his inability and imparts life.<\/p>\n

The glory of the letter flashing on the life of man could but reveal his sin and announce his death. Moses, the minister of the letter, must veil his face, because the issue of his message is death to those to whom it is delivered. “But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit.” The supreme power of the ministry, therefore, lies in the fact that it is the declaration of a message of transforming life by the Spirit, which is demonstrated by the transformation wrought in those who declare that message.<\/p>\n

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

3:1-6:10. THE GLORY OF THE APOSTOLIC OFFICE<\/p>\n

The first three verses, like 1:12-14, are transitional. They are closely connected with the preceding expression of thankfulness and confidence, for clearly looks back to . But .. equally clearly anticipates , and there is more pause between the chapters than between vv. 3 and 4. These three verses, therefore, are best regarded as introductory to the Apostles vindication, not only of himself, but of the high office which he holds, and of the message which he is commissioned to deliver.<\/p>\n

The first verse gives us further insight into the opposition which confronted St Paul at Corinth. Evidently one of the charges brought against him was that he was always asserting himself and singing his own praises,-of course because nobody else praised him. A man who has often to speak with authority is open to this kind of criticism, and there are passages in 1 Cor. which would lend themselves to such a charge; 2:6-16, 3:10, 4:3, 14-21, 9:1-6, 11:1, 14:18. But more probably it was the severe letter, of which 10-13. may be a part, which provoked this criticism. There is plenty of material for such criticism in those four chapters. Titus, no doubt, had reported the existence of these cavillings, and perhaps he knew that they had not been completely silenced. The Apostle does not assert that they still exist, but he meets the possibility of their existence with a tactful question. Then he still more tactfully asks a question which can be turned against his opponents. Finally, he makes a statement which is likely to go home to the hearts of the Corinthians and win those who are still wavering back to their devotion to him. The readiness with which the passionate outburst of 2:14-17 is turned to account for the vindication of the Apostolic office is very remarkable.<\/p>\n

3:1-3. I have no desire to commend myself. The only testimonial which I need I have in you, and all the world can read it.<\/p>\n

1 In claiming to be competent to deliver a message which involves the momentous alternative of ultimate life and death, do I seem to be commending myself once more? I was obliged to assert myself in my last letter, but I have no need to do so now. There are people who bring letters of recommendation to you, and ask you to give them such; and no doubt they require them. 2 But what need have I of such things, when you yourselves are my letter of recommendation written on my very heart, a letter which the whole world can get to know and construe, wherever I go and tell of you? 3 It is made plain to all that you are a letter composed by Christ and published by me; written not with the blackness of perishable ink, but with the illuminating Spirit of the living God ; written not, like the Law, on dead tables of stone, but on the living tables of sensitive human hearts.<\/p>\n

1. ; Are we beginning again to commend ourselves? It makes no difference whether we take with or with . The sentence is certainly a question. Taking it as a statement involves a clumsy insertion in order to get a connexion with …, such as, Or if you object to our commending ourselves, I reply with this question, Do we need, etc. is a sort of echo of the supposed criticism; He is beginning to belaud himself again. The plainly shows that St Paul is aware that this charge of self-praise had been made. He alludes to it again 4:5, 5:12, 6:4. It may have been an insult offered to him by , the great offender; but, whoever started it, it was accepted as true by some of the Corinthians. There are passages 1 Cor. which would give a handle to such a charge; 9:15, 14:18, 15:10 ; cf. 4:16, 7:40, 11:1; 2Co 1:12.<\/p>\n

The question may be a direct reference to (10:12) and to (12:11). If they are, we have further evidence that 10-13. is part of the severe letter written between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor. 1-9. These three verses are strangely out of harmony with the last four chapters, if those chapters are part of the same letter: they are natural enough, if those chapters had been previously sent to Corinth and had occasioned, or intensified, the charge that St Paul was too fond of praising himself. See Rendall, p. 65.<\/p>\n

We find or , to bring together, used in two senses in N.T. (1) To bring persons together, to introduce or commend them to one another; 4:2, 5:12, 6:4, 10:12, 18; Rom 16:1. (2) To put two and two together, to prove by argument and evidence; 7:11; Gal 2:18; Rom 5:8. This difference of meaning is not clearly marked in LXX, but in Susann. 61, Theod. has of Daniels proving that the elders have borne false witness. See on Rom 3:5. In these two senses the verb is peculiar to Paul in N.T. and is found chiefly in this Epistle. It occurs elsewhere only Luk 9:32 and 2Pe 3:5, in quite other senses. The position of the reflexive pronoun is to be noted. In this Epistle we have , in a bad sense, 3:1, 5:12, 10:12, 18 ; and . , in a good sense, 4:2, 6:4, 7:11.<\/p>\n

; Or is it the fact that we need, as some people do? This side-stroke at the false teachers is very effective ; he alludes to the of 2:17 and others like them. St Paul often speaks of his opponents as certain persons, (10:2; 1Co 4:18, 1Co 4:15:12; Gal 1:7; 1Ti 1:3, 1Ti 1:19). The , implying a negative answer, throws back its force on the previous question, and shows that the suggested criticism is unjust. Harnack thinks that the Apostles required a fresh commission for each missionary expedition. That was clearly not the case with St Paul.<\/p>\n

. These words tell us three things : that the Judaizers had brought letters of recommendation from some one; that they had already left Corinth ; and that before leaving they had obtained, or had tried to obtain, letters of recommendation from the Corinthian Church. We know nothing, however, as to who gave recommendations to the Judaizers ; perhaps leading persons in Palestine did so. It is not likely that they had obtained credentials from any of the Twelve or from the Church at Jerusalem.* Letters of this kind were commonly brought by travelling brethren as evidence that they were Christians and honest persons. The Epistle to Philemon is a for Onesimus; and , , (Col 4:10) probably refers to a previous letter of recommendation. St Paul sometimes commends individuals to the Church whom he addresses; e.g. Titus and his companion (8:22 f.), Timothy (1Co 16:10 f.), Phoebe (Rom 16:1). Cf. Act 15:25 f., Act 15:18:27; 2Jn 1:12. Papyri yield examples; Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 226) says that the letters in Episiolographi Graeci, Hercher, pp. 259, 699, begin, like Rom. 16., with . Suicer (ii. 1194) gives instances of such letters in the early Church. The Latins called them epistolae commendaticiae or literae formatae. How necessary they were is shown by Lucian, who says that an adroit unscrupulous fellow, who has seen the world, has only to get among these simplehearted Christians, and he can soon make a fortune out of them (Perigr. Prot. 13). Diogenes condemned as useless ; nothing but personal experience of men, he said, was of any real value (Arrian, Epict. 11, iii. 1). This, however, was what existed between St Paul and the Corinthians; and it was Cf. Act 28:21, and see Harnack, Mission and Expansion, i. p. 328.<\/p>\n

If we are right in inferring from this verse that the Judaizers had left Corinth, we have a strong argument for the view that 10-13. was written before 1-9, for in 10-13. the Judaizers are denounced as a present plague in Corinth.<\/p>\n

If the reading be adopted, we must translate, unless it possibly be the case that we are needing, etc.; and we must interpret this as a sarcasm ; unless it be the case that we are so unable to get recommendations that we are compelled to praise ourselves. This sarcasm shows that the charge of St Pauls praising himself is ridiculous. So clumsy an interpretation need not be accepted, for the balance of evidence is decisive against B C D E F G, Latt. and other versions have , A K L P, Arm. have B D 17 have , F G , all other witnesses A D have , other authorities D E F K L P, d e Syrr. add after , and F G add . . Omit both words with A B C 17, 67* *, Vulg. Copt. Arm. Aeth., Chrys. Ambrst.<\/p>\n

2. . The asyndeton is effective, and the two pronouns are in telling juxtaposition. The convincing statement is flashed out with emphatic suddenness and brevity; The letter of recommendation which we have to show are ye.* No other testimonial is needed, either to the Corinthians or from them. They know what Apostolic teaching has done for them ; and all the world can see this also. Their changed life is an object lesson to themselves and to all outside ; and both they and the outsiders know how this change has been produced; it is writ large in the history of the foundation of a Church in such a city as Corinth. The Apostle appeals, not to written testimony, which may be false, but to the experience of all who know the facts. There seems to be an allusion to this passage in the Ep. of Polycarp (11:3), where he says among whom the blessed Paul laboured, who were his letters in the beginning. See on 4:14 and 8:21.<\/p>\n

The details which follow are neither quite clear nor quite harmonious. St Paul dictates bold metaphors, in order to set forth the convincing character of his credentials, and he does not stop to consider whether they can all be combined in one consistent picture. Written in our hearts does not agree well with read by all men, and yet both were true. The Christian life of the Corinthians was impressed in thankful remembrance on the hearts of those who had converted them, and it was recognized by all who knew them. It was also impressed on the hearts of the Corinthians themselves. See on 1Co 9:2. Experience showed to the teachers that their ministry had been blessed by God; the existence of the Corinthian Church convinced them of this, and they could appeal to that conviction with a good conscience. Experience also taught the world at large that the men who had produced this change at Corinth were no charlatans ; and it had taught the Corinthians themselves the same truth.<\/p>\n

. There is probably no allusion to Aaron bearing the names of the children of Israel in the breastplate (pouch) of judgment upon his heart, when he goeth in unto the holy place, for a memorial before the Lord continually (Exo 28:36). The idea of intercession is foreign to this passage. Written on our hearts suggests to us the idea of deep affection, and Chrys. interprets the words of the love to the Corinthians which causes Paul to sing their praises in other Churches. But it may be doubted whether this is the exact meaning of the words. The context seems to require some such meaning as this; Our own hearts tell us that you are our recommendation, and everybody else can see this also. The compound implies that this fact cannot slip from our hearts, cannot be forgotten ; cf. (Aesch. Pr. V. 789) ; and (Pro 7:3). The plur. hearts probably implies that other teachers are included with the Apostle; contrast our heart in 6:11 The heart in Scripture is the inner man, the centre of personality, known only to God; Rom 5:5, Rom 5:8:27; Eph 1:18, Eph 1:3:17; 1Pe 3:4; Rev 2:23. See art. Heart in Hastings, DB. and DCG.; Milligan on 1Th 2:4.<\/p>\n

Lietzmann and Bousset would read for with 17 after . Confusion between the two pronouns is often found in MSS., and might easily be made at the outset in dictating, the pronunciation being similar.<\/p>\n

My testimonial is written in your hearts and can be read by all, for all can see that you are Christians. Schmiedel and J. Weiss would omit the whole clause as a gloss.<\/p>\n

. Note the change from perf. to pres. participles. It was written long ago and the writing still remains, and this is continually becoming known and being read. See on 1:13 respecting the word-play* and the meaning of . Some suggest that these participles are in the wrong order, for one reads a letter before one knows its purport. Has St Paul been careless, or has he sacrificed sense to sound? Probably neither: one recognizes the hand-writing before one reads the letter; at any rate, one perceives that it is a letter before one reads it.<\/p>\n

. Another blow, whether intended or not, to his opponents, whose testimonials were not published.<\/p>\n

3. . The construction is continued from , and the meaning is continued from . Ye are our epistle, read by all, for you are being made manifest. The idea of making manifest is freq. in this part of the letter; 4:10, 11, 5:10, 11, 7:12.<\/p>\n

. Is the genitive subjective, objective, or possessive? Probably the first, and in that case it may be another hit at the false teachers; their testimonials have little authority, but ours were written by Christ.* Or he may be merely disclaiming all credit; Christ is the agent to whom the composition of the letter is due; I am only the instrument. Chrys. takes the genitive as objective; a letter which tells of Christ. Some moderns make it possessive; ye are a letter belonging to Christ, i.e. ye are Christians.<\/p>\n

. We need not seek an exact interpretation and ask whether, if Christ is the author of the letter, . means that St Paul was His amanuensis, or that he carried the letter to its destination. The metaphor is not thought out in detail. The words mean that St Paul and his colleagues were Christs ministers in bringing the letter of recommendation into existence by converting the Corinthians. See on 1Co 3:5, 1Co 4:1. We have here, not, as in 1:19, 1:4, the more usual . Chrys. understands of St Pauls preparation of their hearts; for as Moses hewed the stones and tables, so we your souls. Per ministerium nostrum scripsit Christus in vobis fidem seem caritatem ac reliqua bona (Herveius). We have the passive , as here, in 8:19, of the service rendered; in Mar 10:45 it is used of the person who receives the service.<\/p>\n

. Cf. 2Jn 1:12; 3Jn 1:13; Jer 36:18. See artt. Ink and Writing in Hastings, DB., atramentum and tabulae in Diet. of Ant. Ink could be blotted out (Exo 32:33) or washed off (Num 5:23, where see Grays note). Non atramento scriptum est, id est non ita ut possit deleri, sicut ea quae atramento scribuntur; sed Spiritu Dei vivi, id est ut aeternaliter et vivaciter in cordbus nostris aut vestris permaneat, sicut ille qui scripsit vivit et aeternus est (Herveius). See the beautiful passage in Plato, Phaedrus, 276 C, in which it is said of the good teacher, that he does not much care to write his words in perishable ink, tracing dumb letters which cannot adequately express the truth, but finds a congenial soul, and then with knowledge sows words which can help themselves and him who planted them, and can bear fruit in other natures, making the seed everlasting and the possessor of it happy.<\/p>\n

. See on 1Co 12:3 and Rom 8:9, Rom 8:14. The epithet is not otiose; the Spirit is an efficient force, and the letter which it produces consists of living persons. Moreover, the epithet accentuates the contrast between the abiding illumination of the Spirit and the perishable blackness of inanimate ink. In the Pauline Epp. and Hebrews, is frequent; in Mat 16:16, Mat 16:26:63; Rev 15:7, we have the less common . For the difference see Westcott on Heb 3:12.<\/p>\n

. This again is not quite in harmony. It would have agreed better with the metaphor of a letter to have said not on parchment ( , 2Ti 4:13), or not on papyrus ( , 2Jn 1:12). But the Apostle has already in his mind the contrast between the Mosaic and the Christian ministry (vv. 4-11), and he therefore introduces here tables of stone (Exo 31:18, Exo 34:1) rather than ordinary writing materials. He suggests that the living letter of Christ, which is his testimonial, is superior, not only to the formal letters brought by the Judaizing teachers, but even to the tables at Sinai. Those tables were indeed written with the finger of God; yet they remained an external testimony, and they had no power of themselves to touch mens hearts; whereas the credentials of the Christian teachers are internal, written on the yielding hearts both of themselves and of their converts. The Corinthians cannot disregard a commendation written on their own hearts. The law written externally is a terror to evil-doers; the internal law is an inspiration to those who do well. As soon as the Apostles thought had reached the tables of stone, the current contrast between the heart of stone and a heart of flesh, and . (Eze 11:19, 36:26; cf. Jer 31:33, Jer 32:38), would easily come in to strengthen the comparison.<\/p>\n

Omitting details, which give fulness but somewhat disturb the metaphor, we have as the main thought this; That which Christ by the Spirit of God has written on your hearts is recorded in our hearts as commending us to all mankind. Once more (see on 1:22) we can perceive how the elements of Trinitarian doctrine lie at the base of the Apostles mind and influence his thought and language; cf. Rom 15:16.<\/p>\n

. This difficult expression is the better attested reading: is a manifest correction, for no one would alter KapBias to Unless with WH. and Wendland we suspect a primitive error, such as the accidental insertion of the second , we must accept the harder reading and take in apposition with Two ways are possible, according as is taken with or with . The former is very awkward; on tables (viz. hearts) of flesh. It does not follow, because balances , and agrees with , that therefore agrees with . But Syr-Hark. takes it so; on tables of flesh-on hearts. On tables (which are) hearts of flesh is less awkward, but not pleasing. In dictating, St Paul might easily utter the words slowly in the order in which we have them, – – . But the proposal to omit is attractive. Both and indicate the material of the , which in each case has , while the instruments (, ) have no preposition; (1:12, 10:4; see on 1Co 3:1) would indicate quality, especially ethical quality.<\/p>\n

B, f Vulg. insert before . K has . ( A B C D E G L P, Syr-Hark., Eus.) rather than (F K, Latt. Syr-Pesh. Copt. Aeth. Arm. Goth. Iren. and perhaps Orig. Did. Cyr-Alex.).<\/p>\n

3:4-11. The Superiority of the New Ministration to the Old<\/p>\n

God alone made us competent to be ministers of the new covenant, which in splendour immeasurably surpasses the old.<\/p>\n

4This confidence, that you are a letter composed by Christ testifying to the effectiveness and validity of our commission, is no fiction of my own invention: it comes through Christ, and it looks reverently to God as its source. 5It is not a confidence that of ourselves we are competent to form any estimate of results, as though we made ourselves sufficient. All our competence to form such an estimate has its source in God. 6For of course He did not leave us incompetent of serving Him when He called us to be ministers of His new covenant with men,-a covenant which consists, not of a lifeless written code, but of an active penetrating Spirit. For the written code imposes a sentence of death, but the Spirit breathes new life.<\/p>\n

7Now if the Laws dispensation of death, which was a thing of letters graven on stones, was inaugurated with such dazzling manifestations of glory that the Children of Israel could not look steadily at the brightness on the face of Moses, a brightness which was already beginning to fade away, 8how much greater must be the glory of the dispensation of the Spirit! 9For, surely, if the dispensation which sentences men to death can be a manifestation of Gods glory, then the dispensation which offers righteousness as a gift to men must be a far greater manifestation. 10For the former may be said to have had no real glory, because its glory pales and vanishes before the overwhelming glory of the latter. 11For if that which comes and soon passes away has somewhat of glory, much more must that which for ever abides be arrayed in glory.<\/p>\n

4. . And confidence of this kind we possess through Christ to God-ward. He refers to the just expressed, viz. that he has no need of any credentials other than the testimony which the existence of the Corinthian Church bears: that fact by itself suffices to prove his Apostleship. But he at once hastens to show that in this confidence there is no self-praise and no claim to credit; for it is conditioned in two ways which entirely exclude vain-glorious thoughts; it is through Christ, and it is towards God. In LXX occurs only in the taunt of Rabshakeh, . ; but it is fairly freq. in other versions. It is found six times in Paul and nowhere else in N.T. See Index IV.<\/p>\n

. Therefore not through any innate power of our own. Apart from Him we could do nothing (Joh 15:5). He gave us the power that we have- (Thdrt.).<\/p>\n

. Erga Deum, which is the second security against boastfulness. The quiet confidence which gives us strength (Isa 30:15) is not directed towards anything earthly as the ultimate source of strength, but towards God (Rom 15:16). The idea is that of looking towards the person on whom one relies. This use of is rare; the usual prepositions after are (8:22) and (Php 3:4), and after , which is very freq. in N.T. and LXX, , , and with dat. (1:9) or acc. (2:3). In 2Th 3:4 we have , a construction which would have stood very well here.<\/p>\n

5. . The is further explained, both negatively and positively, in order to exclude still more emphatically the suspicion of self-commendation. I do not mean that (1:24) of ourselves we are sufficient (2:16) to account anything as originating with ourselves. He does not claim the right or power to judge that he and his fellows are the real authors of any part of the work; they claim no credit whatever. Experience has proved that as ministers they are competent, for the Corinthian Church exists; but all their competency comes from above.<\/p>\n

The statement is particular, not general; and it has reference simply to the successful work at Corinth. The Apostle is not denying free will, nor is he declaring that the natural man can do nothing but evil. Calvins remark, Paulus non Poterat igitur magis hoininem nudare omni bona, is altogether beside the mark.<\/p>\n

By a fanciful derivation, El Shaddai, as a name for God, was sometimes interpreted as meaning The Sufficient One. In Rth 1:20, Rth 1:21, , and in Job 21:15, Job 31:2, 39:32 [40:2]. , is used as a Divine name. It is just possible that St Paul had this in his mind here; Our sufficiency comes from the Sufficient One. Nowhere else in LXX or N.T. is found.<\/p>\n

should be placed before ( B C, Copt. Arm.) rather than after . (A D E F G P, Latt.) or after . (K L, Syr. Hark.) or be omitted (17, Syr-Pesh.). ( A B K L P) rather than (C D E F G). For , B F G have (WH. ii. p. 144).<\/p>\n

6. . Who also made us sufficient as ministers, where who = for He. No English version before the RV. marks the repetition, , , : nor does the Vulgate, which has sufficientes, sufficientia, idoneos fecit. There is a similar repetition in , , , and this is followed by (eight times in five verses), , . As in 1Co 3:5, is used in quite a general sense. There is no evidence that at this time had an exclusively official sense, or designated any particular class of Christian minister: see Westcott on Eph 4:12. The aorist points to the time when St Paul was called to be an Apostle; at that crisis he was made competent (Col 1:12) to respond to the call. See Index IV.<\/p>\n

. Of a new covenant (RV): of the New Testament (AV) is misleading. The covenant is fresh and effective, with plenty of time to run, in contrast to the old covenant, which is worn out and obsolete. Thiss is the constant meaning of as distinct from , so that always implies superiority to that which is not , whereas what is may be either better or worse than what is not . See Trench, Syn. lx. and Lightfoot on Col 3:10.<\/p>\n

The usual word for covenant is , which occurs thirteen times in LXX, but not at all in N.T. It is not suitable for a covenant between God and man, for it suggests that the parties meet on equal terms. See on 1Co 11:25. Here the emphasis is on . Contrast (Heb 9:15), where the emphasis is on . To be ministers of the old covenant was no great distinction; there were large numbers of them, and their duties were largely matters of routine. But to be made competent ministers of a new covenant with God was an extraorinary grace. In Heb 12:24 we have , the only passage in which occurs. Christianity was both and , it was of recent origin and it was effective, whereas Judiasm was old and effete. It was also . I will make a new covenant ( ) with the house of Israel (Jer 31:31. And I will make an everlasting covenant (. ) with them, that I will not cease to do them good (Jer 32:40).<\/p>\n

We are not yet in a position to say the final word respecting the rendering of in N.T., where the word occurs thirtythree times, mostly in Paul (nine) and in Hebrews (seventeen). Probably the extremists on both sides are in error. It seems to be reasonable to hold that cannot always be rendered covenant in accordance with LXX use, and that it cannot always be rendered testament in accordance with the usage of classical writers and that of Greek-speaking populations in the East in the first century. Among the crucial passages are Gal 3:15-18 (see Lightfoot) and Heb 9:16, Heb 9:17 (see Westcott). It does not follow that, because covenant is the meaning elsewhere in N.T., therefore covenant is the meaning in both these passages; or that, because testament is the meaning in one or both of these, therefore testament is the meaning everywhere. Deissmann (Light from Anc. East, p. 341; Licht von Osten, p. 243) says; There is ample material to back me in the statement that no one in the first century a.d. would have thought of finding in the word the idea of covenant. St Paul would not, and in fact did not. To St Paul the word meant what it meant in his Greek O.T., a unilateral enactment, in particular a will or testament. This one point concerns more than the superficial question whether we write New Testament or New Covenant on the title-page of the sacred volume; it becomes ultimately the great question of all religious history; a religion of grace, or a religion of works? It involves the alternative, was Pauline Christianity Augustinian or Pelagian? On this Lietzmann rightly remarks that, however true it may be that almost always means testament in profane literature, yet in the very numerous passages in LXX in which a between God and man is mentioned it cannot have this meaning; and this is true also of the passages in N.T. which have been influenced by the LXX. I know of no instances of a unilateral enactment (einseitige Verfgung). We must abide by the Hebrew and translate covenant. One instance of this usage we at any rate have in Aristoph. Birds, 440. Peisthetairos refuses to have any dealings with the birds, -not to peck him. See Ramsays valuable dissertation, Galatians, 33, 34, pp. 349-370; A. Lukyn Williams, Galatians, pp. 68-70; Wickham, Hebrews, pp. 71-73; Expositor, Dec. 1908, pp. 563-565; E. Riggenbach, Der Begriff der Diatheke im Hebraerbrief, 1908; Muntz, Rome, St Paul, and the Early Church, pp. 146 f., 165 f.<\/p>\n

. Not of letter, but of spirit, for the letter puts to death but the spirit gives life. This saying holds good of many other things besides the Law and the Gospel; everywhere letter prescribes, spirit inspires. But we must not be misled by the common contrast in English between letter and spirit, which means the contrast between the literal sense and the spiritual or inward sense of one and the same document or authority. By and St Paul means two different authorities; is the written code of the Law, is the operation of the Spirit in producing and promulgating the Gospel. See on Rom 2:29, Rom 7:6.* This passage is almost a summary of the Ep. to the Romans. St Paul mentioned the tables of stone (v. 3) in preparation for this comparison between the old ministration and the new. The old put forth a written code of duty, so onerous as to kill hope and love; the new is inspired by the spirit, which is able to revive what is ready to die. See Swete, The Holy Spirit in N.T., p. 319.<\/p>\n

We see here once more (see on 1Co 9:20; Dobschtz, Probleme, p. 82) how completely St Paul had broken with the Jewish Law. He has now reached the main topic in this portion of the Epistle (3:1-6:10), viz. the glory of Apostleship under the new covenant. The Judaizing teachers had not been able to extricate themselves from the trammels of the old covenant. But experience has taught St Paul that the embrace of the Law has now become deadly. It is effete and cannot adapt itself to the new conditions. It is purely external; Thou shalt not do this overt act, Thou shalt do this overt act. It has no power to set free and strengthen the moral elements in man. It makes heavy demands, but it gives nothing. It commands and imposes a punishment for disobedience; but it gives no power or encouragement to obey. The spirit of Christianity is the opposite of this. It is a living force. Instead of pressing the man down from without, it lays hold of him from within; it supplies, not slavish rules, but emancipating principles. It enriches and quickens those who welcome it, and it makes them both desirous and able to follow its inspirations. The Law, says Chrys., when it takes a murderer, puts him to death; grace, when it takes a murderer, gives him light and life.<\/p>\n

It is evident from the language used that the Apostle is contrasting the spirit of the Gospel, not merely with ceremonial regulations, but with the whole code, whether ceremonial or moral, of the Mosaic Law. That Law said to the Jew, Obey, or it will be worse for you. The Christian says to the Gospel, Obedience is the thing that I long for.<\/p>\n

The genitives, and , probably depend on (see v. 8); but the meaning is much the same if we take them after . They are qualifying or characterizing genitives and are equivalent to adjectives: we might translate, not letter-ministers, but spirit-ministers. Winer, p. 297; Blass, 35. 5.<\/p>\n

. This does not refer to capital punishment, which the Law inflicted for a variety of crimes, such as adultery, blasphemy, dishonour to parents, idolatry, murder, prophesying falsely, sabbath-breaking, witchcraft, etc., although there may be some indirect allusion. In a much more serious sense the Law kills, in that it sends men along the road which leads to eternal death. It does this by its prohibitions, which at once suggest the doing of what is prohibited, and also make men conscious of having sinned and merited punishment. By giving edge to the conscience, it intensifies the sense of remorse. A child will go on doing a wrong act ignorantly, till it has become a habit, without any inward dissatisfaction; till at length some authoritative voice says, That is a wicked act. Then everything is changed. Each recurrence of the evil habit brings misery to the child. It has the sentence of condemnation in itself. The commandment has slain the child (Lightfoot). Again, the letter kills by setting up lofty standards, which it does not help men to reach, and which without help they cannot reach. This takes the heart out of them, for they feel from the first that disastrous failure is certain. Moreover, the Law held out no hope of a resurrection, by means of which the failures of this life might be rectified. Lex non est adjutrix legentium, sed testis peccantium quae mortificat peccatores (PseudoPrimasius). Spiritus vivivicat qui intus docet animam qualiter ea quae audit intelligere debeat (Herveius). With St Paul the principle that the letter puts to death is an axiom; and it was confirmed by his own experience. See on Rom 7:7-25, pp. 184-189. But this verse would have been very obscure if we had not possessed Romans, which was written in Corinth and shows what St Paul had been teaching there. In all this disparagement of there was no danger of seeming to disparage Christian writings, for as yet there were no Christian Scriptures. The Apostle, without being aware of it, was beginning to make such writings.<\/p>\n

The excellent cursive 17 has , which is supported by Lat-Vet. non litera sed spiritu; but Vulg. has non litterae sed spiritus. B has , G K P 17 have , a form said to be Aeolic, A C D E L which D3 L accentuate .<\/p>\n

7. . See on 1Co 15:56 and comp. Gal 3:10, which quotes Deu 27:26: is not abstract for concrete, ministry for ministers; it means the whole dispensation of the Mosaic Law. The Apostles main object is to show the superiority of the Christian ministration. This involves disparaging the Jewish ministration, which he does in strong language, because of the mischief done by the Judaizers. See, says Chrys., how he again cuts the ground from under the Judaistic point of view. He adds that the Apostle does not say that the Law produced death, but that its ministry tended to death, when it declared the soul that sinneth, it shall die (Eze 18:4).* The inferiority of the Law to the Gospel is shown in three different aspects, the second of which is an explanation or justification of the first; it is a ministration of death, a ministration of condemnation, and a ministration which was designed to be only temporary.<\/p>\n

, . In letters, and engraven on stones. It is necessary to insert and, in order to make clear that we have here two attributes of the , which was in writing that might never be read or understood, and written on dead and heavy material. Graven in letters on stones would give only one of these ideas. is said of the writing made by God on the first tables (Exo 32:16). It is not said who wrote on the second tables (the nom. may be God or Moses), nor whether the writing was engraved or not (Exo 34:28). The Commandments, as the centre and basis of the Mosaic code, are here put for the whole of it, as the Sermon on the Mount is sometimes put for the whole of the Christian code. In writing would be better than in letters; but the connexion between and must be preserved.<\/p>\n

. Came into existence in glory, i.e. had a glorious inauguration; or came to be in glory, i.e. was transported into a glorious condition. Bachmann defends the latter rendering by a number of instances from papyri in which seems to mean pass into a certain state; , , … This use is not rare in N.T. Cf. [Luk 22:44]; Act 22:17; Php 2:7; 1Ti 2:14; 1Ti 1:10, 1Ti 1:4:2; but it does not fit the context here. The Law was not given in an inglorious condition and afterwards promoted to a glorious one; it was from the first. Driver notices that St Pauls key-words in this passage (, ) are suggested by the LXX rendering of shone in Exo 34:29, Exo 34:35, viz. . We may contrast the aor. here with the fut. in v. 8; the latter implies permanence, the former not.<\/p>\n

. Exo 34:30 says no more than that they were afraid to come nigh him; but Philo (Vita Moys. i. 2, p. 665) gives the current belief; , , . There was a Jewish tradition that the light which shone in Moses face was the light which inaugurated the Creation. Vulg. here varies the translation of in a capricious way; ut non possent intendere filii Israhel in faciem Mosi propter gloriam oultus ejus, quae evacuatur. See Index IV. On the difference between with the infinitive and with the indicative, see T. S. Evans in Expositor, 3rd series, iii p. 3. Excepting here and v. 13, is peculiar to Luke in N.T.; it is freq. in Acts. In LXX it is rare and late.<\/p>\n

. Which was being done away; imperfect participle. It was very splendid, but it was very transient. This is not stated in Exodus, but it seems to be implied, and it is brought in here with much effect at the end of the sentence, to be enlarged upon as a separate point of inferiority in v. 11. Was to be done away (AV) is certainly wrong,* and was passing away (RV) is doubtful. In v. 14, as generally in Paul, the verb is passive, and it may be passive here and in vv. 11, 13; see on 1Co 1:28, 1Co 15:26 and on Luk 13:7 for the meaning of the verb.<\/p>\n

( A C D2 and 3 E K L P, d e f g Vulg. Copt. Syr. Pesh. Goth.) rather than (B D* F G). f Vulg. omit the before , c D2 and 3 E K L, d e f Vulg. Arm. insert before . In all three cases note the divergence between Greek and Latin in bilingual MSS.<\/p>\n

8. . How shall not to a greater extent the ministration of the spirit be in glory? The does not point to the future coming of the Messianic Kingdom; it indicates that . will continue to be in an atmosphere of glory. Or may be the logical future, of the natural consequence of what has been stated. Cf. , (Rom 6:8).<\/p>\n

9. . The second point of contrast is explanatory () of the first; the Law is a . . because it is . . , for condemnation results in death. If such a ministration is glory, to a much greater extent the ministration of righteousness is superabundant in glory.* The use of the pres. here is against being the logical future. By righteousness is meant that which is attributed to man when he is justified. Through faith in Christ man is more than forgiven; his debt is cancelled and he has something placed to his credit.<\/p>\n

The which is usual after (8:7; Eph 1:8; etc.) is omitted here, probably to balance in the first clause. In the first contrast we have in the second, Cf. 1Th 3:12; Act 16:5; here many texts insert .<\/p>\n

. (B D2 E K L P, f g Vulg. Copt. Goth.) is probably to be preferred to . ( A C D* F G 17 d e Syrr.); but the latter may be original ; For if the ministration of condemnation has glory. D E G have after 3 D E F G K L P, Latt. Arm. have before .<\/p>\n

10. . For indeed that which has been made glorious in this respect has been deprived of glory by reason of the glory which exceeds it? It is outshone by something which is much more dazzling and beautiful. When the sun is risen, lamps cease to be of use; orto sole lumen lucernae caecatur. In this way the paradox becomes true that what had been made glorious was not made glorious. In comparison with the glory which superseded it, it seemed to have had no glory at all. Cf. (Xen. Mem. iv. iii. 3). Stallbaum on Plato, Rep. 329 B gives other examples of this use of .<\/p>\n

If be taken with , the meaning will be in respect of the illumination of Moses countenance. But it is better to take the words with and understand them as anticipating what follows; in this respect, viz. because of the overwhelming glory of the Gospel. The phrase is repeated 9:3, and nowhere else in N.T. is found only 9:14; Eph 1:19, Eph 1:2:7, Eph 1:3:19; and its derivative is also purely Pauline in N.T., peculiar to this group, and most freq. in 2 Cor. (1:8, 4:7, 17, 12:7); in LXX only 4 Mal 3:18.<\/p>\n

For a few cursives and a few Latin texts have . Vulg. has nec and also spoils the oxymoron by rendering nam nec glorificatum est quod claruit in hac parte. ( A B D E G P) rather than (C K L).<\/p>\n

11. Third contrast; again explanatory () and in support of what precedes. For if that which was being done away was through glory, to a much greater extent that which abideth is in glory. What is given to last only for a time is as nothing in comparison with what is given to last for ever. Christianity is (14:6), a Gospel reaching forward into eternity and bringing with it (Isa 45:17; Heb 5:9), and its ministers are ministers (Heb 13:20). They have not the transitory glory of Moses in their faces, but in their souls they have the everlasting glory of the message which they deliver. Supply rather than with .<\/p>\n

The change from to may indicate the difference between what passes and what abides. We have a similar change Rom 5:10, in a sentence very similar in construction to this; . In Eph 1:7 we have the converse change from to , from what is permanent to what was transitory; . St Paul is fond of changes in prepositions; 1Co 12:8; Gal 2:16; Rom 3:30.<\/p>\n

These verses (7-11) show what a revolution had taken place in the mind of St Paul since he had exchanged the Law for the Gospel. Christianity is so superior to Judaism that it has extinguished it. Even in its best days, when it also was a Divine revelation to the human race, Judaism had a glory which was infinitesimal compared with that which was inaugurated by Christ. A rich variety of expressions is used to bring this out. The Gospel is is , and the is . It secures from death, it secures from condemnation, and it abides. In this argument the Apostle has chiefly in view the Judaizers who made the Law indispensable and superior to the Gospel. Beet, p. 349.<\/p>\n

3:12-4:6. The Great Boldness of the New Ministers<\/p>\n

Conscious of the vast superiority of the New Covenant, we need no veil to cover deficiencies, but deliver our message with boldness and openness.<\/p>\n

12 Seeing, therefore, that we servants of the Gospel have a sure expectation that the glory of the new covenant will prove as superior in duration as it is in splendour, and will never disappear before a far greater glory, we venture to preach with great confidence, frankness, and courage, at the risk of being accused of self-commendation. 13 Unlike our opponents, we have nothing to conceal. We have no need to act as Moses did. He used to put a veil over his face, to prevent the children of Israel from gazing at the gradual dying away of the glory which the presence of the Lord had imparted to his countenance. The passing away of that glory symbolized the transitory character of the Mosaic dispensation; and by concealing the former from the people Moses might seem to be concealing the other also. 14 But, so far from seeing what the fading of the glory signified, or profiting by our plain speaking, their spiritual perceptions were deadened. For down to this very day, when the records of the old covenant (which might teach them so much) are read, the same veil of ignorance as to the transitory character of the Law lies still upon their minds, still unlifted, because by becoming members of Christ, and in that way alone, is it done away. 15 And unto this very day, whenever the Law of Moses is read in their synagogues, a veil of miscomprehension lies upon their hearts. 16 But just as Moses, when he returned to the presence of the Lord, removed the veil from his face, so, when any one of them turns to the Lord, the veil is removed from his heart, and he sees that the dispensation of the Law has come to an end. 17 Now the Lord to whom such an one turns is the Spirit of Christ, and where the Spirit of Christ is, there is emanicipation from the bondage of the Law and of sin. 18 And all we Christian men, freed from the Law and freely obeying a higher commandment, have a glory which resembles that of the unveiled Moses. As we gaze with unveiled face upon the glory of the Lord Christ, before which the glory of Moses vanished away, we are daily being transformed into spiritual likeness to Him, from one degree of brightness to another,-an amazing transformation, but not beyond belief, when we remember that the power which transforms us is a Spirit which is Lord.<\/p>\n

4. 1 Seeing then that the Gospel is so glorious and is so unreservedly made known, and that we by Gods mercy have been made competent for the ministration of it, we have a courage which corresponds with that mercy. 2 We are not cowardly schemers,-far from it. We have from the first refused to adopt underhand methods of unworthy trickery; we follow no courses of unscrupulous cunning; we do not tone down or in any way tamper with Gods message. On the contrary, we set forth the truth so clearly and purely that this at once commends us to the conscience of our hearers, however much it may differ in different men. If, however, the verdict of all human consciences may err, we are not afraid to appeal to the judgment of God. 3 I do not deny that the Gospel which we proclaim so openly and honestly does not penetrate to the hearts of all who hear it; a veil intervenes. That is true, but only of those who are lost, 4 in whose case the god of this evil dispensation has blinded their understandings, unbelievers, as they are, so that for them there is no morning-glow from the light which is shed by the Gospel,-the Gospel which is charged with all the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 Yes, the glory of Christ; for it is not our own claims that we press, but those of Christ Jesus, as the risen and glorified Lord. Our relation to you is that of bondservants, in the service of Him who Himself took the form of a bondservant. 6 Is say that we do not press our own merits, because we have none; all that is of value in us is derived. To the God who in the beginning said, Out of darkness light shall shine, we owe the light that has shined in our hearts, the light which springs from the knowledge of the glory of God, which we must pass on to others. I have knowledge of that glory, for I have seen it myself on the face of Christ.<\/p>\n

The closing words of this section are a complete explanation of the statement made at the beginning of it and elaborated in 4:2. The man who has always in his heart the Divine light which shone into it from the face of the glorified Lord cannot be guilty of tricky artifices and double-dealing with a view to commending himself and winning applause. The light transfigures him, and he is ever transparent and open. He works to impart the light to others, not as coming from himself, but from God through Christ.<\/p>\n

We may notice the close correspondence between the last seven verses of this chapter and the first six verses of the next chapter. In both we have three subjects in the same order; the excellence of the Gospel ministry, the sad condition of those who are so blind as to be unable to see the excellence of the Gospel, and the Divine source of the excellence. Both passages begin with similar words expressing the rich possession of those to whom the ministry of the Gospel has been entrusted, and in both the metaphor of the veil is used. In the first passage this metaphor is applied to the unbelieving Jews, in the second to unbelievers generally, especially, but not exclusively, Gentiles. The repetition of and of the treasure possessed by Christian misssionaries should be noted (3:4, 12, 4:1, 7, 13). See below on 4:1.<\/p>\n

12. . That he says hope rather than confidence (v. 4) does not prove that is to be supplied with in v. 11. The glory of the Gospel has already begun, and therefore rather than is required. But that the Gospel will prove permanent ( ) is a matter of hope, and therefore is here quite in place. Because, therefore, we have a sure hope that our glory will continue, we use great boldness. For following a participle see 1:17, 5:6, 11, 7:1; 1Co 11:20; Rom 5:1; Heb 4:14, Heb 4:10:19; 1Pe 2:1.<\/p>\n

. He had been accused of having in one matter used such levity that his word could not be relied on (1:17). He says here that he habitually uses great boldness and openness of speech, because he is in possession of a great hope. The word implies that the boldness is exhibited either in speech or in action. It is opposed, not only to timidity, but to reserve, and it is sometimes misunderstood, for it may seem to imply self-confidence and self-commendation.* But it has quite other sources. Ministers who feel that God has made them competent (2:16, 17), and that their work will endure, have ground for . Chrys. expands, , , . Calv., aperta et plena Christi manifestatio. It is possible that in explaining the nature of this the Apostle is not only following up his answer to the charge of (v. 1), but also again glancing at the hole-and-corner methods of his Judaizing opponents; but what follows is on a higher level than mere controversy.<\/p>\n

In Vulg. is generally fiducia, but also constantia (Act 4:13), and confidentia (Heb 10:35), while is audenter (Act 2:29), and (adv.) is palam or manifeste. Bezas in loguendo evidentia is no improvement on fiducia, and Erasmus goes wrong in changing utimur (Vulg.) to utamur. See Index IV.<\/p>\n

13. . The structure is defective, but the sentence is quite intelligible; And we do not put a veil over our faces, as Moses used to put a veil over his face. Comp. Mar 15:8, where there is nothing to correspond to and to do has to be supplied. From the lofty position in which God has placed him the Apostle looks down even on Moses. Moses and the Prophets often spoke obscurely, for they did not always understand their own message, and much had not been even dimly revealed to them that was clearly known to the Apostles. Many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things which ye see and saw them not (Mat 13:17). Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and searched diligently. And not unto themselves but unto you did they minister these things (1Pe 1:10, 1Pe 1:12). For see on 1:14.<\/p>\n

. That the children of Israel should not look steadfastly upon the end of that which was passing away. There is no in this verse, and we have , and not . In v. 7 could not look steadfastly is right; but here could not (AV) is incorrect and misleading. The difference is considerable. In v. 7 it is said that the glory was so dazzling that the people could not look steadily at it. This is not stated in Exo 34:29 f., but it is not inconsistent with what is stated there. Here it is said that Moses used to veil his face so that the people should not see the fading away of the glory on it. This is inconsistent with the AV. Of v. 33; Till Moses had done speaking with them he put a veil on his face; which means that the people were terrified by the brightness and would not come near him, and so he wore a veil all the time that he was addressing them. This is erroneous. The correct translation is, When Moses had done speaking with them he put a veil on his face. He knew that the brightness was caused by converse with Jehovah, and would fade away when he was absent from the Divine presence. He did not wish the people to see the disappearance of the brightness, and therefore, when he had delivered his message, he covered his face, until he returned to the presence of the Lord. This is plain in LXX and Vulg., * as also in RV., but it is quite obscured in AV. Apparently we are to understand that this practice was continued by Moses throughout the wanderings in the wilderness.<\/p>\n

The Apostles main point is this fading of the glory, which he treats as symbolizing the temporary nature of the Mosaic Law. He does not say that it was intended to convey this lesson; but, as in 1Co 10:2-4 and Gal 4:21-26, he takes the O.T. record and gives it a spiritual meaning. The meanig of with the infinitive is in N.T. generally final, expressing the subective purpose, with a view to, in order that. Mat 5:28, Mat 16:12, and Luk 18:1 seem to be exceptions. St Paul has it four times (here; 1Th 2:9; 2Th 3:8; Eph 6:11), and in each case it expresses the purpose of the agent or agents. In this case it was the purpose of Moses that the Israelites should not witness the vanishing of the glory from his face. This does not imply that Moses understood the vanishing to be a sign of the transitory character of the Law; still less that he wished to conceal its transitory character from the Israelites. He wished to conceal from them the end of the fading illumination. He did not wish them to go on watching him till there was no more glory to watch.<\/p>\n

It is the Apostle who makes the passing away of the glory a symbol of the transitoriness of the Law, and the veil a symbol of obscurity and concealment. In these two respects the Gospel ministration is greatly superior to that of the Law. It is permanent, and it conceals nothing that its adherents can understand. Its ministers deliver a message which reaches out into eternity, and they deliver it fearlessly, with entire frankness and freedom.<\/p>\n

. The whole phrase and the context make the meaning of certain: the end of that which was passing away, or (passive) was being done away, means the cessation of the glory. We may set aside the end of that which is abolished (AV), which seems to mean Christ as the end of the abolished Law (Rom 10:4). This meaning of is adopted by Aug. and Thdrt., but it does not stand investigation. St Paul could not mean that Moses veiled his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing Christ. Nor does mean the final cause, the aim and object of the Law. Why should that be concealed from the people, and how would the use of a veil conceal it? And Luther is certainly wrong in making masc., of him who is passing away, viz. Moses, which is quite alien from the context. The Vulg. is puzzling, in faciem ejus, quod evacuatur, but the quod shows that this reading gives no support to the view that is masc.<\/p>\n

(A B C G L P 17) rather than ( D E K). For , A has , which some copyist may have taken from the previous line or from v. 7. f Vulg., Ambrst. have faciem for finem.<\/p>\n

14. . But their minds were dulled. The looks back to the preceding . Dulled is perhaps better than either blinded (AV) or hardened (RV). The Rhemish version has their senses were dulled, following the Vulg., which has obtunsi sunt census eorum. Vulg. generally has excaecare, but Joh 12:4, indurare. Harden is the original meaning of the verb, but this does not agree well with minds; minds are blinded, blunted, dulled. As blinded is wanted for (4:4), blunted or dulled will be better here. J. A. Robinson (Ephesians, pp. 264-274) gives a full history of and , and comes to the conclusion that from the original idea of petrifaction the words come to indicate insensibility, especially of the eyes. The meaning generally required by the context in the N.T. is obtuseness or intellectual blindness rather than hardness. Lightfoot on 2Th 2:8 remarks that St Paul sometimes uses in opposition to light (1Co 2:7; 2Ti 1:10) as here in vv. 7, 13, and this is somewhat in favour of blinded or dulled rather than hardened. Strictly speaking, are the products of , and therefore thoughts rather than minds: but here, as in 4:4 and 11:3, seems to mean the thinking faculty. The same difference of meaning is found in class. Grk.* See on 2:11.<\/p>\n

It is not necessary to decide whether St Paul is speaking of the Jews of his own day, as what follows seems to intimate, or of the contemporaries of Moses, as what precedes rather implies. He is thinking of the nation as a whole without distinction of time. The aor. may be timeless, and in that case may be rendered have been dulled or are dulled. Nor need we ask whether their minds were dulled by God, or by the evil one, or by themselves: in different ways all three contributed to the result. The indefinite passive has the advantage of raising no side issue; the one important fact is the intellectual of the Jews, which is a warning to the Corinthians not to exchange Christian clearness and freedom for the obscure entanglements of Judaism.<\/p>\n

To what does But () refer? To the main topic of these verses, the of the Apostle and his colleagues. We do not use concealments, as Moses did; we speak openly to the people; but (aber) in spite of that, they do not understand. Even the free preaching of the Gospel is powerless against the deep-seated insensibility of Jewish prejudice. This is one of the strongest of St Pauls strong statements against Judaism. Others explain, But (Moses had no need to hide anything, for) their minds were dulled. This is a less obvious connexion.<\/p>\n

. . It must have been insensibility, for it remains unyielding still. Why are ye perplexed that the Jews believe not Christ? They do not even believe the Law. They are ignorant of grace also, because they did not know even the Old Covenant, nor the glory which was in it. For the glory of the Law is to turn men to Christ (Chrys.). Nisi enim credideritis, non intelligetis (Pseudo-Primasius).<\/p>\n

. Not of course the same veil that Moses used, but one which had the same effect, viz. preventing them from recognizing that the Mosaic dispensation was transient. Aug. evidently thought that Moses wore the veil while he was speaking to the Israelites, for he says on this passage, sonabat enim vox Moysi per velum, et facies Moysi non apparebat; sic et modo Judaeis sonat vox Christi per vocem Scripturarum veterum: vocem earum audiunt, faciem sonantis non vident (Serm. lxxiv. 5). The tallith, which Jews now wear as a scarf on the shoulder when worshipping in the synagogue, was formerly worn on the head. It is just possible that there may be some reference to this. A reference to the wrappers in which the rolls of the sacred books were kept is not probable.<\/p>\n

. At the reading. This use of of the occasion on which or circumstances in which something takes place is common enough (1:4, 7:4; 1Co 14:6; etc.). It makes rather strange sense to take . after , for a veil abiding on reading is a picture difficult to realize. We know from Acts and other sources that the synagogues, where the O.T. was publicly read (Act 13:15), were often the headquarters of hostility to the Gospel (Act 13:45, Act 13:50, Act 13:14:2, Act 13:19, etc.). Aug. De Civ. Dei, xviii. 7, says; The O.T. from Mount Sinai which gendereth to bondage, profiteth nothing, except so far as it bears witness to the N.T.<\/p>\n

. The Old Covenant and the New Covenant are such familiar expressions to us that we are apt to forget their enormous significance to those who first used their equivalents. This is plainly stated in Heb 8:13; In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. But that which is becoming old and waxeth aged is nigh unto vanishing away. Nowhere else in N.T. is the expression found, and it is possible that St Paul was the first person to declare the abrogation of the covenant made with Israel by speaking of the Pentateuch as . implies far more than does, that what is old is the worse for wear. Trench, Syn. lxvii.<\/p>\n

. This probably agrees with just mentioned; the same veil abideth, without being lifted, because it is in Christ (and in Him alone) that it is done away. But may be a nom. or acc. absolute; the same veil abideth, the revelation not having been made that it is done away in Christ. Field suggests a third method; the same mystery remains unrevealed, viz. that it is done away in Christ. The second method labours under two disadvantages; (1) the clumsy absolute case, which, however, is not without examples; see Winer, p. 669, who rejects it as inapplicable to this passage; (2) the meaning given to , which in this context seems almost necessarily to refer to the moving of the veil; see v. 18. The third method avoids these drawbacks, but involves one which is more serious, viz. taking in a different sense from that which it bears both before and after this verse. Everywhere else it means the veil and not the thing veiled, i.e. a mystery. The second method may be right; it is strongly supported by Meyer, Stanley, Alford, Bachmann, and others, and is admitted to RV. marg. But with AV, RV., most ancient writers, Waite, Way, Weymouth, J. H. Bernard, Massie, De Wette, Neander, B. Weiss, Schmiedel, Bousset, and others, it seems better to take with .<\/p>\n

. AV and RV. read , and translate, which veil is done away in Christ. But this use of for is open to question. Reading , our rendering will depend on the rendering of . Either, abideth without being lifted, for it is in Christ that it is done away; or abideth, the revelation not having been made that it is done away in Christ. Adopting the former, we make the sentence a parenthetical explanation of , for it is union with Christ which does away with the veil, and this union the unconverted Jews reject. Note the emphatic position of . It is in union with Him, and in that alone, that the removal of this ignorance takes place. The difference between (1:14, 17) and (v. 4, 1:5) should be observed. The number of passages in which may be either because = for, or that, is considerable (1:14, 7:9, 13, 16; 1Co 1:5, 1Co 1:14; etc.). They are specially common in Lk. (1:45, 7:16, 39, 9:22, 10:21, 11:38, 22:70).<\/p>\n

is the reading of nearly all authorities, but K L Syr. Pesh. Aeth., under the influence of v. 15. omit .<\/p>\n

15. The metaphor of the veil is changed in a way somewhat similar to that in which the metaphor of the epistle is changed in vv. 1-3. Previously, the veil was something external to themselves which hid from them the truth that the dispensation of the Law was temporary and vanishing. Now it is something within them which keeps them from recognizing and welcoming the truth, viz. their prejudice in favour of the old dispensation; see on Luk 5:39. It is probably because of this change of meaning that has no article; the veil would mean veil in the same sense as before, and AV obscures the sense by inserting the definite article. In v. 16, means the veil mentioned in v. 15.<\/p>\n

. But unto this day, whenever Moses is read, a veil lies upon their heart. The refers to , not lifted up, but (so far from that) a veil lies on their heart. Heart, as often in Scripture, and especially in Paul, is the seat of the intelligence (4:6; 1Co 2:9; Rom 10:6, Rom 10:8, Rom 10:10; Php 4:7) as well as of the affections. Therefore it is beside the mark to say that the veil is said to be on the heart and not on the head, because it was moral and not intellectual blindness which caused their unbelief. If any contrast is implied in . , it is to the effect that the existing veil does not lie on the head of Moses, hiding the vanishing of the glory of the Law, but on the hearts of his people, hiding the dawn of the glory of the Gospel. We might have expected , but with acc. usurps the place of with dat., not only where motion previous to rest may be implied (Mar 2:14, Mar 4:38, etc.), but where there has been no previous motion (Mar 8:2; Luk 1:33; etc.). Blass, 43. 1. With (Ecclus. 47:7) comp. (1Co 4:13, 1Co 8:7, 1Co 15:6).<\/p>\n

with A B C (17 has ): D F E G K L P omit . ( A B C D E P) rather than (F G K L).<\/p>\n

There is no sufficient reason for suspecting with Heinrici that the verse is a gloss. The in v. 16 looks like a reference to here.<\/p>\n

16. . But, whensoever a man shall turn to the Lord, at once the veil is taken away. The emphasis on justfies at once; away the veil is taken. The nom. to is probably (so Origen); anyone in the synagogue, any who hears the Law read. Others make the nom., or Israel, or Moses as the representative, either of the old Israel, or of the new. The last is Calvins idea. No doubt St Paul has Exo 34:34 in his mind; , . But that does not prove that here he is thinking of Moses as a type, or that here is midd., as is in Exodus. Whenever Moses turned to the Lord (in the tabernacle), he took off the veil from his head; whenever a Jew turns to the Lord (Christ), the veil is taken off from his heart. The compound verb expresses the removing of something which envelops.<\/p>\n

In we have another echo of Ex. 34., and possibly more than one. When the people were afraid to come near him, Moses called them, . And St Paul probably says rather than , because of in Exodus. Frequently the Apostle transfers to Christ expressions which in O.T. are used of Jehovah; and here clearly means Christ, for it balances , and Jews had no need to turn to Jehovah. He is speaking of devout Jews worshipping in the synagogue, and perhaps he is thinking of his own conversion.<\/p>\n

It is difficult to decide between (* A 17) and (3; B D E F G K L P) the latter may be assimilation to v. 15, where, however, D E F G K L P omit . There is good reason for suspecting that, independently of v. 15, may be a correction to literary form. Cf. (1Co 6:18); (1Co 16:3); (Gal 6:7). In many places WH. have restored , in accordance with the best, MSS., where inferior texts have . The evidence of papyri is overwhelming as to this use of for after , , , etc., being very common in the vernacular Greek of the first three centuries. It seems that in this small point the uncials faithfully reproduce originals written under conditions long obsolete (J. H. Moulton, p. 43). See Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 202 f.; he gives numerous examples.<\/p>\n

17. These two abrupt sentences supply premises in support of the emphatic statement, away is taken the veil. They might be omitted without loss to the argument, for no proof is required for the assertion that whenever men turn to the Lord, the veil which hides Him from them is taken away, and v. 18 would follow well immediately after v. 16. Using these two sentences as premises, we get an argument in this form; The Lord is the spirit, Where the spirit is, is freedom. Therefore, Where the Lord is, the bondage of the letter is taken away. Or, as Pseudo-Primasius puts it, Dominus spiritus est. Liber est spiritus. Idcirco non potest velamen accipere, sed magis ipse revelat. Injected statements and appeals are found elsewhere in Paul; 1Co 15:56, 1Co 15:16:13, 1Co 15:14; Gal 3:20.<\/p>\n

In these two verses (17, 18) the fluctuation between as that which is opposed to , and to as the spiritual nature or the inspiring power of Christ, must be allowed for. The contrast between Moses and Christ is one between letter and spirit, between compulsion and inspiration; that is the main fact. How far St Paul thinks of the Spirit as a power distinct from Christ is not clear; at any rate Christ and the Spirit work in the same way and produce the same effects. See on 1Co 2:12.<\/p>\n

The two verses have a rhythm and swing, the balance of which is easily felt in reading aloud.<\/p>\n

.<\/p>\n

, .<\/p>\n

, <\/p>\n

,<\/p>\n

.<\/p>\n

These rhythmical passages, of which there are several in the Epistle, are evidence of exalted emotion, and perhaps of rhetorical skill that has been acquired by study. In the next chapter note the correspondence in structure between v. 4 and v. 6 and the evenly balanced clauses in vv. 8-10.<\/p>\n

. This statement has been misused controversially; on the one side to prove the Divinity of the Holy Spirit, on the other to show that St Paul identifies the Holy Spirit with the Lord Christ. The Apostle is not constructing metaphysical propositions respecting the Divine Nature. He has still in his mind the distinction between and , the former of which is transient and is obscured by ignorance and exclusiveness, while the latter is permanent, informing, and open. Moses placed restrictions on external conduct; Christ transforms the inner life. Therefore to turn from Judaism to Christianity is to turn from the letter which enslaves to the spirit which gives freedom, and to welcome Christ is to receive in oneself the Spirit of the Lord. It is impossible in the Pauline Epistles to make a rigid distinction between the Holy Spirit and the Spiritual Christ. Life in Christ and life in the Spirit are the same. It is by partaking of the Holy Spirit that believers grow into Christ. In 1Co 15:45 Paul says that the last Adam, that is Christ, was made a life-giving Spirit. In 2Co 3:17 he says, The Lord is the Spirit. Paul sometimes falls into the way of speaking of the Christian community as a manifestation of the Divine Spirit, and sometimes he speaks of the indwelling Christ. In Rom 8:9, Rom 8:10 the words Spirit of God, Spirit of Christ, Spirit and Christ are all used interchangeably (P. Gardner, The Religious Experience of St. Paul, pp. 176 f.).<\/p>\n

It is in the interests of the Trinitarian doctrine that the possible, but most improbable translation, The Spirit is the Lord, is sometimes adopted. Grammar allows it, for both terms have the article; but the preceding , which shows that means Christ, and the order of the words forbid it. Lias, in Appendix I., has collected patristic interpretations; Meyer-Heinrici gives several modern suggestions. It is a passage, about the exact meaning of which we must be content to remain in doubt. It is well treated by Headlam, St Paul and Christianity, pp. 106 f.<\/p>\n

, . He who possesses the Spirit of Christ has liberty. Spiritual freedom of all kinds is meant, with special reference to the bondage of the Law and of sin; cf. 1Co 9:1, 1Co 9:19, 1Co 9:10:29; Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6, Gal 4:7. In Rom 6:15-23, Rom 7:1-6, St Paul expounds the freedom which comes by leaving the strictness of the Law for union with Christ. He compares it to release from slavery and to marriage with a second husband after the death of the first. In each case there is the substitution of new ties for old ones, not the abolition of all ties. Christian freedom is not licence; it is the free acceptance of the ties of affection instead of the enforced acceptance of bonds of fear. Service voluntarily rendered to Him who is the Truth is the most perfect freedom of which a creature is capable; . (Joh 8:32, Joh 8:36). * Ubicunque est Spiritus Filii, ibi est mentis libertas, ut remoto servili velamine possit libere mens veritatem inspicere (Herveius). Cf. 1Co 7:22, and Seneca, De vite beata, 15:6, In regno nati sumus; Deo parere libertas est.<\/p>\n

Several conjectural emendations of the text have been suggested. In the first sentence for Baljon and othere would read or , Now where the Lord is, there is the Spirit. In the second sentence, for Hort would read , Where the Spirit (or, the spirit, in opposition to the letter) is Sovereign, is freedom. But Hort admits that there is no obvious difficult in the universally attested reading; and St Paul would be familiar with the expression in LXX (1Ki 18:12; 2Ki 2:16; Isa 61:1).<\/p>\n

L has instead of . The before should be omitted with * A B C D* 17, 67*, Syr-Pesh. Copt. Elsewhere St Paul does not write answering to (Rom 4:15, Rom 5:20).<\/p>\n

18. . And we Christians, all of us. And rather than But (AV, RV), for there is probably no contrast in , but mere transition from liberty to those who have been set free. The main contrast is marked by the very emphatic : we freed believers, unlike the servile Jews, qui fidet carent oculis (Erasmus). A second contrast is marked by , which is in antithesis to the one Moses. But this contrast is greatly weakened if, with Bengel and others, we confine , as in vv. 1-12, to we ministers of the Gospel. There is a tone of triumph in , which would be out of place if the meaning were confined to a handful of teachers. The contrast is between the one Hebrew leader and the whole body of Christians. Then only one was illuminated, and his illumination was hidden from all the rest; now all are illuminated and there is no concealment. Point after point in the comparison is brought out, and in most of them superiority is brought out also. The rhythm throughout the two verses (17, 18) is jubilant.<\/p>\n

. This is a third contrast. In our case there is no need of concealment; there is no fear and there is nothing to hide. We Christians know that the glory which is seen in us is permanent, and no one will see it vanishing away. Neither with open face nor with unveiled face gives quite distinctly the full meaning of More clearly than (1Co 11:5, 1Co 11:13) or (not in N.T. and rare in LXX), shows that there has been a veil and that it has been removed. We might have expected rather than , for the veil was on their heart before conversion (v. 15); but the comparison here is chiefly with Moses, whose face was veiled.<\/p>\n

. The glory of the risen and glorified Christ, which is given here as equivalent to the glory of Jehovah in the Holy of Holies or on the Mount. It is inadequate to interpret this of Christs moral grandeur and beneficence during the life of His humiliation. It is rather the glory of Him in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily (Col 2:9), and who was revealed to Stephen as standing at the right hand of God (Act 7:55, Act 7:57; cf. 6:15). See Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, pp. 127, 128; The Messiah of the Gospels, pp. 292, 293.<\/p>\n

. Pres. part. of what continually goes on; either beholding as in a glass (AV), or reflecting as a mirror (RV). The former is clearly the meaning in Philo, Legis Alleg. iii. 33, where he expands the prayer of Moses in Exo 33:13 thus; , , , , . The latter meaning is adopted by Chrys., and it makes excellent sense. When Moses spoke to the people, he covered with a veil the reflexion of the Divine glory which shone in his face; but it is with unveiled face that Christians reflect the glory of Christ and make known their changed condition with openness and boldness. The force of the participle is by continually reflecting; it is by this process that the metamorphosis takes place.<\/p>\n

The Latins adopt the other meaning and translate speculantes or contemplantes, neither of which preserves the allusion to , a mirror. Speculantes seems to preserve it, but does not, for speculari is to see from a watch-tower (specula), not see in a mirror (speculum). In any case, is in an emphatic position in reference to , as in reference to .<\/p>\n

. Are transformed (RV) is better than are changed (AV), for to be changed is the rendering of (1Co 15:51, 1Co 15:52; etc.). But are being transfigured brings out both the force of the pres. and also the fact that we have here the same word that is used of the Transfiguration (Mar 9:2; Mat 17:2), and nowhere else, excepting Rom 12:2.* Vulg. has three different words in the four passages; transfigurari in the Gospels, transformari here, and reformari Rom 12:2. Comp. in 11:13, where a less complete change is implied than that which is indicated here. See on Rom 12:2, Lightfoots detached note on Php 2:7, and Trench, Syn. lxx. Seneca (Ep. vi. 1) has Intelligo, Lucili, non emendari me tantum, sed transfigurari. Again (Ep. xciv. 48), Philosophiam qui didicit nondum sapiens est nisi in ea quae didicit animus ejus transfiguratus est.<\/p>\n

The same image means the image of Christ reflected in the mirror. St Paul may have in his mind the (Gen 1:27), the image of God, marred in Adam and restored in Christ. The construction is regular. Beza and others say that rather than is to be understood: but nothing is to be understood. Like other compounds of which mean change, means to be transformed into. Thus, is often to change to. When Menelaus taxes Agamemnon with acting very differently before and after gaining power, he says, , , and with being shifty about the surrender of Iphigeneia, (Eur. Iph. in Aul. 343, 363). Similarly Plato has , . (Rep. iv. 424 C, vii. 535 D), and (Parm. 138 C). In all these cases the verb means to make a change and adopt. The omission of in the last example is conclusive. Again, while is to change from ones opinion, is to change to ones new opinion (Hdt. vii. 18). This usage is regular and not rare, whereas we lack evidence that can be used absolutely like , , , and . See Stallbaums note on Plat. Rep. iv. 424 C, where he renders mutando assumere.<\/p>\n

Driver says of the narrative in Exo 34:29-35, that it is a beautiful symbolical expression of the truth that close converse with God illumines the soul with Divine radiance, and that those who with unveiled face behold spiritually as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are gradually through its influence transformed more and more completely into His likeness (Exodus, p. 376). We find similar ideas in the Book of Enoch, where it is said that the righteous will become angels in heaven, and their faces will be lighted up with joy because the Elect One has appeared (51:45), the glory will not pass away (62:16), and they will be resplendent for times without number, for righteousness is the judgment of God (108:13). Again, in the Apocalypse of Baruch; Their splendour will be glorified in changes, and the form of their face will be turned into the light of their beauty, that they may be able to acquire and to receive the world which does not die, which is then promised to them. They shall be changed into every form they desire, from beauty into loveliness, and from light into the splendour of glory (51:3, 10). This Apocalypse is contemporaneous with the chief writings of the N.T. Its authors were orthodox Jews, and it is a good representative of the Judaism against which the Pauline dialectic was directed (R. H. Charles, Preface).<\/p>\n

. There is no fading away, as in the case of Moses, for it is no superficial glory. It penetrates to the spiritual nature of the inner man and makes that, like the Lord from whom it comes, a source of light. Yet it is no sudden change, completed, as if by magic, in an instant; that might end in stagnation. It is a continual and gradual progress, from strength to strength (Psa 84:7), shining more and more unto the perfect day (Pro 4:18). It passes on from this world to the next, from what is temporal to what is eternal. Less probably, is interpreted of the Divine glory imparted, and of that which is received. Thus Bengel; a gloria Domini ad gloriam in nobis: and Neander; from the glory which we contemplate to the glory which we receive in ourselves. Thdrt. perhaps means the same. Aug. De Trinitate, xv. 8; de gloria creationis in gloriam justificationis, vel etiam; de gloria fidei in gloriam speciei, de gloria, qua filii Dei sumus, in gloriam, qua similes ei erimus, quoniam videbimus eum sicuti est. From the glory of Moses to that of the Spirit (Ambrose), and from the glory lost in Paradise to the glory to be received in Heaven (Ephraem) are curiosities of exegesis.<\/p>\n

. Like the first half of v. 17, this is a passage about the exact meaning of which we are obliged to remain in doubt. It is impossible to decide with certainty what the words mean. Every possible translation has been advocated. Are the genitives in apposition? or is one dependent on the other? If the latter, which of the two is dependent? Is the definite or the indefinite article to be supplied in each case? If the definite with one and the indefinite with the other, which is to have which? May the article, whether definite or indefinite, be in either case omitted in English? May be an adjective? AV and RV. give us four renderings, which may be reduced to three, for AV marg. is almost the same as RV. text. These three are; by the spirit of the Lord (AV), from the Lord the Spirit (RV), from the Spirit which is the Lord (RV marg.). Add to these renderings three more; from the Lord of the Spirit, from the Lord who is spirit, and from a sovereign Spirit, i.e. a Spirit which exercises lordship, making an adjective. These six do not exhaust the possibilities in English, but they probably include the right rendering.<\/p>\n

It will help us to select one or more of these as more probable than the others, if we consider why these words are added. The (see on 1:14), even as, means as one would expect, as is natural, and the words which follow explain how it is that the marvellous transfiguration into the very image of Christ is possible. It is because the Lord is spirit that He effects this change. A spiritual effect must have a spiritual cause, and from a cause of the highest order we may expect very high effects. On the other hand, a spiritual effect of the greatest magnitude requires an adequate cause. The Lord of glory as the giver of glory satisfies these conditions, and the Apostle shows talem gloriam dari, quae sublimitati congruat dantis (Ambrst.). These considerations are in favour of Even as from the Lord who is spirit (Joh 4:24), the Lord being Christ, as is shown by and . It is the glory of Christ that is reflected in Christians; for which reason Even as from a Spirit who is Lord, or Even as from the Spirit which is the Lord, is less probable. Even as from the Lord of the Spirit, i.e. from Christ who sends the Spirit (Joh 16:7), is the simplest translation grammatically, unless is an adjective; but it has against it (1) the absence of the articles, which would have made this meaning clearer, and (2) the fact that St Paul generally represents God as the giver of the Spirit (1:22, 5:5; 1Co 2:12, 1Co 2:6:19; 1Th 4:8), through the instrumentality of Christ (Tit 3:6). Horts proposal to make an adjective is attractive, but it has against it the fact that nowhere else in Scripture is thus used, and this is a strong objection, for the fact can hardly be accidental.* Writers would avoid using as a mere epithet a word which was so constantly employed as one of the Divine names. Even as from the Lord who is spirit, or from the Lord, the Spirit, is on the whole to be preferred. AV text is not likely to be right.<\/p>\n

There is no transforming power so effectual as spirit, and in this case it is the Lord Christ Himself who is the transforming power. Spiritual agency is here at its highest. The most wonderful changes are not only possible but natural, when such a cause is operating. But the conditions must be observed, and they are mainly three. There is the turning to the Lord; every veil that might hide Him must be removed; and it is His glory and no other that is reflected. When these three things are secured, by continual reflexion of the Lords glory Christians are transfigured into the very image of Him whose glory they have caught and retained, and step by step the likeness becomes more and more complete- , unto the full measure of the maturity of the fulness of Christ (Eph 4:13).<\/p>\n

* The relation of the Judaizers to the Twelve is unknown to us, as also are the details of their teaching. It was the life, not the teaching of the original Apostles which appeared to support the Judaizers. They continued in attendance upon the Temple services. To a superficial observer, they were simply pious Jews. They were not simply pious Jews. But the Judaizers failed to penetrate beneath the outward appearance. Because the original Apostles continued to observe the Jewish Law, the Judaizers supposed that legalism was of the essence of their religion (J. G. Machen, Princeton Biblical Studies, p. 555).<\/p>\n

(Fourth century). Codex Sinaiticus; now at Petrograd, the only uncial MS. containing the whole N.T.<\/p>\n

B B (Fourth century). Codex Vaticanus.<\/p>\n

C C (Fifth century). Codex Ephraemi, a Palimpsest; now at Paris, very defective. Of 2 Corinthians all from 10:8 onwards is wanting.<\/p>\n

D D (Sixth century). Codex Claromontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. The Latin (d) is akin to the Old Latin. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS.<\/p>\n

E E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant<\/p>\n

F F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trinity College, Cambridge.<\/p>\n

G G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). The Greek text is almost the same as that of F, but the Latin (g) shows Old Latin elements.<\/p>\n

A (Fifth century). Codex Alexandrinus, now in the British Museum. All of 2 Corinthians from 4:13 to 12:6 is wanting.<\/p>\n

K K (Ninth century). Codex Mosquensis; now at Moscow.<\/p>\n

L L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; now in the Angelica Library at Rome.<\/p>\n

17 17. (Evan. 33, Act_13. Ninth century). Now at paris. The queen of the cursives and the best for the Pauline Epistles; more than any other it preserves Pre-Syrian readings and agrees with B D L.<\/p>\n

P P (Ninth century). Codex Porfirianus Chiovensis, formerly possessed by Bishop Porfiri of Kiev, and now at Petrograd.<\/p>\n

d d The Latin companion of D<\/p>\n

e d The Latin companion of E<\/p>\n

67 67. (Eleventh century). At Vienna. Has valuable marginal readings (67 * *) akin to B and M; these readings must have been copied from an ancient MS., but not from the Codex Ruber itself.<\/p>\n

* information respecting the commentator is to be found in the volume on the First Epistle, pp. lxvi f.<\/p>\n

* Observe the remarkable expression of the Apostle ; his letter! He was writing on mens hearts ; and each man here is writing something ; and his writing lasts for ever. Pilate uttered a deeper truth than be thought when he said, What I have written, I have written. For deeds are permanent and irrevocable : that which you have written on life is for ever. You cannot blot it out ; there it is for ever ; your Epistle to the world, to be known and read of all men (F. W. Robertson).<\/p>\n

* Cf. (2Th 3:11) ; (Rom 12:3) ; (Act 8:30).<\/p>\n

* Chirstum facit auctorem, se vero organum, ut calumniatores intelligant sibi cum Christo csse negotium, si maligne contra obtrectare pergant (Calvin).<\/p>\n

See Swete, The Holy Spirit in the N.T., pp. 193 f. ; Deissmann, Light from the Anc. East, p. 379.<\/p>\n

f d The Latin companion of F<\/p>\n

* No idea is more familiar to us than the distinction between the spirit and the letter. Yet, so far as I am aware, it occurs in S. Paul for the first time. No doubt the idea was floating in the air before. But the fixed it; he made it current coin (Lightfoot, Sermons in St Pauls. p. 206).<\/p>\n

The third chapter is a polemic against the doctrine that believers in Christ ought to pay respect to the Law of Moses (Menzies, p. xxc)<\/p>\n

* Ministratio mortis lex estr, quae ostenso reveintoque peciato confundit, conterret et ocidit conscientiam (Melanchthon, Loci Theologici, p. 65, ed. Volbeding).<\/p>\n

* The same error is made by Beza, quae gloria eral abocienda, and is repeated in v. 13, in finem ejus quod abolendum est, where AV inconsistently has is abolishe.<\/p>\n

g d The Latin companion of G<\/p>\n

* Paul, then, must be not less distinguished than Moses; this is the extraordinary claim made by the Apostle in this passage. To have set up a genuine and lasting spiritual movement in a society like the Church at corinth is proof that it is so; for Moses produced no such result; the opposite is the result of what he did. And what is being done at Corinth is being done in other places also; mankind is passing into the final stage of its history (Menzies).<\/p>\n

* Arrian in his letter to Lucius Gellius, introductory to his report of the Discourses of Epictetus, says that they are memoirs of the philosophers thought and freedom of speech (), the aim of which was simply to move the minds of his hearers to the best things; but it may not have this effect on those who read the report of hese utterances.<\/p>\n

* , : impletisque sermonibus, posuit velamen super faciem suam.<\/p>\n

* In Agathons speech in praise of Eros, he ends with mention of the beautiful song which Eros sings, (Plat, Symp. 197 E).<\/p>\n

* There can be no liberty of though without the love of truth (Paget, The Spirit of Discipline, p. 106). The hapter is a good comment on this text. By the use of one of the splendid paradoxes of the higher life, the acceptance of the service of God is equated wtih a supreme and glorious liberty (P. Gardner, The Religious Experience of St Paul, p. 34).<\/p>\n

* Cf. in 3:7 with in Luk 9:31, and in 4:6 with in Mat 17:2.<\/p>\n

* The familiar language of the Creed, the Lord, and Giver of Life, is based on these verses (3:6, 17, 18). The Greek, , shows that it is wrong to rehearse the words as if they meant. the Lord of life and the Giver of life.<\/p>\n

Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

the Savor of the Knowledge of Christ <\/p>\n

2Co 2:12-17; 2Co 3:1-6<\/p>\n

Paul, in 2Co 2:14-16, imagines himself as part of his Masters procession passing through the world. First he is a captive in Christs conquering train; then he is one of the incense-bearers, scattering fragrant perfume; then he conceives of his life as being in itself that perfume. As the captives in a triumphal procession would be divided into two bodies, of which one company was doomed to die while the other was spared, so inevitably all who come in contact with Christ, either directly in the preaching of the gospel or indirectly in the lives of His people, are influenced either for evil or for good.<\/p>\n

The Apostle fancies himself challenged to furnish letters of commendation and he repudiates the claim. No, he cries, the lives and testimonies of those whom I have won for God, are all the credentials that I require! Every Christian should be a clearly written and legible tractlet, circulating for the glory of God. Men will not read the evidences for Christianity as contained in learned treatises, but they are keen to read us. God alone can suffice us to sustain this searching scrutiny.<\/p>\n

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Lecture 5<\/p>\n

The Epistle Of Christ<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-6<\/p>\n

Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you? Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward: not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God; who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. (vv. 1-6)<\/p>\n

The first two chapters, which we have already considered, have been largely occupied with the experiences, the trials, and the victories of the apostle Paul and his companions, while they were engaged in the marvelous ministry committed to them of going out into a world of sin to preach the gospel of the grace of God. And now in this third chapter the apostle develops for us in a very striking way the nature of the ministry committed to them, the ministry of the new covenant. He deals in the first place with the epistle of Christ. Notice how he introduces it.<\/p>\n

Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you? What does he mean? Why does he use language like this? As we have noticed on other occasions, one of the greatest trials that the apostle Paul had to meet as he went around in his ministry was the opposition of false brethren, men who professed to be Christians, but who in reality were Jewish legalists who had never apprehended the freeness and the liberty of the gospel, and they were continually dogging his steps. He would scarcely have left a place before they would come in and endeavor to discredit the message by discrediting the messenger. One of their ruses was to call in question his apostleship. For instance, they might put it like this to these Gentile Christians: Paul! Why, he is no true apostle! The apostles were those who were educated by the Lord Jesus Christ when He was here in the flesh, they had their schooling under His own personal instruction. They kept company with Him for three-and-a-half years, and then after He died and ascended to heaven it was they who went forth with authority to proclaim the message of the new covenant. Paul was not one of them, he did not even know Christ when He was here on earth. More than that, he has no commission from the apostolic college at Jerusalem. Challenge him and see. He will tell you he has received no authority from Peter or James or John or any of the rest, authorizing him to go forth on this mission. He simply is a freelance, and you need to be a bit careful of these freelances; you never can tell just what they have up their sleeves. For instance, when Paul visited you did he have a letter of commendation? Did he have a letter from the church at Jerusalem or from one of the other churches, showing that he was in good standing in the place from which he came?<\/p>\n

Paul had been in Corinth for a year-and-a-half, and his life had been as an open book. They had seen for themselves the kind of life that he lived, and knew how genuine his profession was. Now he is away from them and is anticipating visiting them again, and some of these Judaizers have I said, If I were you, before giving him the platform I would at least take the precaution of asking him for his letter, and see whether he has a letter of commendation. It is perfectly right and proper, you know, to carry letters. When Apollos, a total stranger, was going from Ephesus to Corinth, Priscilla and Aquila gave him a letter commending, or recommending, him to the confidence of the brethren in Corinth, and as Christians moved from place to place it was right that they should carry a letter, but think of demanding anything like that from the apostle Paul! Why, he says, Do we then have to accredit ourselves with you, you among whom we have labored for a year-and-a-half, you whom we have led to Christ? Is it necessary that now we should have some kind of a letter of commendation? Do we need a letter of commendation to you, or do we need one from you? Is it necessary that we should be commended by you to other people? The fact of the matter is, if it is a letter that is wanted, you yourselves constitute our letter. Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men. If people want to know whether we are genuine or not, they can look at you. Who were you when we came to you? You were poor ungodly heathen, lost in sin, in bondage to iniquity of the very vilest kind, and what are you now? Redeemed men and women who have been brought into the joy and gladness of a new life through the message that we imparted to you. Is not that letter enough? Does that not prove that we are divinely sent? Is not that the Holy Spirits own imprimatur, as it were, put upon our message. Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us. Through you God is showing what Christ is able to do for sinners who trust Him. We, of course, were the instruments. Ministered by us, written not with ink, but the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. God, then, is manifesting Himself to the world through His church.<\/p>\n

In Old Testament times we do not have a message going out to the world as such. God revealed Himself to Israel on Mount Sinai, and gave them His message on tables of stone. Stone, you know, is very hard, very cold, and very unyielding, like the message of the Law itself, but that message was never sent out to the Gentile world. Judaism was not a missionary religion. You never hear of the representatives of Judaism going out into all the world to proclaim the glories of the Old Covenant. Not at all. God had not yet come out to man; He was still dwelling in the thick darkness. The veil was unrent, and God was testing man through one particular nation, the nation of Israel, the very best group He could find. What things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God (Rom 3:19). If the very best people cannot keep the law, there is no use carrying it to the ungodly Gentiles, and so Judaism had no missionary message. Things have changed now. God has come out to men, the veil is rent, the light is shining out, and the message from the risen Christ is, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature (Mar 16:15). And wherever that message is carried, men read its power in the changed lives of those who believe it. That is what the apostle means when he says that we are the epistle of Christ.<\/p>\n

I sometimes hear people pray, O Lord, help us all to be epistles of Christ. You never get it that way in Scripture. It does not say that you are an epistle of Christ and I am an epistle of Christ. It takes the whole church to make His epistle, but each one of us is one little verse in that epistle. I should hate to have anyone judge Christ simply by me. I hope there is a little of the grace of God seen in my poor life, but take the church of God as a whole and see what a wonderful letter you have. What a marvelous epistle is Gods church telling the world what the grace of God can do for sinners who trust in Him. And it is such a vital thing, such a tender thing, written not with ink, but by the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. God gives to believers in the gospel a new heart, a new nature, a heart made tender by divine grace, in order that men may go out and manifest the love of Christ to a lost world. The apostle says this gives us confidence, Such trust have we through Christ to God-ward. If it were not that we could see the change in the life of a man through believing our message we would lose confidence, but when we see His grace working in this miraculous way, then we have trust toward God that we are indeed His chosen servants sent to make known the exceeding riches of His grace.<\/p>\n

The epistle to the Philippians gives us a beautiful hint of the way men read the truths of God in the church of God. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling (Php 2:12). I am not to work out my own salvation in my own power but, you see, It is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. Do all things without murmurings and disputings: that ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world; holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain (Php 2:13-16). Men, we often say, will not read their Bibles, and we are called upon to live Christ so that as they read us they will see that there is reality in the gospel and the message we preach, because of the change that has come in our lives.<\/p>\n

I wish we might test ourselves along that line. Is my life really witnessing for Christ? Is it really counting for God? Do the members of my own family see that God has control of me? Do they see something of the patience of Christ, the meekness of Christ, the purity of Christ, something of the love of Christ, the tender compassion of Christ, in me? Am I manifesting these things? As I go out in the world, as I mingle with others in business, in my daily employment, or whatever it may be with which I am occupied, do those with whom I have to do most intimately see any difference between me and those who do not make the profession that I make? Do they say, Well, So-and-So may be a Christian; if he is I do not think much of Christianity? Or are we so living Christ that others looking upon us say, Well, if that is Christianity, I wish I knew something of it in my own soul? I have heard people give testimony like that at times, I have had them come to me and say, I have met one of your people, or, I work with him, and there is something about him that appeals to me; I cannot help but believe in the reality of the message you preach because of the effect it has on the people who believe it. That is what Paul means when he says that we are the epistle of Christ.<\/p>\n

We are Christs letter. What is a letter for? It is to express ones mind. And what are some of the important things in a letter? First, legibility. You want to be able to read it. If you and I constitute the epistle of Christ the letter should be a legible one, one easily read. People ought not to have to puzzle their heads over it and say, Well, I dont know, I really cannot understand that. It may be Christianity, but it does not seem so to me. And then a letter should contain clear, definite statements. Clearness of meaning characterizes a well-written letter. You do not like to get a letter and go through it all and say, I can read it, but for the life of me I cannot understand what he means. You and I are called upon to so clearly set forth the grace that is in Christ that people will not have to puzzle over it, but that they will be able to say, Oh, now I understand; I see what Jesus does for the soul that trusts Him. If that is Christianity, I should like to know the same blessed life myself. And then, you know, a real letter reveals the personality of the one who writes it. Somebody has said that we have almost lost the art of letter-writing nowadays. Everything is so standardized that our letters do not reveal our personality at all. Take some of the volumes of old-fashioned letters, what a delight it is to take from the bookshelf some of Carlyles or Brownings letters, and others of the great men of the past. How marvelously they reveal the personality, the mentality of the soul, the spirit of those men. The church is the epistle of Christ, and the church is expected to reveal to men the personality, the loveliness, the beauty, the preciousness of Jesus. Oh, to have men say, I did not know Christ until I saw So-and-So, and then I said to myself, Jesus must be a wonderful Savior, for I have seen a little of what He is, revealed in this or that man or woman. That is what it means to be an epistle of Christ, to be manifesting Him.<\/p>\n

And so the apostle says, it is not that we can do this in ourselves, that we are sufficient of ourselves-Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God. Let us never get away from that. Christianity is a supernatural thing. I am persuaded that one of the greatest mistakes that thousands of people make is to imagine that Christianity is simply a natural thing, a natural life lived on a higher plane than the ordinary life. A man may say, I think perhaps I have been too selfish, too worldly; I am going to start in and lead a Christian life; I am going to be a Christian, and so am going to join the church, be baptized, take the sacrament, read the Scriptures, and have family prayer. You can do all of those things outwardly, and yet not be a Christian at all. Christianity is not the natural life lived on a higher plane. It is a divine life manifested in the energy of the Holy Spirit. That is why men need to be born again. That is an old-fashioned theme, but we cannot emphasize it too much. The Lord Jesus Christ said to Nicodemus, a very good man, a very religious man, Except a man be born [again], he cannot see the kingdom of God (Joh 3:5). The natural man can manifest only what is in his natural heart; there must be a second birth. I ask you, in the name of my Master, have you ever known that great change which the Bible calls the new birth? If not, you have never taken the very first step in the Christian life. You cannot live a Christian life until you have a Christian life to live. You must receive the life before you can manifest it. We are not sufficient of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God. If you are saying, I have heard a good deal about that, but my perplexity is that I do not know how I may be born again, let me give you two or three passages from Gods Holy Word, and may His divine Spirit wing them home in power. Joh 1:11: He came unto his own, and his own received him not. How do you receive Him? You receive Him into your heart, open your heart to Him, and let Him come in. Joh 1:12-13: But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.<\/p>\n

Here are three ways by which people do not become Christians, and only one way by which they do. Not of blood. You are not born a Christian because your parents were Christians; the grace of God is not transmitted by natural generation. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit (Joh 3:6). In the second place, Nor of the will of man. There is no man so great, so good, that he can make another person into a Christian. We believe in Christian baptism, but he makes a tremendous mistake who supposes that any man can become a Christian through submission to the ordinance of baptism, or that any minister can make another man a Christian by baptism, or by giving the sacrament of the Lords Supper. In the third place, Not by his own will. No man can will himself into becoming a Christian. No man can become a Christian by saying, I have made up my mind, and from now on I am no longer a sinner, I am a Christian. That will no more make him a Christian than a man, who by birth is an American but has become infatuated with the Russian system, can change his nationality by saying, From now on I am no longer an American, I have decided to be a Russian. You are what you were born, and we were born sinners, and have to be born again in order to become Christians, and so the verse says, Not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. There is just one way by which we become Christians, by receiving Christ. Then we are born again. The apostle Peter says, Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth for everAnd this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you (1Pe 1:23, 25). When you believe the gospel, when you accept the message that God has given, when you accept the Savior whom God has sent, then you are born of God, and you become part of this great company designated, the epistle of Christ. And the same God through whose mighty power we are born again is the One who sends His servants forth to minister His gospel in divine energy.<\/p>\n

The apostle concludes this section in verse 6 by saying, Who also hath made us able ministers [he is not dwelling on his own ability, but the Spirit of God working in and through him has enabled him to minister in power] of the new testament [we do not belong to the old covenant, we are through with that, we are enjoying the spiritual blessings of the new covenant. The word for testament and covenant is exactly the same]; not of the letter, but of the spirit. Do not misunderstand that. When he says not of the letter, he does not mean not of the letter of the Word of God. They tell us that we take the Bible too literally, and ask us whether we do not know that the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. That is what he says here, but by letter he does not mean the literal Word. You cannot be too literal in reading your Bible. God could have given it in another way if He meant us to have it that way, but He wants us to take it as it is. What is meant here? The letter refers to that which was engraven on the tables of stone, and therefore the letter is the law. But now you have the new message, the message of the New Testament, in the energy of the Holy Spirit. In other words, Paul says, We are not law preachers, we do not go to men and say, you must give up your meanness, you must be obedient to the law, but we say, What you cannot do yourselves God is able to do for you by the energizing power of His Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n

If you will open your heart to Christ, He will give you a new life, and put a new power in you. He will enable you to live Christ, to be a part of the epistle of Christ. The letter, the law, could only kill, could only condemn. It is called in the verses that follow the ministration of death, but the gospel of Gods grace preached in the power of the Spirit gives life to all who believe. <\/p>\n

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1-5<\/p>\n

I. There is a peculiar writing on the tablet of the Christian’s soul. The old covenant, with its precepts and penalties, was engraven upon slabs of stone; but the new covenant, with its gospel and its commandments, is written upon the sensitive and everlasting tablet of the heart.<\/p>\n

II. The writing on the tablets of the true Christian’s soul is effected for Christ by the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n

III. In writing upon the tablet of hearts, the Spirit of the living God employs men-pastors and teachers.<\/p>\n

IV. Those upon whose hearts Christ has written are the epistles of Christ: they are Christ’s chief means of communicating with the outlying world.<\/p>\n

S. Martin, Rain upon the Mown Grass, p. 125.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:2<\/p>\n

The Two Ministrations-the Law and the Gospel.<\/p>\n

I. There is perhaps something that, on the first mention, jars with our feelings in the fact that it was with a perfect knowledge that man could not obey the law, that the Almighty placed him under the law as a covenant. Yet in truth, there is no difficulty but what arises from the forgetfulness of union between the law and the gospel. If the two systems had been altogether detached, the law having no connection with the gospel, there would have existed great cause for wonder at God’s having appointed a ministration of condemnation. But when it is remembered that the law was most strikingly introductory to the gospel, so that the covenant of works literally made way for the covenant of grace, all surprise ought to vanish, and all doubt to be removed, as to the institution being consistent with love. From the earliest moment of human apostasy, God’s dealing with the fallen had always a reference to the works of atonement; He looked upon the world as a redeemed world, at the very instant of its becoming rebellious.<\/p>\n

II. The gospel is a ministration of righteousness. It is, therefore., far surpassing the law in its glory. It is a ministration of righteousness (1) because it is a system which, assuming that man can have no meritorious righteousness of his own, puts man in a position wherein he appropriates the meritorious righteousness of another. (2) Because it proposes to us the righteousness of the High Priest of our profession, as the procuring cause of our acceptance with God. And (3) this gospel, while displaying a perfect righteousness which hath been wrought out for us, insists peremptorily on a righteousness which must be wrought in us by God’s Spirit, making our holiness, though it can obtain nothing by way of merit, indispensably necessary by way of preparation. If then the law, though a ministration of condemnation, be glory, does not the gospel, the ministration of righteousness, much more exceed in glory?<\/p>\n

H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 1929.<\/p>\n

References: 2Co 3:2.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. iv., p. 122; C. Morris, Preacher’s Lantern, vol. ii., p. 298. 2Co 3:2, 2Co 3:3.-T. J. Crawford, The Preaching of the Cross, p. 215; Outline Sermons to Children, p. 229. 2Co 3:3.-E. Garbett, Experiences of the Inner Life, p. 84; A. J. Griffith, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxvi., p. 198. 2Co 3:4, 2Co 3:5.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. v., p. 31. 2Co 3:4-18.-F. W. Robertson, Lectures on Corinthians, p. 294. 2Co 3:5.-Homilist, 3rd series, vol. x., p. 277; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. vii., p. 88; W. M. Punshon, Sermons, p. 25.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4-5<\/p>\n

The Divine Sufficiency.<\/p>\n

I. Here we have a conception of the Christian ministry-what it is in its range, in its demands, in its difficulties, and in its trust upon God. The first work is unquestionably that of a preacher of the gospel. It is one message from heaven, a message of love; it is the message of an offended Father, still full of love to the children who have strayed from Him, and whom He would fain recover to Himself. The minister of the new covenant is God’s messenger to teach men this. He is an ambassador-bound to speak to the utmost of his ability the message which has been entrusted to him, having nothing to do with any other message but this.<\/p>\n

II. If this be a correct view of the function of a minister of the gospel, what a very solemn work this work of preaching is! Men are to be led to believe. So that the idea is this, that the one power by which men are to be saved is preaching. We are so accustomed to the thought, we are so familiar with the remarkable power which in all ages has attended preaching, that it does not seem to us perhaps at first sight to be the marvel that it really is that men should be saved by the “foolishness of preaching.” By that God means to save men. It is God’s method. And what a responsibility must rest upon the preacher! Is it possible to think that preparation can be too careful, that the consecration of heart and mind can be too complete, that the culture of every faculty which God has given can be too perfect, in order that these faculties may be used to bring the force of the gospel to bear upon men’s hearts?<\/p>\n

III. It is not only, however, in relation to the work itself that the difficulties of the Christian teacher and pastor occur, but in regard to its results; for those results, however men may forget them and slight them, are of the most serious and momentous character. “To the one we are the savour of death unto death, and to the other the savour of life unto life.” How could we hear these solemn responsibilities if it were not that “our sufficiency is of God.”<\/p>\n

J. Guinness Rogers, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxix., p. 321.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/p>\n

Practical Use of the New Testament.<\/p>\n

I. The New Testament is the revelation of eternal life by Christ; of life which must begin in man’s spirit by the conviction of sin, must be entered on by justifying faith, and carried on by the sanctifying power of the Holy Ghost. It comes to us, not as a code of laws, but as good news: this has ever been its name since its first announcement. And the good news have been of the most attractive kind. We find in the Gospels the independent testimonies of four holy and truthful men to a set of facts substantially the same. No concert had been previously entered into, to make them tally with one another; no collusion has taken place since their writing, by which seeming discrepancies might be removed. In some minor details, it cannot be denied that their accounts are considerably divergent; in their consecutive order and arrangement of events, the same divergence is observed. How precious to us is all this, as matter of teaching, that we must not be children of the bondwoman, but of the free; that the same great Spirit, who worketh in every man severally as He will, worked according to this analogy in those holy men also.<\/p>\n

II. The Gospels are usually taken up as a miscellaneous collection of histories, without any reference to their distinctive character. We should read them to obtain not only a correct historical idea of the important events which they record, but which is far more important, to be able to form in our own minds, and for our own spiritual lives, that living and consistent image of the glorious person of our Lord, which their separate testimonies, when combined, build up and complete.<\/p>\n

H. Alford, Quebec Chapel Sermons, vol. v., p. 277.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/p>\n

I. An able minister of the new testament, as many think, is a powerful, talented, and acceptable preacher of God’s word, especially of the New Testament-one who is well acquainted with every part of the gospel, and well able to set it forth from the pulpit. There is nothing of the kind in the text. For “new testament” has no reference to that which we now call by that name: we know it cannot have, for the simple reason that the New Testament was not then written; some of the books of the New Testament were in existence, but more were not, nor had any one, in all probability, the slightest notion that there ever would be a volume such as we possess in the New Testament. In point of fact, the phrase “new testament” in our text means “new covenant”-that covenant, namely, which God made to men in Christ Jesus, in place of the older and now abolished covenant which He made to Israel by the hand of Moses. The contrast between the two is drawn out in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and in other places.<\/p>\n

II. And in the second place, “ministers” has nothing at all to do with preachers: it simply means servants, or as we say “ministering servants”-such as are actively employed in carrying on the practical work of any dispensation or scheme; by a natural transition it comes to be specially applied to those who lend their active powers to the service of God and His Church.<\/p>\n

III. Lastly, able ministers was never meant to convey a notion of cleverness or talent, or acceptableness in themselves. What St. Paul meant was, that God had made them able to be ministers and made it possible for them to act as ministers; but sufficiency, he says, is of God, who also enabled even us, utterly unworthy as we are, and, humanly speaking, quite inadequate, to be ministering servants of the new covenant made to man in Christ and ratified by His death.<\/p>\n

R. Winterbotham, Sermons and Expositions, p. 317.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6<\/p>\n

Religious Thought and Life of the Age.<\/p>\n

I. There is in our age a tendency to greater simplicity of creed. The divines of today would hesitate to lay down, even on cardinal points, strict and narrow lines of orthodoxy; and still more would they shrink from including in any confession of faith a number of other dogmas, which, whether received or not, are not to be regarded as an essential part of the gospel. The feeling is strong, and it is continually growing, that the foundations of Christian fellowship are to be laid in spiritual sympathy rather than in theological agreement, and that all doctrinal formularies should be made as brief and as general as is consistent with the assertion of the grand principles of the Evangelical system.<\/p>\n

II. The second tendency to be noted is that towards a truer and broader humanity in our system. I use what may seem the somewhat ambiguous term “humanity” to signify in general the disposition to recognise that a theological system must consider the aspect in which it presents God to man, as well as the coherence of its theory with the Divine government.<\/p>\n

The theology of the day does not pretend that the creature can have any claim on the Creator, but it sees what has too often been forgotten, that God must be true to Himself. Confessing the necessary limits to all human investigations, it yet feels that intellectual power has been given in vain, and that there can be no meaning in the gracious invitation of God Himself, “Come now, let us reason together, saith the Lord,” if the gospel is not to be examined, and its teachings compared with those which God has given us through the conscience. The new tendency leads the preachers to deal with the false religions of the world as Paul dealt with the Athenians, when even their own errors and superstitions were used as stepping-stones up which they might be guided to the knowledge of the true God, and of Jesus Christ whom He had sent. In short, it deals with man as the object of the Divine love after whom God is seeking, and it endeavours, by appeals to the intellect, conscience, and affection, to win him for Christ. What is this but carrying into practice the great principle of the Apostle, who recognises the power of adaptation and tells us that he himself employed it. “I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.”<\/p>\n

J. G. Rogers, Christian World Pulpit, vol. ix., p. 129.<\/p>\n

References: 2Co 3:6.-Plain Sermons by Contributors to “Tracts for the Times,” vol. iv., p. 161; J. Leckie, Sermons at Ibrox, p. 317; T. Lloyd, Christian World Pulpit, vol. iii., p. 69; H. W. Beecher, Ibid., p. 395; vol. xxvi., p. 24; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. i., p. 307; J. H. Hitchens, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xix., p. 360; H. Riley, Ibid., vol. xxxiii., p. 185; R. Bartlett, Ibid., vol. xxxvi., p. 187. 2Co 3:6-11.-A. J. Parry, Phases of Truth, p. 30. 2Co 3:7, 2Co 3:8.-Sermons on the Catechism, p. 173. 2Co 3:7-11.-Homilist, 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 421; 3rd series, vol. ii. p. 107; Ibid., vol. ix., p. 121.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:8<\/p>\n

The Ministry of the Spirit.<\/p>\n

I. First among the proofs of Christianity comes the indisputable product of the “ministration of the Spirit,” the new society of believers in Christ Jesus, the new world of redeemed and regenerate sons, created and held in its true spiritual orbit by the power of Christ, the Eternal Sun. The ministry of the Holy Ghost issues in a new social organism, which buries the hates of centuries out of sight, lifts purity to absolute supremacy, and makes the love of God and men the ruling passion of life and action.<\/p>\n

II. The next most signal evidence of this ministry, in the first and nineteenth centuries alike, is the fulness and overflow of spiritual life consequent upon the descent and gracious indwelling of the Holy Ghost. The Christian society of the New Testament lives in habitual dependence upon an hourly communion with God. The same spirit is alive today.<\/p>\n

III. We ought to expect the work of the Holy Spirit to be one of cleansing: an uplifting of the standard of sanctity, and an outflow of conquering holiness. So it was, and so it is.<\/p>\n

IV. The first century was the era of universal missionary enterprise. This too is the missionary day the God of all souls has made, and in it we will rejoice and be glad.<\/p>\n

V. But one of the most assured evidences of the teaching ministry of the Spirit is the simplification of the problem of religion and the opening up of the treasures of revelation to all men.<\/p>\n

VI. Whence comes the rousing of our solicitudes for the social welfare of our fellows, and of the quickening of interest in all measures of social reform? Whence but from that Spirit whose gracious ministration lifted the slave to a seat by the side of his Master at the supper of love?<\/p>\n

VII. Add to and penetrate all this work with the life-giving presence of an immortal hope, and you have carried the service of the Spirit to the maximum of effectiveness. Christianity is the rebirth of hope. “Now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.”<\/p>\n

J. Clifford, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxii., p. 296.<\/p>\n

References: 2Co 3:9.-Parker, Hidden Springs, p. 203. 2Co 3:12.-J. B. Heard, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xx., p. 46. 2Co 3:12, 2Co 3:13.-L. Campbell, Some Aspects of the Christian Ideal, p. 1.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:12-18<\/p>\n

Mirrors of Christ.<\/p>\n

I. Note first what St. Paul means when he speaks of why Moses put the veil upon his face. You think it was because it was too bright that he did so. Not at all. When his face is shining with most radiance, then it is that he bares it before the assembled multitude. They dread to come near him, but they are persuaded to draw nigh, and with his face shining with the glory that it got from God, he talks to the people; when he has done speaking, he hides his face until he goes in again to speak to the Holy One of Israel; then he takes the veil off, and then it gathers fresh glory, and with this fresh glory he comes out and speaks again to the people. Moses, in his wisdom, judged it well to hide his face in between. The light began to grow shadowy and fade, until he went in again to speak to God. Where the Spirit of the Lord is not, there is slavery at all times, dulness and darkness and stupidity; people must often be left in that condition, just like the old Jews, because they would not make use of it if more was given.<\/p>\n

II. As the picture of the sun dwells in the mirror, so the form of Jesus Christ, the idea of Him as we behold Him with unveiled face, dwells in us, as a power, as an indwelling force. The idea that you have drawn from seeing Christ, that is the mirror-form of Christ in your soul, and that is the Spirit dwelling in you and working in you in proportion as you have Him right and hold Him true. Give your souls to the Living One, and He will make them glorious. Let the love of God shine into your hearts and obey it, and then there is no limit to the eternal height to which you should rise, to the eternal breadth to which your souls should go up; nay, there is no limit to the depth into which your souls will be able to pierce the very Divine will of God, which is the universe, which is the life, which is the treasure of all existence.<\/p>\n

G. Macdonald, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxii., p. 33.<\/p>\n

References: 2Co 3:12-18.-A. J. Parry, Phases of Christian Truth, p. 46. 2Co 3:14, 2Co 3:15.-A. Maclaren, Christ in the Heart, p. 157. 2Co 3:15.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 281; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 253. 2Co 3:15, 2Co 3:16.-E. M. Goulburn, Thoughts on Personal Religion, p. 284.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:17<\/p>\n

Spiritual Liberty.<\/p>\n

These words form the climax of the argument contained in the whole of the chapter. Through the chapter Paul puts law and gospel side by side. He shows us that there was a glory attached to the legal dispensation, but that the glory of the gospel far exceeds it in many respects. He notes first that it transcends the law in glory, in that the literal knowledge of the law, as engraven on stone, had no power whatever to affect the heart of the man who read it. The tables of stone had no quickening power in them, but when the law gives place to the gospel, no one can receive it without having wrought, at once, an inward transformation. (2) The Apostle goes further in the seventh verse, for he shows the superiority of the gospel over the law in that, whilst the law was simply a ministry of condemnation, the gospel is a ministry of life. (3) He proceeds a step further, and shows that the gospel has an exceeding glory over the law, in that, while the latter was only temporary, the gospel is for ever. (4) And yet once more the gospel exceeds the law in the matter of its perspicuity. The law was obscure, and the revelation made to man through Moses was dim and indistinct. “Now,” says the Apostle, “there is an efficiency in the gospel which the law does not possess. The law found man in bondage, and left him so, only sealing the cords of his captivity; but when the gospel comes it snaps all fetters and leads the man at once into perfect liberty, for where the Spirit of the Lord is-that is, where the gospel of Christ is-where the law of the Spirit of life is-there is liberty. Freedom follows the footsteps of the gospel.<\/p>\n

I. This is true among the nations of the earth. Although the liberty mentioned here does not primarily refer to political, or religious, or national liberty, yet, at the same time, national liberty is the inseparable companion of the gospel. Wherever the gospel of the grace of God has free way-is preached and accepted-there you always find political liberty following in its wake. Liberty is the attendant angel of the gospel. Let God’s truth lay hold of any land, and despotism dies. The gospel creates an atmosphere that suffocates a despot; and where it is free it exercises an influence under which slavery of every description is certain to wither.<\/p>\n

II. Our text is true in regard to ecclesiasticism. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” Once have the gospel in the heart, and there is a grand rebellion against all the despotism of ecclesiasticism.<\/p>\n

III. Our text is specially true in the experience of the individual believer. There is liberty (1) from the bondage of sin, (2) from the entanglements of ceremonialism, (3) liberty of character, (4) liberty in service, (5) liberty in all that the Bible contains.<\/p>\n

A. G. Brown, Penny Pulpit, No. 974.<\/p>\n

I. I do not find, anywhere in the Bible, that we are warned against too much liberty. In fact, it is almost always those who have felt themselves too shut up and confined, who break out into carelessness of conduct; just as the stopped river, bursting its barrier, runs into the more violent stream. And yet some people seem to me to be afraid of a free gospel. The freeman of the Lord walks in the day. His former sins do not trouble him. They were cancelled the first time he brought them to Christ, and God never rewrites one cancelled line. He has to do with nothing but the sins of the day.<\/p>\n

II. The Christian has the commandment of God in his mind, and it is his delight to study and to keep it. But far more than the command, he has the whole will of God. He has studied the commands till he has reached to the spirit of the commands. He has gathered the mind of God. He knows, by a kind of blessed, spiritual intuition, what the will of God would be on any given subject, and he follows it. It is a very grand feeling to be doing God’s will. This is what Christ was doing all the time He was on earth. It is the Spirit of the Lord, and “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”<\/p>\n

III. Is not the Christian free of the New Jerusalem? And how should things on the surface of this little world bind him? He is on the wing for eternity. These things cannot hold him. He can go down into deep, secret places. His mind is dealing with the mind of eternity. He is free to all the promises of the Lord, for he has the mind of Christ.<\/p>\n

J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 4th series, p. 61.<\/p>\n

References: 2Co 3:17.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. i., No. 9; Good Words, vol. iii., pp. 633, 634; Homilist, 2nd series, vol. iii., p. 467; Church of England Pulpit, vol. xx., p. 149; J. E. C. Welldon, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxv., p. 392; A. Murray, The Fruits of the Spirit, p. 124.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:18<\/p>\n

The Intuition of Faith.<\/p>\n

St. Paul says that we, as members of Christ, behold the manifold glory of God as in a glass, as if it were a direct object of sight, and that by beholding it we are changed. It has an assimilating power, and that which makes us capable of its transforming influence is our beholding it “with open face.” What, then, is this power of vision, this spiritual sight by which the unseen is visible; in one word, what is faith? It is the power which the Son of God gives us to behold the glory of the Lord. But we are asked, What is this power, this faith which is given us?<\/p>\n

I. The controversies of these later ages have committed two evils; they have dethroned the object of faith, and they have degraded faith itself. Faith is something more Divine than disputants believe. Some will have it to be a speculative assent to truths revealed, and some, to correct them, will have it to be a principle of moral action, and others, to set both sides right, join together these two definitions in one, and tell us that faith is a principle of moral action springing out of a speculative assent to truths revealed. As if faith were something partial and fragmentary, the action of half our being; an effect without a cause, or with a cause simply human, and within the natural endowments of the human intelligence. Surely all these alike, if not equally, come short of truth. We might as well say that sight is a belief of things seen, or that sight is action arising out of a belief in what we see. What are these but the effects of sight demanding and pointing to a cause? They are the consequences of sight, not sight itself. As our waking sense checks our irregular thoughts and subjects us to the conditions of the world we see, so faith brings the whole spiritual nature of man under the dominion and laws of the unseen kingdom of God. This supernatural gift was infused into us as a habit by the Spirit of God, but in its acting it depends upon our will.<\/p>\n

II. A clear intuition is the very life of the consciousness of God and of His kingdom. And this clear intuition of the heart is to be attained only by habitual self-examination and penitent confession made under the eyes in which the heavens are unclean. The next condition essential to beholding the glory of the Lord is a habitual use of spiritual exercises, such as meditation and prayer, whether mental or in words, and the like. By spiritual exercise is meant specially, an exercise of the will awakening the consciousness of our spiritual life. The whole catholic faith, the worship of the Church, the discipline of spiritual life through devotions and sacraments, has no existence for us, until we have united our spiritual consciousness with them by acts of faith and of the will. And the last and highest means of perfecting the gift of faith is to exercise it habitually upon the real presence of our blessed Lord in the Sacrament of His body and of His blood. For this very end it was ordained, that when He should withdraw His visible presence, He might still abide with us unseen; that when He ceased to be an object of sight, He might become an object of faith; and that the spiritual consciousness of our hearts should there for ever meet with the reality of His presence.<\/p>\n

H. E. Manning, Sermons, vol. iv., p. 369.<\/p>\n

Transformation by Beholding.<\/p>\n

I. The Christian life is a life of contemplating and reflecting Christ. Note (1) Paul’s emphasis on the universality of the vision-“We all.” (2) This contemplation involves reflection, or giving forth the light which we behold.<\/p>\n

II. This life of contemplation is a life of gradual transformation. The brightness on the face of Moses was only skin-deep. It faded away and left no trace. It effaced none of the marks of sorrow and care, and changed none of the lines of the strong, stern face. But, says Paul, the glory which we behold sinks inward, and changes us, as we look, into its own image. Thus the superficial lustre, that had neither permanence nor transforming power, becomes an illustration of the powerlessness of law to change the moral character into the likeness of the fair ideal which it sets forth. And in opposition to its weakness, the Apostle proclaims the great principle of Christian progress, that the beholding of Christ leads to the assimilation to Him.<\/p>\n

III. The life of contemplation finally becomes a life of complete assimilation. Christ’s true image is that we should feel as He does, should think as He does, should will as He does; that we should have the same sympathies, the same loves, the same attitude towards God and the same attitude towards men. The whole nature must be transformed and made like Christ’s, and the process will not stop till that be accomplished in all who love Him. But the beginning here is the main thing, which draws all the rest after it as of course.<\/p>\n

A. Maclaren, Sermons in Manchester, 3rd series, p. 77.<\/p>\n

The Gift of the Spirit.<\/p>\n

I. Some insight is given into the force of the word “glory” as our present privilege, by considering the meaning of the title “kingdom of heaven,” which has also belonged to the Church since Christ came. The Church is called by this name as being the court and domain of Almighty God, who retreated from the earth, as far as His kingly presence was concerned, when man fell. Not that He left Himself without witness in any age; but even in His most gracious manifestations, still He conducted Himself as if in an enemy’s country, “as a stranger in the land, and as a wayfaring man that turneth aside to tarry for a night.” But when Christ had reconciled Himself to His fallen creatures, He returned according to the prophecy “I will dwell in them and walk in them; I will set My sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.” From that time there has really been a heaven upon earth, in fulfilment of Jacob’s vision. Since the Christian Church is a heaven upon earth, it is not surprising that in some sense or other its distinguishing privilege or gift should be glory, for this is the one attribute which we ever attach to our notion of heaven itself, according to the Scripture intimations concerning it. The glory here may be conceived of by considering what we believe of the glory hereafter.<\/p>\n

II. Next, if we consider the variety and dignity of the gifts ministered by the Spirit, we shall perhaps discern in a measure why our state under the gospel is called a state of glory. The Holy Ghost has taken up His abode in the Church in a variety of gifts, as a sevenfold Spirit. The gift is denoted in Scripture by the vague and mysterious term “glory,” and all the descriptions we can give of it can only, and should only, run out into a mystery.<\/p>\n

III. It were well if these views were more understood and received among us. They would, under God’s blessing, put a stop to much of the enthusiasm which prevails on all sides, while they might tend to dispel the cold and ordinary notions of religion which are the opposite extreme. For ourselves, in proportion as we realise the higher view of the subject, which we may humbly trust is the true one, let us be careful to act up to it. Let us adore the sacred presence within us with all fear, and rejoice with trembling. Prayer, praise, and thanksgiving, good works and alms deeds, a bold and true confession and a self-denying walk, are the ritual of worship by which we serve Him in these His temples. As we persevere in them the inward light grows brighter and brighter, and God manifests Himself to us in a way that the world knows not of. In this, then, consists our whole duty, first in contemplating Almighty God, as in heaven, so in our hearts and souls; and next, while we contemplate Him, in acting towards and for Him in the works of every day; in viewing by faith His glory without and within us, and in acknowledging it by our obedience. Thus we shall unite conceptions the most lofty concerning His majesty and bounty towards us, with the most lowly, minute, and unostentatious service to men.<\/p>\n

J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. iii., p. 254.<\/p>\n

I. The Picture. “We all with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord.” The glory of God in Christ, or the excellence and beauty of the Divine nature and purpose as they are revealed in the gospel-that is the picture on which we are invited to gaze. Jesus Christ is the brightness of God’s glory. He honours law and expresses love. His death is the centre of universal harmony. His resurrection is victory over hell and death. His ascension opens immortality and heaven. His Second Coming is the hope, as it will be the joy and triumph, of every loving heart.<\/p>\n

II. The Beholders. We are all beholding. “We,” Christians, that is. The whole context requires this interpretation. There is a sense, no doubt, in which it may be said, that all who have heard of the Lord Jesus Christ, so as to have anything like correct views of His person and character, are beholders of God’s glory in Him. All Christendom, in this sense, stands beholding. Even heathen lands are turning to gaze. Light from the great picture streams over Christendom, penetrates the darkness of heathendom, and men cannot but look towards a vision so bright and beautiful. But it is the doctrine of this, and many other passages in the New Testament, that a new sense is needed, what may be called a new soul-sense, by which to apprehend and appreciate spiritual things.<\/p>\n

III. The Transformation. We are changed into the same image, changed as we gaze. We gaze and become like that which we behold, like Him whom we love. The spiritual apprehension we have, the vivid appreciative faculty within us, transfers to us and fixes upon our souls the beauty we behold. This is a truth acknowledged by philosophy and everywhere recognised in the word of God. By perceiving we become. By knowledge, spiritual, apprehensive knowledge, we grow in grace.<\/p>\n

IV. The author and finisher of this transformation is the blessed Spirit of God-“Even as by the Spirit of the Lord.” He reveals the picture, He clarifies the eye, He vitalises the spiritual law, and He dwells in the soul. He changes and watches the great work from birth to perfection. He takes of the things of Christ and shows them unto us. He leads us out of all our darkness into the realm of gospel light and glory, where we are transfigured as we stand.<\/p>\n

A. Raleigh, Quiet Resting Places, p. 123.<\/p>\n

References: 2Co 3:18.-Good Words, vol. iii., pp. 636, 639; Homilist, 2nd series, vol. iii., p. 217; J. Clifford, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxv., p. 121; G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines of Sermons, p. 392; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. vi., p. 94; E. Paxton Hood, Sermons, p. 356. 2Co 4:1.-T. Arnold, Sermons, vol. iii., p. 242; Ray, Thursday Penny Pulpit, vol. xvi., p. 17. 2Co 4:1-15.-F. W. Robertson, Lectures on Corinthians, p. 301.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Sermon Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

4. The Ministry of the New Covenant in Contrast with the Old.<\/p>\n

CHAPTER 3<\/p>\n

1. The Epistle of Christ. (2Co 3:1-3)<\/p>\n

2. The True Sufficiency. (2Co 3:4-6)<\/p>\n

3. The Old and New Ministry Contrasted. (2Co 3:7-11)<\/p>\n

4. The Glory in the Face of Moses and the Glory in the Face of Christ. (2Co 3:12-18.)<\/p>\n

It was customary in the church to give letters of commendation (Act 18:27; Rom 16:1). Did the Apostle need, as some others, epistles of commendation to the Corinthians, or such letters from them? Probably his enemies, the Judaizing teachers, who upheld the law and its ordinances, demanded such letters. They may have said, he did not come from Jerusalem ; who then is Paul? Why has he not letters of commendation? His answer is, Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men; being made manifest that ye are the epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not on tables of stone, but on fleshly tables of the heart. It is a most beautiful and tender Statement.<\/p>\n

The Corinthians were his letter of commendation, the proof of his blessed ministry, because under his preaching they had been saved and were walking well. After their obedience, he could rightly say so. it would have been impossible for him to make such a statement in the first epistle. Let all men read you as an epistle, and they will know what kind of a man I am. What confidence and love this expresses! It would also lead them to an earnest inquiry if they were really such a letter of commendation. When he speaks of ye are the epistle of Christ he describes the general character of the church and her responsibility. The church is the representative of Christ, or Christs letter of commendation to the world. What a solemn responsibility to recommend in life and walk Christ to the world! Just as God had written once the law on tables of stone exclusively for Israel, so now the Spirit of the living God writes Christ on the hearts of believers, that the world may read Christ in the Church composed of all believers. (Exo 34:1; Joh 13:35; Joh 17:21. The analogy is obvious. Jehovah was the God of Israel , Christ is the Savior of the world. The tables were Jehovahs witness to His people, the Church is Christs living Epistle to the world. Israel heard but turned away; the world saw and read but refused, and yet refuses Him who thus speaks from heaven.<\/p>\n

Lastly, in the former case, the law was made void by the commandments of men; in the latter, the Church, the power of whose testimony consists in her separation from the world, has by mingling with it become the betrayer, rather than the witness of the name by which she is called.) And this is true ministry, witnessing to Christ not alone in the proclamation of the Gospel, but in life and walk. That ye may be blameless and harmless, the children of God, without rebuke in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world (Php 2:15). And such was Pauls confidence through Christ to Godward. He trusted the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ to accomplish this. In himself, he acknowledges, there is no sufficiency for anything, all our sufficiency is of God, who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant, not of letter, but of spirit; for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. The latter statement is often wrongly interpreted. The word letter does not mean the entire written Word of God. Many have taken this view and declare that the Bible must not be taken literally, just as it says. (This is mostly said in connection with Prophecy, the Second Coming of Christ, etc. More than once the word the letter killeth has been used to explain away the literal meaning of things to come.) It is not the question at all between the literal words and meaning of the Scriptures and the spiritual meaning, but it is a contrast between the old covenant and the new covenant, between the law and the gospel. The word letter stands for the law, which in its ministration kills and cannot give life. What the purpose of the law is and what it can do and cannot do is learned from the following passages: Rom 3:20; Rom 5:20; Rom 7:5-11; Rom 8:3; Gal 3:10; Gal 3:19.<\/p>\n

By the law no flesh can be justified; by the law the offence abounded; the law means death to man (Rom 7:10-11). It is weak and has no power to help man, and it curses man. In this sense the letter, the law, killeth. But the spirit giveth life. It means that the spirit of the Gospel is different from the law, for the Holy Spirit operates through the Gospel and quickens the sinner who is dead and under the curse. Here then we have the absolute incompatibility of law and gospel. The epistle to the Galatians makes this fact fully known. The contrast between law and gospel, the old and the new covenant, is introduced in this epistle because the teachers who magnified the law and preached the keeping of the law for righteousness, were also at work in Corinth (chapter 11:22). And the glory of the gospel and its ministry cannot be fully demonstrated except in its relation to the law. The contrast made is fivefold:<\/p>\n

Law<\/p>\n

Gospel<\/p>\n

Letter<\/p>\n

Spirit<\/p>\n

Ministration of death<\/p>\n

Ministration of the Spirit (Life)<\/p>\n

Ministration of condemnation<\/p>\n

Ministration of righteousness.<\/p>\n

Vanishing glory<\/p>\n

Abiding glory<\/p>\n

Veiled glory<\/p>\n

Unveiled glory<\/p>\n

The law ministers death. It was written and engraved and came with glory. This refers us to the second giving of the law. Glory was connected with that, for Moses face shone. Because grace and mercy were mingled with the second giving of the law (Exo 34:1-7), glory was seen upon the face of Moses. They could not look upon that glory, and Moses, the Mediator, had to cover his face with a veil. It was a brightness which dazzled and repelled, but had no power to attract or to bring light, warmth and joy to the hearts of the people. But if glory was connected with the ministration which is death, how shall not the ministration of the Spirit be rather glorious?<\/p>\n

The Gospel is all-glorious and abiding; it is the ministration of righteousness which abounds in glory. The glory on the face of Moses has given way to the glory in another face, even in the face of the Lord, Jesus Christ. The glory on Moses face was but the reflection of His glory who came and dwelt among men. It is now a remaining glory as well as a surpassing glory, the glory that excelleth. And the sinner can behold that glory. Righteousness is now ministered unto us, not worked out by us; and thus, indeed, the glory of God is revealed as nothing else could reveal it. His inmost heart is told out in righteousness, but love is righteousness, and love, how marvelous, as shown in the gift of Christ for men! So that which was made glorious in the time past had, in itself, no glory compared with this surpassing glory (Numerical Bible).<\/p>\n

Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness (literally: boldness and confidence) of speech. With such blessed assurance and knowledge of the ministration of righteousness and the Spirit, the true minister can use great plainness of speech in the proclamation of the Gospel. To make the marvelous truth of Gods gospel as clear as daylight to the human conscience is the first duty of those whom the Lord now sends forth as heralds of His grace. Whatever is recondite or enigmatic is not now of God. Babes receive that which, when digested, makes them men. It could not be thus with Moses, who was indeed the open minister of the law, but the veiled prophet of grace,. The action of Moses in covering his face is here described as something intentional, and in keeping with his office as the minister of that which he knew to be imperfect in character, and therefore not of permanent effect. The lawgiver was a witness also of a better thing than law. To deliver his present message to the people he lifted the veil, which was again replaced when the commandment was uttered. Before God he was unveiled, and looked with open vision on the mystery of Jehovahs ways, but to Israel his covered face was an emblem of the incomplete and unsatisfying nature of the ministry committed to his charge. (A. Pridham)<\/p>\n

But Israel has been blinded. The people who boast in the ministration of the law did not believe, and as a result their minds were blinded (Isa 6:9-10; Mat 13:14; Joh 12:40; Act 28:26; Rom 11:8). They read the Old Testament, but the veil is unremoved; yet the day of grace is coming when the veil shall be taken away, and that will be when they turn to the Lord during the coming time of great tribulation, ending with the glorious coming of Him whom they once rejected (Hos 5:15; Hos 6:1-3).<\/p>\n

And those who believe look upon the unveiled, the unhidden glories of the Lord, and are transformed into the same image from glory to glory. It is through faith. And all is through the blessed life-giving Spirit of Christ, who works in believers as the Epistle of Christ. The power to enjoy Him is the power to reflect Him. The reflection is no effort, but the necessary effect of enjoyment. May we enjoy Christ by being more and more occupied with Him through His Word and then make Him known by walking even as He walked. This is a part of true ministry so much needed.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

begin: 2Co 2:17, 2Co 5:12, 2Co 10:8, 2Co 10:12, 2Co 12:11, 2Co 12:19, 1Co 3:10, 1Co 4:15, 1Co 10:33 <\/p>\n

epistles: Act 18:27, 1Co 16:3 <\/p>\n

Reciprocal: Rom 15:18 – which Rom 16:1 – commend 1Co 9:2 – for 2Co 10:14 – we stretch not 2Co 10:18 – not 2Co 13:3 – which Gal 1:1 – but<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

PAUL HAD JUST spoken of the way in which he preached the Word, but this did not mean that he wished to commend himself to the Corinthians, or that he needed others to commend him. The fact was that they themselves were his letter of commendation, being so evidently, in spite of their sad faults, the fruit of a genuine work of God through him. He speaks of them as an epistle in two ways. First as written in his own heart. In so saying, we believe he wished them to realize how deeply they were engraved, as it were, on his affections. They little realized the intensity of his love in Christ for them. But then they were an epistle of Christ in a more objective sense, and of this verse 2Co 3:3 speaks. <\/p>\n

They were the epistle of Christ in a double sense, inasmuch as that which is written is, in one word, Christ, and also it is Christ Himself who is the great and effective Writer. True, He writes by the hand of His servant, and so we find the words, ministered by us. Paul was only the minister, still he was the minister, and this sufficiently commended him. <\/p>\n

Next we have a double contrast. The thoughts of the Apostle went back to the former ministry of the law through Moses. Then the Divine commandments were engraved on tables of stone, and apparently made the more visible by some kind of ink. Now it is not ink but the Spirit of the living God: not tables of stone but the tables of the heart. That was dead; this was living. The Gospel had indeed been to the Corinthians a savour of life unto life. <\/p>\n

In this verse the work of God in the hearts of the Corinthians is viewed as being equally the fruit of the operation of Christ and of the Spirit of the living God. Christ and the Spirit are very closely linked together thus all through this remarkable passage, as we shall see. <\/p>\n

This work of Christ and of the Spirit had been carried out through Paul. He had been the minister. Every servant of God who preaches the Gospel is in that position. Yet Paul had that place in a very special sense. He had no more sufficiency for it than we have, yet he had very specially been made able or a competent minister of the New Covenant which had found its basis and foundation in the death and resurrection of Christ. The New Covenant, of which Jeremiah prophesied is of course to be formally established in the future with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, but the basis of it has already been laid, and the Gospel preached today is of a new covenant order. The blessings promised in the New Covenant are found in it, as well as blessings that go beyond anything that the New Covenant contemplates. <\/p>\n

Again in verse 2Co 3:6 the living character of the Gospel ministry is emphasized, whereas the law brought in death. We get the expression the letter twice in verse 2Co 3:6, and the same word (in a slightly different form) occurs in verse 2Co 3:7, where it is translated, written. The New Translation renders it, the ministry of death, in letters, graven in stones, which shows that in this passage the term, letter, refers to the law. The law kills. Its ministry is unto death. The Spirit quickens. <\/p>\n

What we have just pointed out is worth notice, for some have sought to deduce from this Scripture that the letter of Scripture kills! Under cover of this idea they feel free to disregard the letter of Scripture in favour of what they are pleased to declare is its spirit. What Scripture says is waved aside in order to introduce what it is supposed to mean. And if other passages be quoted which definitely contradict the alleged meaning, that matters not, for those other passages can be waved aside as also being but the letter which kills. Such people kill the letter because, they say, the letter kills. But it is all a mistake. There is no such idea in this verse. <\/p>\n

We have been pointing out the digressions of this epistle. We now have to note that there is a big parenthesis in the midst of this lengthy digression, covering from verse 2Co 3:7 to verse 2Co 3:16 inclusive. Within this parenthesis the very striking contrast between the ministry of the Law and the New Covenant is developed, and the point is particularly made that the glory connected with the latter far outshines the glory connected with the former. <\/p>\n

First, the law was but a ministry of death: the Gospel is a ministry of the life-giving Spirit. Yet there was a glory connected with the law: a glory so great that the children of Israel could not behold it, nor could they look at the reflection of it as seen in the face of Moses. That glory was to be done away, for presently it faded from the face of Moses, and the time came when the signs of the divine presence left Sinais crest. So our verse states that the law system began with glory, (N. Tr.) not merely that it was glorious. It began, but it did not continue. Now comes the question, How shall not rather the ministry of the Spirit subsist in glory? (N. Tr.). The glory of the law began, but soon it was quenched in the ministry of death to all who came under it. When the ministry of the quickening Spirit comes in, it abides in glory. <\/p>\n

Again the law was a ministry of condemnation, whereas the Gospel is a ministry of righteousness. That demanded righteousness from man, and, because he had none of it, utterly condemned him. This brings righteousness, and ministers it to man by means of faith. Without a question a ministry which confers righteousness, and thus enables sinful man to stand in the presence of God, greatly exceeds in glory a ministry which merely demands righteousness where it is non-existent, and as a result condemns. <\/p>\n

There is a further contrast in verse 2Co 3:11. The law system and its glory is done away or annulled in Christ; whereas the glory introduced by Him abides. There has been introduced by the Lord Jesus that which remains to eternity; and the glory of that is so surpassing that it completely eclipses any glory that once existed in connection with the law, as verse 2Co 3:10 points out. <\/p>\n

This then was the wonderful character of that ministry with which the Apostle was entrusted; and the character of it influenced the manner of its presentation. That which the Gospel ministry presents is not yet brought into full display, but it will be in due season. Hence he speaks here of having a hope, and such a hope. Having it, he was able to confront men with great plainness of speech or boldness, and also with great openness and absence of reserve. There had to be reserve in connection with the law, for men could not stand in the presence of its glory. <\/p>\n

Moses had to put a veil on his face when he had come down from the mount, to hide the glory from the children of Israel. That which has been annulled had an end which they did not see. End signifies not the finish or termination of the law, but the purpose of God in the law; which was Christ, as Rom 10:4 tells us. The law provided man with a very thorny road for his feet, but it led to Christ; just as every other road laid down by God leads to Christ. The glory that shone in the face of Moses was really a faint reflection of Christ. But Israel could not see it. Had they seen it they would have condemned themselves and waited with eager expectancy for the advent of Christ, the Deliverer. <\/p>\n

Alas, their minds were blinded. They used the law as though it were a kind of feather stuck in their cap, to give them a pre-eminent place among the nations; and it is as though the veil that once was upon the face of Moses had been transferred to their minds and hearts. There is of course an election of grace today from amongst Israel, nevertheless it is still true of them as a nation that they read the Old Testament with the veil on their hearts. <\/p>\n

Still a moment is coming when the veil shall be removed. Verse 2Co 3:16 of our chapter is an allusion to Exo 34:33-35. Though Moses veiled his face when he dealt with the people, when he turned to the Lord and had to do with Him he removed the veil from his face. This is a kind of allegory as to what will happen with Israel. When at last they shall turn to the Lord in sincerity and repentance the veil will be lifted from their minds, and the glory of the Christ, whom once they crucified, will burst upon them. <\/p>\n

Verse 2Co 3:16 completes the parenthesis which began at verse 2Co 3:7. With verse 2Co 3:17 we pick up the thread from verse 2Co 3:6, where it was stated that the Spirit quickens. Here we find the Lord and the Spirit identified in a very remarkable way, the Spirit being the Spirit of the Lord, as also He is the Spirit of God. We are so accustomed to distinguishing between the Persons of the Godhead that we may easily fall into the error of separating between them. This we must not do. There is the related truth of the unity of the Godhead, and we must never lose sight of their essential oneness. <\/p>\n

The Lord is the life-giving Spirit of the New Covenant, and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty. Life and liberty go together, just as law and bondage are associated. The divine life is not to be hampered or entangled within legal restraints. There is no need that it should be. Legal restraints are necessary and suitable enough when the flesh or the world are in question. They are not effective, for the flesh and the world break through them and transgress. In another way the law is effective, for it curses and brings death in upon the transgressor. All is changed when once the Spirit has given life. Then liberty can be safely accorded, for the Spirit of the Lord holds sway. <\/p>\n

Verse 2Co 3:18 brings in a third wonderful thing. In addition to life and liberty there is transformation. As we have it in the Authorized Version the words, with open face, are a little vague, and would probably be read as applying to us. It is true of course that we have no veil upon us as Israel has; but the point seems to be that the glory of the Lord, upon which we gaze, has no veil upon it. There is no veil upon the face of our Lord as there was upon the face of Moses. Moreover the glory that shines in Him is not repellent as was the glory in the face of Moses, it is attractive: and not only attractive but transforming also. The more Christ in His glory is before our spiritual vision the more we gain His likeness. <\/p>\n

This transformation is a gradual process, and not reached all at once. We are changed from glory to glory, that is, from one degree of glory to another. It is a Divine work, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. Here again the wording is remarkable. Even as by [the] Lord [the] Spirit. (N. Tr.). The definite article the is omitted both times in the Greek. Our little plumb-line may utterly fail when let down into the depths of this statement; but at least we can see that both the Lord and the Spirit work together in this transformation process; the Lord as an Object before faiths vision, the Spirit as a power within us. <\/p>\n

Oh, that we might be kept steady with the eye on Christ; kept as true to Him as the needle is true to the pole! <\/p>\n

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1. In reference to the declarations in the closing verses of the preceding chapter, Paul implies a denial that they were given in the spirit of boastfulness, of which he evidently had been accused by some persons in Corinth. His work was so well known in that city that he did not even need any commendation from outside sources. As some others refers to men coming to or going from the vicinity of Corinth who were not so well known, and who had to be provided with letters of commendation as credentials.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1. Are we beginning again to commend ourselves? or[1] need we, as do some, epistles of commendation to you or from you? (On these two questions see footnote on chap. 2Co 1:13.) In those times, when means of communication between distant places were both few and slow, such recommendatory letters would be natural, and we have examples of the practice in Act 15:23; Act 18:27; indeed in this very Epistle (2Co 8:18-19), as also in 3Jn 1:5-8. Against the usefulness of such letters in general the apostle here says nothing. But was it come to this, that he needed such to his own children in the faith? The some who did need such letters were doubtless the parties who had come to Corinth as emissaries from the hostile party of Jewish zealots for the law, to poison them against his own person and teaching, and who, in order to make way for themselves, had brought with them letters, probably from the headquarters of his opponents at Jerusalem (see Gal 2:12).<\/p>\n

[1] The Authorised Version has done well in departing here (with Beza) from the received reading (unless it be that we need, etc.). Though the evidence against it is decisive, they were probably less influenced by this than by its evident unsuitableness.<\/p>\n

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Division 2. (2Co 3:1-18.)<\/p>\n

The ministry of the new covenant in contrast with the old.<\/p>\n

The second division now dwells upon the characters of this ministry of Christ, which was, therefore, the ministry of the new covenant, in contrast with all that could be called ministry in connection with the old. Ministry of such sort, as we see it in the apostle, there was not in Israel, -a ministry, that is, which went out to the world with the offer of God’s grace to it. In Israel itself God was shut up. The way into the holiest was not yet made manifest; the light had not yet shone out through a rent veil. As a consequence, there was in one sense no God to proclaim. Law was in this sense enmity, as the apostle has said to the Ephesians. It was something which stood between God and man, a hindrance, as one may say, on both sides. Man could not go in to God. God could not come out, as it was in His heart to come out, to man. One may ask why then this should be, if it was in God’s heart to show Himself? The apostle has answered already, in the Epistle to the Romans, that there had to be a “due time” in which, when man was found still “without strength,” Christ should die “for the ungodly.” The discovery of the need had to precede the ministry to it; and alas, man resists the discovery of this need. It is not sufficient for God even to declare it. Man must make the experiment for himself. He will be satisfied with nothing short of personal experience; and thus God, after the testimony of His grace, -which, in fact, had begun in Abraham, -had to allow the law to come in, in order to exhibit sin in its true character, and the hopelessness of man’s condition apart from grace.<\/p>\n

Thus it was the special priesthood which characterized Israel, a priesthood which was not national, as God had conditionally offered it should be in the wilderness. They were not a “kingdom of priests”; but the nation, put into the distance by their own departure from God and from the terms of their covenant with Him, had need of those who could approach God for them in a way they could not for themselves. Even so, the priests who approached were, after all, of the same nature and character as the people for whom they stood. They were thus an officially typical priesthood, but not the reality of it according to God. They were the shadow, and not the substance. Thus, they themselves could not go into the innermost holy place. They were shut out, as others, by the veil. The one exception of the high-priest’s entrance on one day of the year only, with the blood to put upon the mercy seat, was a mere glimpse, -full of encouragement, doubtless, of that which was to come, -a finger pointing on, as always throughout the law, to that which was beyond the law itself. But thus there was a priesthood, but no ministry; that is, no ministry which now we should call such, a ministry in which the heart of God could come out as He desired. Thus the testimony was shut up in Israel, although indeed, as has often been said, it was placed upon the public highway of the world, so as to be accessible to man if he desired it; but it did not yet show God seeking as He really sought, because as yet it was not plain that they whom He sought were lost ones. For the ungodly and yet without strength, -when that was proved, -Christ in due time died. Now there is a ministry, a way of access to God opened by His own hand, a way out for God in His love to manifest Himself to all His creatures, -a world-wide testimony, therefore. The character of Christian ministry is thus in many respects in complete contrast with anything before it. It is plain also, by what we find here, that this ministry is not merely one of word, -a gospel, however sweet and wonderful, -but it is a testimony in life as well as in speech, as we are to see directly, an “epistle of Christ to be read and known of all men,” written no more like the old, upon the tables of stone, but upon fleshy tables of human hearts. Here then, as is plain, we pass beyond the bounds of any mere official ministry and find one which belongs to the whole Church of God, and which the Church of God as a whole is alone competent. for. Individuals are not the epistles of Christ, but the whole Church of God is that which forms the epistle. We may each have our part in this testimony; but the testimony of the whole is the only sufficient one; so far, at least, as man’s failure allows us to speak of sufficiency anywhere.<\/p>\n

1. The doctrine is introduced incidentally, as so commonly in the epistles, with the most important truths. He appeals to them amid all this questioning which has been going on amongst them, -Did they really need epistles of commendation to them, or did he need epistles of commendation from them to others? As to this latter, they were his letter of commendation, (a beautiful and tender appeal to them, this,) “an epistle written,” he says, “in our hearts, known and read of all men.” It would touch them indeed to ask themselves, with all the love in which he had come amongst them, how far they were truly a letter commendatory of him. But he goes on to speak of what was not local, but the general character of the Church of Christ, and that they were the epistle of Christ in contrast with the legal message to men, written on tables of stone; a letter of commendation of Christ Himself, written by the Spirit of the living God. We see, I doubt not, in the end of the chapter, how this letter has been written; but it is plainly the responsibility which the whole Church has as representing Christ in the world. By their confession of Him they were identified with Him, and would give Him character in the eyes of men around them. How solemn a position is this! We cannot, as Christians, escape from the place of testimony. The only question will be, is the testimony for or against? Could it be possible that they would permit the confession of One to whom they owed their all to be to His discredit instead of to His praise? But he is not looking at this side of things now. He speaks of that which was essentially true with them as those in whom the Spirit of God had wrought. He is speaking encouragingly, not to blame; and, as a fact, this testimony could not be a local one merely. As we have said, he does not speak of individuals being epistles of Christ. No individuals could be sufficient for this. The brightest saint would have very much lacking in him. The records that we have of the saints of old have all, we may say, exhibited some conspicuous defect, while yet the general character of a saint might be evident. Here the testimony of one supplements the testimony of another; and thus, through that of the whole, Christ is borne witness to in a way in measure competent.<\/p>\n

It is plain that this witness must be a true ministry. The formal preaching of the Word, while it has its necessary place, and even the prominent place, -yet, after all, unless in connection with its effects in the life, would come sadly short. This thought of ministry we shall find accompanies us through some chapters following. Those who hold forth the Word of life, as the apostle has told us in Philippians, must be “the sons of God, blameless and harmless, without rebuke, and in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation shining as lights in the world” (Php 2:15-16). Such lights he is indeed thinking of here, those who reflect the light from a heavenly source, from One who shines there brighter than the sun.<\/p>\n

But thus, God was no more addressing men with a message carved upon inanimate tables, but by living messengers, His own wonderful workmanship. Such confidence with regard to them the apostle had through Christ. He knew that, alas, the flesh was in believers, and even prominent in them, and that his confidence as to them must be confidence through the Lord. But this is, therefore, an unfailing ground of confidence, and of this, -satisfied that they were after all truly the divine workmanship, -he could speak as he does here. It was not to make much of himself, of his competency in the ministry which God had given him. All competency was derived from God Himself, who in fact works in all this for the glory of Christ, and will not suffer Christ to be without His testimony amongst men. Thus had he with others been made the competent ministers of a new covenant, a covenant not of letter, as the old covenant of the law, but a covenant which was of spirit. In fact, the new covenant is, as we know, entirely the declaration of God’s “I will”s: not a demand upon man, but an assurance of that which He works for and in men. It is of grace, therefore, necessarily. The covenant of law, the letter, killed; but the power of the Spirit which effected that of which the new covenant speaks, gives life.<\/p>\n

We are carefully to observe that he is speaking here not of the letter of Scripture, as some would have it, but of the letter of the old covenant, which was the law. It is not true that the letter of Scripture kills. Even the letter of law, apart from its covenant character, is not against us, clearly, but the safe lesson of an old schoolmaster under whom indeed we may not be, but whose lessons still do us good. But the covenant of law kills, and only that. If law is to be the condition under which we live, we shall soon find that it is a ministration of death and not of life.<\/p>\n

2. Now then comes the contrast, briefly yet fully told out, -the law with the ministration of death indeed. We have seen in Romans how really it had that character. When the commandment came to the apostle, when he realized the power of it, sin revived, he says, and he died. Death also was the public sentence written upon man at large, of which the law availed itself in order to work conviction in the souls of those to whom it was addressed. The death of which it spoke was just what we ordinarily call such. Upon every child of man it stamped the character of a convicted criminal, one sentenced as such to be removed from the sphere into which creation had brought him, and no one, however comparatively well he might appear in contrast with those around him, could escape this sentence. “Death has passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” Grace indeed has brought in a greater blessing, but it leaves this testimony unaffected. It is a blessing of grace, not a reward of works. We are debtors simply to the compassion of God, and in order to realize the blessing we have to accept in that sense the sentence of death in ourselves. Then indeed the glory of the new covenant appears to us, and God’s wonderful and sweet “I will”s are the joy and satisfaction of the soul.<\/p>\n

Yet this ministration of death, which was therefore a true ministration, a thing meant of God in its results to be mercy to man, whatever the gravity of the sentence which it carried, yet this ministration of death written and engraven on stones came in with glory. It is plain that he is not speaking of the first giving of the law at all, but of the second, for he immediately refers this glory to that which was upon the face of Moses when he came down from the Mount after he had been there the second time, a glory which they could not look upon, though it were merely the reflection of the divine. Thus he had to cover himself with a veil when he stood amongst the people; and that characterized all the glory of the law, which was essentially a veiled glory. The second giving of the law had, in fact, unveiled in a certain sense the glory of God as the first had not. It was not the divine Face indeed revealed, but, as He says to Moses, the glory of the “back parts.” His face could not be seen. A solemn word, this therefore, for those who are the disciples of Moses, the assurance that according to law God could, even when He was showing real mercy, have His face turned away, and in mere pity His hack turned upon men! They were not competent to see Him face to face. No man could see Him and live. No one could stand before Him upon those terms, try it as often as they might.<\/p>\n

This opportunity of protracted trial was what the second giving of the law provided for. It was that which made the law, as it were, a pool of Bethesda, a pool into which man might get, just as if he were not “impotent.” For an impotent man, it had no help. God, therefore, says to the wicked, that if he turn from his wickedness which he hath committed and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive; but nevertheless, He is One who can by no means clear the guilty, when the final account is to be made. Thus He can give another opportunity, He can forgive iniquity, transgression and sin in the meantime; but at last one must be able to show a righteousness such as He requires, and this we cannot. Thus the opportunity so given only shows the more convincingly the desperate condition of man. It is just this gracious revelation of God manifesting all the grace of which law was capable, before which the people cannot stand, and which is a ministration of death, a writing of hopeless condemnation upon all.<\/p>\n

This glory must, therefore, pass away. The glory on the face of Moses must give way to the glory in another Face, and the ministration of death to the ministration of the Spirit, who reveals Christ. Here the glory remains, for it is glory which the sinner, hopeless in himself; may see with gladness and satisfaction. There is gospel in it, as we shall learn directly, the gospel of the glory of Christ. So then the ministration of condemnation yet had glory, but how then does the ministration of righteousness abound in glory! Claim of righteousness the law made, but the ministration of righteousness was impossible by it. Righteousness is now ministered to us, not worked out by us, and thus indeed the glory of God is revealed as nothing else could reveal it. His inmost heart is told out in righteousness, but love in righteousness, and love how marvelous as shown in the gift of Christ for men! So that which was made glorious in the time past had in itself no glory compared with this surpassing glory. It would be sufficient to show this to realize that the one i the glory of that which is passed away, while the other glory remains and shall remain.<\/p>\n

3. The ministers, then, of this new covenant can use great boldness; boldness indeed to pronounce the justification of the ungodly and to make sinners in Christ the righteousness of God! This is the boldness which grace has given us, and now there is to be nothing hidden, but the plainest speech and the fullest display of that which, while it glorifies God, is the complete blessing of man. In the dispensation of law, the children of Israel could not fix their eyes on the end of that which is now annulled. They could not see, alas, as disciples of law and going no further, the end of the law itself. The sweet grace of God, which indeed underlies everywhere its types and parables, was to them incapable of being realized. Their thoughts were darkened, and so, says the apostle, at this very day they are darkened. That veil remains unremoved from Moses, face, while yet in Christ it is done away. God has on His part done with it. They on their part have chosen it. It lies upon their heart, a heart which, taken up with its own self-righteousness, is turned away from the Lord. They must turn to the Lord to have the veil removed. This too shall be, in a time to which yet we look forward. The apostle now goes on to say that this Spirit, who in the new covenant works out God’s blessed will in men, is in fact the Lord. It is the energy of the Second Man, who, as the apostle says, “is a quickening Spirit.” The Lord and the Spirit of the Lord are in this sense identified as the apostle identifies them here. “The Lord,” he says, “is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty.” Freedom has come in place of bondage, the joy of sonship instead of the old slavery. There is liberty of access to God so manifested, and it is in the revelation of His unveiled face that now we find the power which works in us, which makes us, in fact, that epistle of Christ of which the apostle has been so lately speaking. Here are the fingers of light that write God’s new testimony upon souls. Looking now upon the glory of the Lord, a glory now unveiled, not hidden, we are transformed into the same image from glory to glory. How clear is the power of faith in this, how blessed the simplicity of it! We have only, as it were, to sit in the sun, to be bathed in its brightness. The power to enjoy Him is the power to reflect Him. The reflection is no effort, but the necessary effect of the enjoyment. While this goes on from one degree of glory to another, the least measure of it is glory, and, as more and more we know of Christ, glory super-added to glory. This is what is “by the Lord the Spirit.” It is the life-giving Spirit of Christ, working in His energy in the souls of men, not only for individual blessing, but for that display also in the world of sinners which is true gospel witness.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Our apostle here expostulates the case with the Corinthians, why they should at any time hearken to the false apostles, who, by relecting upon his person and ministry, made it needful for him to vindicate both from contempt and scorn. <\/p>\n

As if he had said, “What! do I need to begin again in this second epistle, as I did in the first, to commend myself, and the effects of my ministry, among you? Or need I commendatory letters either to you or from you, as the false teachers amongst you have?<\/p>\n

No, verily, you yourselves, by your conversion to Christianity, and embracing the faith of the gospel, are a better attestation and testimonial to the world, of the success of my ministry, than any written epistle is or can be: for you are an epsitle written in my heart; that is, your conversion by my ministry is the joy and rejoicing of my heart; there it is that I continually carry a thankful and honourable remembrance of you, and bear you upon my heart, whenever I go in and out before the Lord.<\/p>\n

And as my epistle, you are known and read of all men; that is, all Christians, far and near, take notice of you as a church which God has eminently blessed my ministry to the conversion and edification of.”<\/p>\n

But lest the apostle should seem too assuming in calling the Corinthians his epistle, in the next words he calls them the epistle of Christ, 2Co 3:3, Ye are the epistle of Christ, ministered by us, that is, your faith and conversion was the work of Christ’s Spirit, though wrought by my ministry; he having wrote his law in your hearts after a more excellent manner than any thing that can be written with ink and paper; not as the ten commandments of old were written, in tables of stone, but in the fleshly tables of the heart; that is, in your hearts made soft and pliable and ready to obey the word and will of God, by the operation of the Holy Spirit, using my ministry as the pen or instrument in his hand in order thereunto.<\/p>\n

Learn hence, 1. That it is a very great favour from God when his ministers can see the success of their labours in the hearts and lives of any of their people; when they can say, Ye are our epistle.<\/p>\n

Learn, 2. That nothing doth so highly commend our ministry as our people’s proficiency: their improvement in knowledge, their stedfastness in the faith, their growth in grace and holiness, is beyond all verbal commendations and acknowledgments whatsoever. Sermons fetch not applause from men’s renown; the people’s practice is the preacher’s crown.<\/p>\n

Learn, 3. That whatever success the faithful ministers of Christ meet with either in the work of conversion or edification, among a people, they attribute the whole efficiency of it unto God, ascribing nothing more than a bare instrumentality to themselves: Ye are the epistle of Christ, says the apostle, ministered by us; Christ has written his law in your hearts by my ministry: as if he had said, “Christ is the writer, the pen is the minister, the ink the Spirit, the paper, or table that receives the impression, is the heart, and the law of God, the writing writ therein and thereupon.”<\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Paul’s Letter of Recommendation<\/p>\n

<\/strong> It seems Paul was criticized for using personal examples in his first epistle. The apostle makes it clear that he needs neither boasting nor letters of commendation as the Lord’s apostle. In fact, he said they were his letter. Their conversion was deeply etched in his heart and was on display in Corinth, a center of world trade. Christ was the author, Paul his secretary, the heart the place of record, and the Holy Spirit the means of leaving a lasting impression ( 2Co 3:1-3 ).<\/p>\n

Assured by Christ, Paul confidently counted them as his letter of recommendation. Of course, the work he did in Corinth was through God’s power. God made Paul a messenger, not of a legal age, but of a spiritual age. This new law gives life in place of condemnation ( 2Co 3:4-6 ).<\/p>\n

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1-2. Do we begin again While we thus speak and avow our integrity; to commend Or recommend; ourselves As some insinuate we do? Is it needful to do so? have we nothing but our own word to recommend us? St. Paul chiefly here intends himself, though not excluding Timothy, Titus, and Silvanus: or need we, as some others Namely, the factious and false teachers, referred to 2Co 11:22-23; epistles of commendation Recommendatory letters; to you From other churches; or recommendatory letters from you To others? As if he had said, Do I indeed want such recommendation? Nay, ye are our epistle Our recommendatory letter, more convincing than any bare words could be, as being a testimonial from God himself. He means that the change which had been produced in their hearts and lives, in their dispositions, words, and actions, by his ministry, and that of his fellow-labourers, a change which could not have been effected except by the power of God, was a demonstration that God had sent them, and was present with them, giving efficacy to the word of his grace, a letter written in our hearts Deeply engraven there, so that we never can forget it; known and read of all men Who knew what immoral persons you once were, and observe what you are now. By speaking as the apostle does in this and the preceding verse, he intimates that his apostleship did not depend on the testimony of men, and that he could go to no church where he was not known to be an apostle of Christ, and to have been instrumental in converting many to the faith, and making them new creatures in Christ.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

[The closing verse of chapter two are capable of being construed as an outburst of self-laudation, and as the apostle well knew that his enemies at Corinth accused him of this very vice, and hence would make the most of words susceptible of misconstruction, he anticipates their move by discussing not only his words, but the whole subject of this (apparent) self-glorying.] Are we beginning again [for places where he might be construed as having done so before, see 1Co 2:6; 1Co 4:3; 1Co 4:4; 1Co 4:14-16; 1Co 7:7; 1Co 9:1-6; 1Co 9:15; 1Co 9:19; 1Co 9:26-27; 1Co 14:18; 1Co 16:10] to commend ourselves? or need we, as do some, epistles of commendation to you or from you? [These questions are cuttingly ironical. Evidently his opponents at Corinth had come thither with letters of commendation, either from brethren of repute, or from churches, and had drawn disparaging contrasts between their own formal, official, letter-proved standing in the church, and what they were pleased to describe as Paul’s self-asserted, self-manufactured, boast-sustained standing. The apostle therefore turns the edge of their own weapon against them, and shows how ridiculous their claims to reverence and respect were in comparison with his own. Such powerless creatures needed letters of commendation–it was all they had to commend them! Without letters they would be utter nobodies. But the letter which was the top of their honor did not rise to the level of the bottom of the apostle’s honor. For himself how ridiculous such letters would be! Could he bring a letter to them? it would be like a father seeking introduction and commendation to his own children. Could he ask a letter from them? why, all the knowledge, grace, etc., which made them capable of commending had come from him, their founder, so that their commendation would, after all, be only another form of self-commendation. Could they think that he overpraised himself to them, hoping thus to cozen them into giving him exaggerated, undeserved commendation to others ? Very early the churches learned to grant letters of commendation. See Rom 16:1; Act 18:27; Act 15:25; Col 4:10; Tit 3:13; but such commendation was always fallible, and liable therefore to abuse– Gal 1:7; Gal 2:12] <\/p>\n

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2 Corinthians Chapter 3<\/p>\n

These words give rise to an exposition of the gospel in contrast with the law, which the false teachers mixed up with the gospel. He gives this exposition with the most touching appeal to the heart of the Corinthians, who had been converted through his means. Did he begin speaking of his ministry to commend himself anew, or did he need, as others, letters of commendation to them or from them? They were his letters of commendation, the striking proof of the power of his ministry, a proof which he carried always in his heart, ready to bring it forward on every occasion. He can say this now, being happy in their obedience. And why did they serve as a letter in his favour? Because in their faith they were the living expression of his doctrine. They were Christs letter of commendation, which, by means of his ministry, had been written on the fleshy tables of the heart by the power of the Holy Ghost, as the law had been graven on tables of stone by God Himself. <\/p>\n

This was Pauls confidence with regard to his ministry; his competency came from God for the ministry of the new covenant, not of the letter (not even the letter of this covenant, any more than the letter of anything else) but of the Spirit, the true force of the purpose of God, as the Spirit gave it. For the letter kills, as a rule imposed on man; the Spirit quickens, as the power of God in grace-the purpose of God communicated to the heart of man by the power of God, who imparted it to him that he might enjoy it. Now the subject of this ministry brought out the difference between it and the ministry of the law yet more strongly. The law, graven on stones, had been introduced with glory, although it was a thing that was to pass away as a means of relation between God and men. It was a ministry of death, for they were only to live by keeping it. Nor could it be otherwise ordered than on this principle. A law was to be kept; but man being already a sinner by nature and by will, having desires which the law forbade, that law could only be death to him-it was a ministry of death. It was a ministry of condemnation because the authority of God came in to give to the law the sanction of condemnation against every soul that should break it. It was a ministry of death and of condemnation because man was a sinner. <\/p>\n

And observe, here, that to mingle grace with the law changes nothing in its effect, except to aggravate the penalty that results from it by aggravating the guilt of him who violated the law, inasmuch as he violated it in spite of the goodness and the grace. For it was still the law, and man was called to satisfy the responsibility under which the law placed him. The soul that sinneth, said Jehovah to Moses, will I blot out of my book. The figure used by the apostle shews that he is speaking of the second descent of Moses from Mount Sinai, when he had heard the name of Jehovah proclaimed, merciful and gracious. The face of Moses did not shine the first time that he came down: he broke the tables before he went into the camp. The second time God made all His goodness pass before him, and the face of Moses reflected the glory which he had seen, partial as it may have been. But Israel could not bear this reflection; for how can it be borne, when it must judge the secrets of the heart after all? For, though grace had been shewn in sparing on Moses intercession, the exigency of the law was still maintained, and every one was to suffer the consequences of his own disobedience. Thus the character of the law prevented Israel from understanding even the glory which was in the ordinances, as a figure of that which was better and permanent; and the whole system ordained by the hand of Moses was veiled to their eyes, and the people fell under the letter, even in that part of the law which was a testimony of things to be spoken afterwards. It was according to the wisdom of God that it should be so; for in this way all the effect of the law, as brought to bear on the heart and conscience of man, has been fully developed. <\/p>\n

There are many Christians who make a law of Christ Himself, and in thinking of His love as a fresh motive to oblige them to love Him, think of it only as an obligation, a very great increase to the measure of the obligation which lies upon them, an obligation which they feel bound to satisfy. That is to say, they are still under the law, and consequently under condemnation. <\/p>\n

But the ministry which the apostle fulfilled was not this; it was the ministry of righteousness and of the Spirit, not as requiring righteousness in order to stand before God, but as revealing it. Christ was this righteousness, made such on Gods part for us; and we are made the righteousness of God in Him. The gospel proclaimed righteousness on Gods part, instead of requiring it from man according to the law. Now the Holy Ghost could be the seal of that righteousness. He could come down upon the man Christ, because He was perfectly approved of God; He was righteous-the righteous One. He came down upon us, because we are made the righteousness of God in Christ. Thus it was the ministry of the Spirit; His power wrought in it. He was bestowed when that which it announced was received by faith; and with the Spirit they also received understanding of the mind and purposes of God, as they were revealed in the Person of a glorified Christ, in whom the righteousness of God was revealed and subsisted eternally before Him. <\/p>\n

Thus the apostle unites, in the self-same thought, the mind of God in the word according to the Spirit, the glory of Christ who had been hidden in it under the letter, and the Holy Ghost Himself, who gave its force, revealed that glory, and, by dwelling and working in the believer, enables him to enjoy it. Thus, where the Spirit was, there was liberty; they were no longer under the yoke of the law, of the fear of death, and of condemnation. They were in Christ before God, in peace before Him, according to perfect love and that favour which is better than life, even as it shone upon Christ, without a veil, according to the grace which reigns by righteousness. When it is said, Now the Lord is that spirit, allusion is made to2 Corinthians 3:6; 2Co 3:7-16 is a parenthesis. Christ glorified is the true thought of the Spirit which God had previously hidden under figures. And here is the practical result: they beheld the Lord with open (that is, with unveiled) face; they were able to do it. The glory of the face of Moses judged the thoughts and intents of the hearts, causing terror by threatening the disobedient and the sinner with death and condemnation. Who could stand in the presence of God? But the glory of the face of Jesus, a man on high, is the proof that all the sins of those who behold it are blotted out; for He who is there bore them all before He ascended, and He needed to put them all away in order to enter into that glory. We contemplate that glory by the Spirit, who has been given us in virtue of Christs having ascended into it. He did not say, I will go up; peradventure I shall make atonement. He made the atonement and went up. Therefore we gaze upon it with joy, we love to behold it: each ray that we see is the proof that in the eyes of God our sins are no more. Christ has been made sin for us; He is in the glory. Now, in thus beholding the glory with affection, with intelligence, taking delight in it, we are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the power of the Holy Ghost, who enables us to realise and to enjoy these things; and in this is Christian progress. Thus the assembly too becomes the epistle of Christ. <\/p>\n

The allusion made at the same time to the Jews at the end of the parenthesis, where the apostle makes a comparison between the two systems, is most touching. The veil, he says, is taken away in Christ. Nothing is now veiled. The glorious substance is accomplished. The veil is on the heart of the Jews, when they read the Old Testament. Now every time that Moses entered into the tabernacle to speak to God, or to hear Him, he took off his veil. Thus, says the apostle, when Israel shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. <\/p>\n

There is but one more remark to be made. The things that remain [2] are the subject the gospel treats of, not the ministry which announces it-the glory of the Person of Jesus Christ, the substance of that which the Jewish ordinances represented only in figure. <\/p>\n

The apostle returns to the subject of his ministry in connection with his sufferings, shewing that this doctrine of a Christ victorious over death, truly received into the heart, makes us victorious over all fear of death, and over all the sufferings that are linked with the earthen vessel in which this treasure is carried. <\/p>\n

Footnotes for 2 Corinthians Chapter 3<\/p>\n

2: See 2Co 3:11. <\/p>\n

Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

ALL CHRISTIANS ARE GODS LETTERS<\/p>\n

1-3. This wicked world will never read the Bible. When they read it, they never can understand it, unless they become penitent and pray till the Holy Spirit opens their understanding and reveals it to them. Hence none of the books constituting the Bible are addressed to sinners. Jesus says: Ye are the light of the world. Here Paul tells us that we are letters written, not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God. Hence the silly folly of those heretics who deny the contact of the Holy Spirit with the human spirit. Pursuant to this illustration they would have to write a letter with ink and never permit it to come in contact with the paper, as the contact of Spirit with spirit is as real as that of the paper and ink when you write the letter. Paul recognizes the fact that they also had a copy of their converts in their hearts. These letters are the hope of the world, as the wicked will read us, though they will not read the Bible. What a grand conception! Every saint is the letter of Christ for all the world to read. O, how Satan has strewn the world with counterfeit letters, which the people read and believe and go down to Hell by millions.<\/p>\n

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1-3. Do we begin again to commend ourselves? A happy mode of recovery, as though he had slidden unawares into self-applause, when contrasting his ministry with that of false teachers. Or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you? Ye are our epistles, living epistles, written in our hearts, and carried in our bosoms wherever we may go. Your wisdom and piety, and all your moral glory as a people, record our fame. We are bold to say that the church at Corinth, manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ, publishes our praise, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, as is the manner of men, but in fleshly tables of the heart. The Swedes published about a century ago, a large folio book full of wood-cuts, copied from stones which record the actions of their princes, and the virtues of private persons. Some of those actions have been engraved on rocks and contour cliffs, to instruct posterity.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:5. Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves. These words are laconic; more is understood than said. , to reason out, to collect such a system as the glorious gospel of the blessed God. We are not able to illuminate and convert the multitudes who have renounced idolatry, and turned to the Lord, both in Asia and in Greece. Our sufficiency is of God.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:6. Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament. The Greek is, new covenant, as in Jeremiah 31., which is the proper word, for the covenant regards all nations, as in Isa 42:6; Isa 49:8. A testament, on the contrary, chiefly regards an individual. The grace conferred on Paul makes him bold. He says more than either Moses or the prophets could say, yet his ministry says more than his words. As the glory of the gospel surpasses the glory of the law, so the ministry of the new covenant, in every view, surpasses that of the old.<\/p>\n

Not of the letter, the moral law, but of the spirit, that is, the gospel in all its quickening and reviving influences. For the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. Yet when the gospel is called spirit and life, it is understood also of the Holy Spirits giving power and energy to the gospel, convincing the world of sin, and making the word quick and powerful, like a two- edged sword. It is preached with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. We must be careful not to concede too much to that philosophy ever hostile to revelation.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:7-8. If the ministration of death was glorious; the sublime and terrific grandeur of God on Sinai at the promulgation of the law. This law discovers the moral glory of God, is unchangeable as the divine nature, and requires pure and perfect love to God. It also discovers the concupiscence of the heart, as in a sunbeam; it pronounces the awful sentence without respect of persons, The soul that sinneth, it shall die. But the same glory in Christ, the mediator of the new covenant, founded on better promises than those of corn and wine, on ascending the throne of the mercy-seat, displays the healing beams of grace. It is his prerogative to confer pardon, adoption, righteousness, and eternal glory, the crown that fadeth not away.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:10. That which was made glorious had no glory, compared with the new covenant, because the law of righteousness and life superseded the law of sin and death. All the glory of the gospel, clothed with everlasting righteousness, remains in the fullest splendour. The moon of the tabernacle wanes, while the sun of the true tabernacle shines with everlasting light.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:12-13. Seeing then we have such hope, that the gospel shall abide for ever, we use great plainness of speech. We are the more bold and confident in preaching the gospel of Christ; and not as Moses, who put a veil over his face. The Greek is, over his own face. By this veil Moses intimated that the children of Israel should not confine their regards to a law which was ultimately to be abolished, but should look through the shadows to the end of the law. To this day that veil is on their hearts when Moses and the prophets are read. They do not, as the learned Pascal remarks, see the old testament full of Christ.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:16. When it (their heart) shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away from it. When the time shall come, says Erasmus, that they shall rise above the contumacy of their mind, and embrace the catholic faith, and turn to the Lord, then the veil shall be taken away, and they shall contemplate those divine truths which can be seen only with the luminous eyes of faith. The law of Moses related to gross and carnal ministrations, which may be seen with corporeal eyes. But the law of Christ is spirit, not teaching such shadowy things, but the invisible things of God, which are seen by faith. The law of Moses imposed obedience through fear of punishment; the gospel opens the glorious liberty of the children of God. <\/p>\n

2Co 3:17. Now the Lord is that Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. The glorious liberty to call God Father, to call Jesus Lord, and pray and preach with the Holy Ghost. By consequence, the nearer a believer lives to God, the more he will enjoy of his Spirit, and the bolder he will be in prayer and speaking in his name. If he have lost that Spirit, his words will want the living power which is known and felt by the people; or if the Lord should favour him with some portions of it in the sanctuary, it is for the sake of the people. The glory will depart from him, and leave him to all the groveling habits which daily reign in his heart. David, as is allowed by the jews, when he fell from grace in the affair of Bathsheba, lost the spirit of psalmody, and of prophesying. Therefore in his penitentiary psalm he prays thus: Restore to me the joy of thy salvation, and uphold, or establish, me with thy free Spirit, the Spirit of glory and liberty in the worship of the sanctuary: then will I teach transgressors thy ways, and sinners shall be converted unto thee. Psa 51:12-13.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:18. But we all with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image. 1Co 13:12. Christ is that mirror; in him we see all the perfections of the deity revealed. This glory is spiritual, and is effectuated in the heart by the Spirit of the Lord. The more we see his glory, the more we are changed into his image, till we all come in the unity of the faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man. Believers having once seen the glory of Christ, can find no substitute on earth. That sentiment is supreme in every faithful heart: I shall be satisfied when I awake with thy likeness. Psa 17:15.<\/p>\n

REFLECTIONS.<\/p>\n

In coming a second time to this happy sphere of labour, the apostle says he did not need letters of recommendation. He had now multitudes in Asia, and countless numbers in Greece, who in every city would crowd the road to meet him, with looks and greetings all divine; and the man who received him must for awhile keep open house. And who could divide a family of love? Oh happy fruits of the gospel of Christ. The faith, the love, the piety, and hallowed joy of the father were written on the hearts of his spiritual children. The glory and unction of St. Pauls ministry might be read of all men in the looks of a hundred converts. The glory of the gospel infinitely surpasses the glory of the law. This is illustrated by the most conclusive contrasts. The law by a discovery of sin, and by an absolute sentence, was the ministration of death. But the gospel, illustrating the shadows of the law, brought life and righteousness to the penitent: it wrote the law on the heart, and manifested a glory that shall never fade away. It opened the light of Gods countenance, and all the heaven of redeeming love. How lamentable then is the case of the jews who could read the old testament, which is full of the Messiah, and yet overlook the glory of the Lord Jesus, and the power of his resurrection.<\/p>\n

The blindness and prejudice of the human heart can only be removed by the grace of God, giving a teachable temper; and when they turn to the Lord the veil shall be removed. Thus Moses, shining with the divine glory, veiled his face when he addressed the elders: but on turning to speak to the Lord, he took away the veil. Happy figure of the removal of the veil which covered the law, by the superior glory of grace. Happy transition from the bondage of the legal shadows to the glorious liberty of Zion, whose children have received the spirit of adoption, crying, Abba, Father.<\/p>\n

The glimpse of glory which Moses saw, then a singular favour, is now open to every believing soul in regard of sanctification. The gospel is the speculum or glass, setting forth the glory of Christ. When we contemplate his lustre, the whole soul becomes irradiated with the light of life; when we behold his love, the heart presently burns with celestial fire; and as it is the property of fire to convert every substance into its own element, so we are changed into the same image, by the renovating power of the Holy Ghost. Thus Stephen before the council had a countenance irradiated with the glory of Christ, for heaven at that moment opened to his view with brighter and still brighter beauty. But whence proceeds this astonishing power of faith, or of beholding the glory of the Lord. It is because he has been pleased to make faith the grand condition of justifying and of sanctifying grace; and because it is consonant to the moral nature of things. If I look at the glory of this world, and covet its vanities, I become base by leaving God, and choosing corruption. But when looking simply and constantly at his glory, I become elevated in faith, ennobled in sentiment, and sanctified in habit. Thus faith purifies the heart, and inexplicably transforms the soul into the image of God. What then must be the change induced on glorified spirits, when they shall see him as he is. <\/p>\n

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

2Co 3:1 to 2Co 4:10. The Splendour of the Apostolic Ministry in Spite of its Outward Lowliness.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-6. One of the charges laid against Paul had probably been that of overweening self-esteem, leading to a claim to greater authority than rightfully belonged to him. One of the means used by his enemies had been letters of introduction from high authorities, possibly apostles in Jerusalem. Was he not now displaying only too clearly the reasonableness of such a charge? Did he really need to justify himself, as by such letters others had done? Far from it. The church at Corinth was his sufficient testimonial. Its religious experience, recorded in the hearts of the converts there, was in fact Christs own letter of commendation for Paul, the only one he required. His confidence, great as it is, is justified, for it lays hold on God through Christ as a channel. And even his confidence does not imply a claim to draw any conclusion, to form any judgment, on his own responsibility. His qualifications come wholly from God. It is He who has qualified him to be a minister of a new covenant. And the supreme distinction of this new covenant is that, being based not on written legislation but on the Spirit, it avoids the deadly consequences of the old covenant (Rom 7:11), and substitutes for them the life which the Spirit alone can create (Gal 3:21).<\/p>\n

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Did the Corinthians assume that Paul was merely commending himself or defending himself in penning the last verse of chapter 2? It was not so; but necessity demanded that they should recognize that he was giving them the pure, plain truth of God, not a mere human interpretation of it. He required no letter of commendation to them; for they knew him, and were themselves the commendation of his work. For this latter reason too he needed no letter from them: their own established assembly was the fruit of his own labour, therefore “our epistle, known and read of all men.” They themselves were his own evident message to all men.<\/p>\n

Verse 3 goes further, and no doubt its force includes, not only the Corinthians, but the entire body of Christ, the Church of God; for it is “the epistle of Christ,” not simply of Paul and of his fellow-servants. Every member of the body of Christ is necessary in order that the message of Christ might be properly represented before the world. It is not each believer individually who is a letter, but all collectively form the one letter of Christ to the world.<\/p>\n

This is ministered by the apostles, for they have communicated the truth by which the Church is established, and by which she is enabled to represent Christ before the world. But this letter is written, not with ink, not as a formal declaration, but by the Spirit of the Living God; therefore in the power of living reality. And in contrast to the ten commandments written in tables of stone, this is written in fleshy tables of the heart. For the law was as hard and cold and impersonal as the stones upon which it was written. The Spirit of God writes upon that which is both living and yielding, impressing and affecting the heart, which responds thankfully, affectionately, spontaneously. Certainly therefore it was proper that these servants should have such trust toward God as would enable them to prove faithful in the trust given them of ministering the new covenant in unadulterated purity.<\/p>\n

God had not chosen the apostles on account of their own competency in matters so great and marvellous, for this was infinitely beyond mere human competency in any case. But when He chooses a vessel, He supplies the ability for carrying out the work with which He entrusts that vessel. It was God Himself who had made them competent as ministers of this new covenant, and Paul would not in any way separate the competency from its source: if so the competency is immediately lost.<\/p>\n

“Not of the letter, but of the Spirit; for the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life.” He is plainly speaking here of the cold, rigid letter of the law, the old covenant, in contrast to the living power of the Spirit of God in the new covenant. This in no way belittles the exactitude of every word of Scripture, as given in the original languages; for it is the Spirit of God who has inspired every “jot and title:” indeed, Paul communicated “words” “which the Holy Ghost teacheth,” not merely thoughts (1Co 2:13). But the new covenant is not on the principle of peremptory legal requirement, “the letter” therefore that demands obedience; but on the principle of that living grace that supplies the Spirit of God as the power for devoted and willing obedience. The letter of the law only sentences man rightly to death. But the Spirit gives life, so infinite a contrast.<\/p>\n

Therefore, the legal covenant is called “the ministration of death.” It was perfectly righteous and holy, engraven in stones, so that it began with glory (see New Translation), a glory reflected in the face of Moses, the skin of his face so shining that the children of Israel could not endure looking at him (Exo 34:29). Yet this glory was only temporary, a glory only reflected in the face of Moses, not by any means intrinsic.<\/p>\n

But the ministration of the Spirit is itself glory, the manifestation of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. This is intrinsic glory, that which reveals the preciousness of all that is within Him, the very nature of the eternal God. Therefore it is a glory altogether impossible of being done away: it subsists.<\/p>\n

In verse 9 the legal covenant is called “the ministration of condemnation’! in contrast to the Spirit’s “ministration of righteousness.” which latter abounds in glory infinitely higher than the former. Because law demanded righteousness, it actually brought only condemnation, for man is unrighteous. The Spirit of God, on the other hand, coming on the precious, solid basis of the accomplished redemption of the Lord Jesus Christ at Calvary, brings righteousness.<\/p>\n

The legal covenant was “made glorious,” as illustrated in the skin of Moses’ face – the exterior – shining. This was reflected glory; and of course it has no remote comparison to the excelling, intrinsic glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. The first therefore is rightly done away, that it might give place to the second, which “subsists in glory.”<\/p>\n

The Spirit then having implanted in saints today such certainty of hope, the apostle can say, “We use great boldness of speech.” Bondage, fear, doubtfulness is gone, in beautiful contrast to the trembling apprehensions of the children of Israel at the time of their receiving the law. Because they could not endure looking upon the face of Moses, he put a veil over his face. And though this was only a small reflection of God’s glory, yet it illustrated the fact that under law man could not in the least way look upon God’s glory.<\/p>\n

Israel, today, because they still choose law rather than Christ, are in a similar state. But the veil is not over God’s face, but on their heart. Their minds are blinded: as they read the Old Testament they see nothing of the fact that it constantly directs them toward the New Testament: they prefer to have the veil there to keep them from too close – and precious – contact with the Living God. In actual fact, the veil is done away in Christ, but they refuse Christ, and choose the darkness of the veil.<\/p>\n

But Israel will yet turn to the Lord, though the time of her unbelief has been long, and her suffering through the ages greater than that of any other nation. And it will take the most dreadful tribulation of all history, and the personal appearing of the Lord Jesus Himself before their eyes, to finally break down their resistance in repentance and faith. The veil will suddenly fall from their eyes.<\/p>\n

Verse 17 refers back to verse 8, for it may be questioned as to what the ministry of the Spirit really is. It is that which directs us solely to the Lord, for there is perfect unity and interdependency between the Lord Jesus and the Spirit of God, just as there is between the Father and the Son. The Spirit would not engage our thoughts with His operations within us, but with Christ, who is infinitely above us. This is true liberty.<\/p>\n

Yet this does produce a marvellous subjective effect. As our eyes are turned from ourselves to behold the glory of the Lord, so the results show in ourselves. It is not a reflection here, but “with unveiled face” we behold, by the Spirit of God, the glory of the Lord Jesus, and are changed from glory to glory. As one remarks: “This goes on from glory to glory, but the least measure of it is glory.” The Lord, the Spirit is the absorbing Object and power by which we are formed in the same image. Wonderful contemplation! And it is the proper contemplation for every dear child of God.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Verse 1 <\/p>\n

Do we begin? must we begin? is it necessary?<\/p>\n

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

SECTION 4. PRAISE FOR GODS MANIFEST APPROVAL OF HIS LABORS. CH. 2:12-3:6.<\/p>\n

Moreover, when I came to Troas for the Gospel of Christ, and a door was open to me in the Lord, I had no relief for my spirit, through my not having found Titus my brother: but I bade farewell to them and went forth into Macedonia. But to God be thanks who always leads us in triumph in Christ, and makes manifest through us in every place the odour of the knowledge of Him. Because a perfume of Christ we are to God, among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing to these, an odour from death for death; but to those, an odour from life for life.<\/p>\n

And for these things who is sufficient? For we are not, as the many are, huckstering the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, before God in Christ we speak.<\/p>\n

Are we beginning again to commend ourselves? Or do we need, as some do, commendatory letters to you or from you? Our letter you are, written in our hearts, known and read by all men: being made manifest that you are a letter of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not in stone tablets but in tablets which are fleshen hearts. A confidence of this kind we have through Christ in reference to God. Not that of ourselves we are sufficient to reckon anything, as from ourselves: but our sufficiency is from God. Who also has made us sufficient to be ministers of a New Covenant, not of Letter but of Spirit.<\/p>\n

2Co 2:12-13. Further proof, after the necessary digression of 2Co 2:5-11 of Pauls deep interest in his readers, shown in his movements after writing his First Epistle. This is followed by an assertion and proof and defence of the grandeur of his ministry, occupying 2Co 2:12 to 2Co 6:10. See under 2Co 6:10.<\/p>\n

Having come to Troas; agrees with Act 20:1, which says that after the tumult Paul left Ephesus for Macedonia.<\/p>\n

Troas: now Eski Stamboul or Old Constantinople, where there are considerable ruins: an important Roman colony on or near the site of ancient Troy, on the coast of Asia Minor and near the entrance of the Dardanelles. It was the chief landing place for those coming by sea from Macedonia to western Asia. Cp. Act 16:8; Act 20:6.<\/p>\n

For the Gospel: Rom 1:1 : i.e. to proclaim it.<\/p>\n

Door being open, or standing opened: as in 1Co 16:9. The opportunity afforded at Troas was in the Lord: i.e. in relation to the Master Christ. Notice an important coincidence with Act 20:7 ff, where, though we have no account of Pauls previous preaching at Troas, (cp. Act 16:8; Act 20:1), yet on his return after visiting Macedonia and Corinth we find Christians at Troas with whom he celebrates the Lords Supper. These were probably, in whole or part, a result of labors at the time referred to here. We must therefore suppose that after the tumult at Ephesus Paul went to Troas with a view to preach the Gospel there; and found an abundant opportunity of doing so.<\/p>\n

To my spirit: as in 2Co 7:13; 1Co 16:18.<\/p>\n

Had no rest: cp. and contrast 2Co 7:5.<\/p>\n

Titus my brother; suggests the special relation of Titus to Paul as colleague in apostolic work. This trouble at not finding Titus suggests that he had been directed to rejoin Paul at Troas; and implies clearly that Paul expected him to bring news about the Corinthians. See note under 2Co 9:5. The expected meeting at Troas was prevented either by Pauls earlier arrival owing to the tumult, or by some delay of Titus.<\/p>\n

Bid farewell; suggests reluctance to leave Troas.<\/p>\n

To them: to the converts at Troas. All details about them are unknown to us.<\/p>\n

Notice the vivid picture in 2Co 2:12-13 of Pauls deep anxiety about his readers spiritual welfare. He has come to the important city of Troas to proclaim there the good news about Christ; and finds a way open to do so. But he cannot preach. For his spirit is ill at ease, waiting eagerly for tidings about his beloved children at Corinth. Drawn by this intense desire he bids adieu to some at Troas who would gladly keep him, and once more crosses the blue Aegean to Europe. This anxiety suggests the greater importance, recognized by all true evangelists, of securing old converts than making new ones.<\/p>\n

2Co 2:14 a. In Macedonia Paul met Titus, (2Co 7:6 f,) and received from him most gratifying news about the effect of his First Epistle. And we cannot doubt that this caused really the joy which finds utterance here. But instead of mentioning these tidings Paul begins a long digression (2Co 2:14 to 2Co 6:10) about the grandeur of his work. This suggests that the good news received in Macedonia revealed to Pauls mind and heart the success and grandeur of his work as a whole, and thus called forth his thanks to God. Hence the word always, in emphatic prominence. The Greek word Thriambos, rendered here triumph, denoted originally a hymn sung in those festal processions to the honor of the god Dionysius which were so common in ancient Greece. But in this sense it is found, in all extant Greek literature, perhaps only once. It is, however, found some four times as an epithet of the god to whom the hymns were sung. It was also the usual Greek equivalent for the Latin word triumph, the technical term for the military processions in which illustrious conquerors, accompanied by their soldiers, captives, and booty, entered in state the city of Rome and marched to the Capitol. Cp. Polybius, bk. vi. 15. 8, iv. 66. 8 xvi. 23. 5; Plutarch, Pompey xlv. 14, subst. six times, verb three times; Josephus, Wars bk. vii. 5. 3, 4, 7. This use of the word suggests that it had been used not only for the hymn sung to Dionysius but for the procession in which it was sung. But of this use no example is extant. In later ages, when both pagan festivals and Roman triumphs had passed away, the word was used for any public procession. It is difficult to say to what extent details of a Roman triumph or of a pagan festival* (*See an interesting paper by G. G. Findlay in The Expositor, vol. x. p. 403.) were present to Pauls mind when writing these words. But in any case the two kinds of triumph had enough in common to link with these words a definite idea. And the Roman triumph suggests a good meaning here. Paul thinks of his life of wandering and hardship, driven from Ephesus by a tumult and from Troas by anxiety about the Corinthians. But he remembers that, just as in Roman triumphs the long and sad train of captives and booty revealed the greatness of the victory and the victor, so his own long and weary wanderings over sea and land revealed the grandeur of God. Cp. Polybius, bk. xvi. 23. 5: And, when he entered the city in triumphal procession, then even still more, being reminded of their former dangers by sight of those led along, their emotions were aroused both of thanks to the gods and of goodwill towards the cause of so great a change. Perhaps Pauls words were suggested in part by remembrance, ever present to him, of his former hostility to God. As a captive he is led along. And his absolute submission, shown in his apostolic work, reveals the completeness of the victory of Him against whom Paul once fought. That his march in the train of his conqueror was with a song of praise to the conqueror, is explained in the words which follow.<\/p>\n

In Christ: as the cause, the aim, the director, and the encompassing element, of all his journeys.<\/p>\n

2Co 2:14 b. Explains leads in triumph, and accounts for Pauls thanks to God.<\/p>\n

Odour: Joh 12:3; Eph 5:2; Php 4:18 : any kind of scent.<\/p>\n

Manifest: set conspicuously before men. See under Rom 1:19.<\/p>\n

Knowledge of Him: of Christ, as proved by perfume of Christ in 2Co 2:15. This knowledge of Christ is an odour which, by leading Paul along in triumph, God manifests, i.e. presents to mens minds. We may conceive the triumphal procession accompanied by incense-bearers, and revealing its approach by the perfume scattered around. So Pauls presence, wherever he went, made Christ known, as it were silently and invisibly but pervasively, to those among whom he moved. And that he was a means through which God made Christ known to men to be their eternal life, filled his lips, even amid weariness and anxiety, with thanks to God.<\/p>\n

The two parts of this verse present two aspects of Pauls life. He was both well known and unknown. Before the eyes of men the once proud Pharisee walked, a conspicuous token of the victory and majesty of God; meanwhile imparting unobtrusively to those ready to receive it, the life-giving knowledge of Christ.<\/p>\n

2Co 2:15-16. A fact which explains and justifies the assertion of 2Co 2:14 b.<\/p>\n

Perfume of Christ: something revealing, as perfumes do, the nature of that from which it proceeds; and therefore practically the same as odour of the knowledge of Him, but adding to it the idea of pleasantness to God.<\/p>\n

Similarly, the self-sacrifice of Christ (Eph 5:2) and the money given by the Philippians to Paul (Php 4:18) were an odour of perfume. Same words in Lev 1:9; Lev 1:13; Lev 1:17, etc. Wherever Paul went he presented unobtrusively to men around the knowledge of Christ, and thus pleased God. He was, therefore, himself a perfume of Christ to God. For through his life and work shone the glory of Christ. And this, both when surrounded by those who accept Christ and are thus in the way of salvation and by those who reject Him and are thus perishing. See under 1Co 1:18. For in each case his word is acceptable to God, as accomplishing a divine purpose. In 2Co 2:16 Paul lingers on these contrasted cases, and explains more fully the meaning of his solemn words.<\/p>\n

Odour: more appropriate to the word death than is perfume.<\/p>\n

From death for death: (cp. Rom 1:17 \ud83d\ude42 a scent proceeding from, and thus revealing the presence of, death; and, like malaria from a putrefying corpse, causing death. Pauls labors among some men revealed the eternal death which day by day cast an ever deepening shadow upon them; and, by arousing in them increased opposition to God, promoted the spiritual mortification which had already begun. But even among such he was nevertheless a revelation of Christ, acceptable to God, i.e. a perfume of Christ to God. For it pleases God, the righteous Judge, that the foundation Stone crushes to death (Luk 20:18) those who refuse to build upon it. Among those who believed, Pauls labors both gave proof of the eternal life they already possessed, and strengthened it. Thus, through the apostle and his colleagues, driven rudely from place to place, revealing and causing among different men different moral states and different results, God was spreading, unobtrusively yet pervasively, the knowledge of Christ. And for this honor Paul cannot forbear to give exultant thanks to God.<\/p>\n

2Co 2:17. A question suggested by the solemnity of the position just described, before Paul passes to Gods commendation of his work by the conversion of the Corinthians; and a reason for this question, viz. that Paul is very far from looking upon the Gospel as mere merchandise for self-enrichment.<\/p>\n

Huckster: one who bought from the merchants and sold by retail. Same word in Sir 26:29; Isa 1:22 thy hucksters mix the wine with water. Cp. Plato, Protagoras p. 313d: They who carry about education from city to city and sell and huckster it. Not thus did Paul with the Gospel, making gain of it.<\/p>\n

As the many are: a terrible charge. It does not necessarily mean the greater part of Christian teachers; but implies a large and definite number present to Pauls thought. Sincerity was the human source or motive of his words, as it was (2Co 1:12) the element of his whole behavior. The original source was from God.<\/p>\n

As from (cp. Joh 1:14) as from: his words correspond with their human and divine source.<\/p>\n

Before God etc.: completes the inward picture of Pauls preaching; his words spring not from selfish, but from genuine purposes, and from God; and are such words as men speak when sincere and when moved by God. They are spoken in the presence of God and in union with Christ as their encompassing element. Cp. 2Co 12:19.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1. Paul now proceeds to recall plain proof (in 2Co 3:2-3) of the dignity claimed by him in 2Co 2:14 f. But he remembers that his words above may be thrown in his teeth by opponents at Corinth as mere self-commendation. This hostile reply he anticipates by the first question of 2Co 3:1; and overthrows it by a second question, which compels his opponents to admit that he has no need to commend himself. Then as an answer to the second question he gives proof of his divine mission.<\/p>\n

Commendatory letters: containing credentials needful for those who go among strangers. Such letters Apollos brought (Act 18:27) to Corinth. But Paul did not need them either to the Corinthians or from them to others.<\/p>\n

As some do: probably Jewish or Judaizing teachers who came with letters from known Jewish teachers in other places. The mention of such letters reveals the infinite difference between the great Apostle who came alone to Corinth and founded the church and these unknown teachers.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:2-3. Our letter: practically the same as the seal of my apostleship, 1Co 9:2. Both to themselves and to others, to you and from you, the Christians at Corinth were a proof that God sent Paul. Others bring letters in their hands: but in our hearts you ever are as a plain declaration to ourselves of our divine mission. This shut out all need for commendatory letters. These words are forerunners of confidence in 2Co 3:4 and hope in 2Co 3:12.<\/p>\n

Known and read. The Corinthian church was not only in the heart of the apostle but was also visible to all men, as a proof of Pauls divine mission. His credentials were so conspicuous that all saw them; and so plain that all read their significance.<\/p>\n

All men: believers and unbelievers: for in their hearts even enemies knew the work Paul had done at Corinth.<\/p>\n

Being manifested that you are etc.: since you stand before the eyes of the world as a letter written by Christ and therefore carrying His authority.<\/p>\n

Ministered (see under Rom 12:7) by us: by Paul and Timothy, who, as servants of Christ, founded the Corinthian church, which is here described as a letter written by Christ. These words correspond with through us in 2Co 2:14. Not written by us: for the writer was Christ, whose helper Paul was. The Holy Spirit dwelling in the hearts of the Christians at Corinth through the agency of Paul and Timothy was an abiding divine testimony to them, to their converts, and to others that they were sent by God. To the converts, the presence of the Spirit was known directly by the new cry Abba, Father, put into their hearts and lips, and by victory over sin given to them day by day; and to others, by the fruit of the Spirit in their holy lives. Cp. Rom 8:13-16; Gal 5:22.<\/p>\n

Living God: in contrast to lifeless ink or stone. Cp. 1Th 1:9; 1Ti 3:15; 1Ti 4:10; Act 14:15; Heb 9:14; Deu 5:26; Jos 3:10; Psa 42:2, etc. It suggests the activity of God, ever blessing, protecting, or punishing. After placing in contrast to the letters written with ink brought by his opponents the gift of the Holy Spirit, Paul places this gift in further contrast to the stone tablets received by Moses on Mount Sinai. And very suitably. For these tablets of stone, preserved during long ages, were an abiding and visible and famous witness of the divine authority of Moses and of the Covenant of which he was minister. No human hand, but the Hand which made Sinai and the world, traced those venerable characters. But they were written only on lifeless stone, on material apparently the most lasting yet doomed to perish. But the divine writing of which Paul had been the pen was on living human hearts, destined to retain and show forth in endless life the handwriting of God.<\/p>\n

Flesh: the visible and controlling embodiment of human life, and a conspicuous contrast to stone. Same contrast, and same phrase, in Eze 11:19; Eze 36:26 f. Pauls commendation was engraved on the flesh and blood walls of the inmost chamber of his readers being.<\/p>\n

By the second contrast of 2Co 3:3 Paul opens a way for important teaching to follow. And this second contrast increases immensely the force of the foregoing rebuke to his opponents. Amid much affliction but in words of glowing gratitude to God Paul has been speaking (2Co 2:14 f) about his own ministry. To this some might object as being self-commendation. The apostle asks whether he has any need for commendation. The absurdity of this suggestion, and the infinite difference between himself and his detractors, he reveals by asking whether when he came to lay the foundation of the church at Corinth he brought commendatory letters with him, or had ever asked his readers for such. Yet he has a letter of commendation, not in his hand but in his heart. His readers themselves are a divine commendation of himself and his fellow-laborers. Others brought letters written in characters of ink. His commendation was the presence of the life-giving Spirit in his readers hearts. Nay more. Not only were Pauls credentials of a kind quite different from those of his opponents, but they were infinitely superior even to the venerable credentials with which God confirmed the Covenant made amid the thunders of Sinai and confirmed the authority of the great Lawgiver of Israel. For Moses brought down from the mountain a testimony written by God on blocks of silent stone. But Paul could point to a testimony written also by God, in the hearts of living men. On Jewish opponents glorying in Moses, this argument would fall with overwhelming force.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:4-6 a. A comment on 2Co 3:2-3.<\/p>\n

Confidence: an idea recurring throughout 5, 6.<\/p>\n

Of this kind: viz. grounded on the fact that through his agency God had written His name by the Holy Spirit in the hearts of living men.<\/p>\n

Through Christ: through whom we received grace and apostleship, Rom 1:5.<\/p>\n

In reference to God; as in Rom 4:2. Pauls confidence took hold of God and came through the work and death of Christ. For it rested on what God had wrought through Christ. To 2Co 3:4; 2Co 3:5 is a corrective: cp. 2Co 1:24.<\/p>\n

Reckon: the mental process resulting in Pauls confidence. See under Rom 6:11.<\/p>\n

Of ourselves: apart from influences from without or from above. (Similar words convey important truths in Joh 5:30; Joh 16:13.) Pauls confidence just expressed, is not a result of mere human reasoning. For confidence referring to God, mere mental powers are not sufficient.<\/p>\n

As from ourselves: i.e. looking to our own powers as the source of success. Had Pauls confidence been a result of mere human calculation, it would have looked for results from his own unaided powers.<\/p>\n

Our sufficiency: our ability to make the reckoning which results in the confidence of 2Co 3:4. Of this confidence God is the source. And He has also given us spiritual powers fitting us to be ministers of a new covenant. These last words take up again, in order to develop it fully, the contrast introduced for a moment in 2Co 3:3.<\/p>\n

A New Covenant; implies a complete difference between the gospel dispensation and the older one: for it implies a new engagement of God with men. These words confirm Luk 22:20, (which, supported by all the oldest Greek MSS., I cannot doubt to be genuine,) where, as in 1Co 11:25, similar teaching is attributed to Christ; teaching from which Pauls words here were doubtless derived. Cp. also Heb 8:6 ff; Heb 9:16. Christ, and, taught by Him, Paul, thus proclaimed that in the Gospel the prophecy of Jer 31:31 was fulfilled.<\/p>\n

Ministers of a New Covenant: whose work it is to make known and carry out a new agreement of God with men. So ministers of righteousness, 2Co 11:15; of the Gospel, Eph 3:7; Col 1:23; Col 1:25; Gal 2:17.<\/p>\n

Not of letter etc.: in apposition to new covenant, and describing its nature. As minister of the New Covenant it was Pauls work to convey to his hearers an indwelling Spirit; not a written letter, like that given to Israel through Moses and engraved on tablets of stone or written on the pages of a book. Similar contrast, in the lips of the Baptist: Joh 1:17. This contrast Paul expounds in 2Co 3:6-11; and shows in 2Co 3:12 to 2Co 4:6 that his conduct corresponds with it.<\/p>\n

REVIEW. After speaking about his former letter and the man whom in that letter he excommunicated, Paul speaks in (4 of his movements after writing the letter. He came to Troas to preach the Gospel. But, drawn by intense anxiety about the Corinthian church, he abandoned the favorable opportunity there presented and came at once to Europe. At this point, without assigning any cause, he bursts into a song of praise to God. The state of mind which made this outburst of praise easy was doubtless prompted, though Paul does not say so, by his joyful meeting with Titus. But the matter of his praise is his entire apostolic work. His sad and weary journeys are a triumphal procession revealing the greatness of God his conqueror, a procession which makes Christ known everywhere, as by the silent perfume of incense. A perfume to God is Pauls whole life, both among those who receive and those who reject his word. The responsibilities of his work well-nigh appall him. For to him the preaching of the Gospel is no cloak for self-seeking; but is intense reality. This is not self-commendation. For such is needless. While others bring letters of commendation he merely points to Gods evident work in the hearts of his readers, an evidence treasured in Pauls own heart. The presence in them of Gods Spirit is a nobler testimony than the letters brought by his adversaries, or even than the tablets of stone brought by Moses from Sinai. The confidence in God which moves him to speak thus is no mere human interference, but a gift of that God who has also given him ability to do gospel work, and has made him a minister of a Covenant nobler than that established through the medium of Moses.<\/p>\n

Notice that Pauls appeal in support of his apostolic authority is a courteous recognition of the genuineness of the religion of his readers. They cannot deny the one without denying the other.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

CHAPTER III.<\/p>\n

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER<\/p>\n

i. Paul asserts that he does not seek or need the praise of men, as the Judaising false apostles sought it: the fruit of his preaching is, he says, sufficient commendation. <\/p>\n

ii. He states (ver. 6) the cause of this to be that the Apostles and other ministers of the New Testament and of the Spirit were adorned by more honour and glory than were Moses and the other ministers of the Old Testament and of the letter. <\/p>\n

iii. He points out (ver. 13) that the Jews have still a veil over their heart in reading the Old Testament, and so do not see Christ in it; but that they will see Him when this veil shall be taken away by Christ at end of the world. <\/p>\n

Ver. 1.-<\/span>Do we begin again to commend ourselves? At the end of the Apostle had seemed to praise himself and seek the favour of the Corinthians, hence he meets here any suspicion of vain glory. <\/p>\n

Or need we . . . epistles of commendation to you . . . or from you? ie., written by you to commend me to others. <\/p>\n

Ver. 2.-<\/span>Ye are our epistle. You, 0 Corinthians, converted by my efforts, are to me like an epistle of commendation read and understood by all, which I can show as my credentials to whom I like. As the work recommends the workman, and the seal faithfully is represented by its image, so do you commend me as though you were a commendatory letter, sealed by yourselves. For all know what you were before your conversion-drunken, gluttonous, given up to impurity and other evil lusts. Corinth was then an emporium, as famous for its vices as its wares. But now all men see that you have been completely changed, through my preaching, into different men-temperate, chaste, meek, humble, devout, liberal. This your conversion, therefore, is my commendatory letter, i.e., the public testimony of my preaching before all people. <\/p>\n

Written in our hearts. You have been converted by me, and indelibly written and engraven on my heart. This “epistle” was twice written by S. Paul. (1.) He wrote it actually when he instilled into the mind of the Corinthians the faith and Spirit of Christ. (2.) He wrote it and imprinted it on his own heart by his care and love of them. (3.) Christ again was inscribed on their hearts by Paul’s ministry, as if by a pen; and Christ, Himself, by Paul’s preaching, imprinted on them his faith, hope, charity, and other graces, not with ink, but by the inspiration of the Spirit of the living God, who filled their hearts with charity and all virtues. <\/p>\n

Ver. 3.-In fleshy tables of the heart. Not in hard stone, as was the law of Moses, but in a heart tender, soft, and teachable. There is an allusion to Jer 32:33. The Apostle, we should notice, makes a distinction between , used here, and : the first denotes the natural condition of flesh-its softness, &c.; the other that which has the vices and corruptions of flesh. Cf. Rom 7:14 and 1Co 3:3. Other writers, however, do not observe this distinction. Nazianzen, e.g., applies the latter of these terms to the incarnation and manhood of Christ. <\/p>\n

Ver. 4.-<\/span>And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward. The Greek word used here, denotes that confident conviction which makes the mind strive to attain some difficult end that it longs for, as though it were certain of success. Such is the confidence which is inspired into the Saints by the Holy Spirit enabling them to work miracles or other heroic works of virtue. This confidence God is wont to demand as a fitting disposition, and to give beforehand, both in him who performs and in him who receives the benefit of the miracle or other Divine gift, in order that the soul may, by this gift, expand and exalt itself, and become capable of receiving Divine power. S. Paul says in effect. “This confident persuasion that you are our epistle, written by the Spirit of the living God, we have before God through the grace of Christ; we have hope and sure confidence in God that, as He has begun, so will He finish this epistle by His Spirit.” In the second place this trust is the confidence S. Paul had before God, which enabled him to glory confidently in God of this epistle of his and of God, and of the dignity of his ministry, and of its fruit, when compared with the ministry of Moses and of other Old Testament ministers. <\/p>\n

Ver. 5.-<\/span>Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves. To think anything that is good and is ordained to faith, grace, merit, and eternal salvation, so as to make a man an able minister of the New Testament. But if no one is able to think any such thing, he is still less able to do it. Cf. Council of Arausica (can. 7) and S. Augustine (de Prdest. Sanct. c. ii.). <\/p>\n

1. From this passage S. Augustine lays down, in opposition to the semi-Pelagians, in which he is followed by the Schoolmen, that the will to believe and the beginning of faith and salvation, and every desire for it, come, not from free-will but from prevenient grace. Hence Beza wrongly charges the Schoolmen with teaching that the beginning of good is from ourselves, though weakly and insufficiently; for they all alike teach that the beginning of a good and holy life, of good thoughts and actions, and salvation in general is supernatural, and has its origin in the grace of God, not in nature or the goodness of our will. <\/p>\n

2. Calvin is mistaken in inferring from this passage that there is no power in free-will which may be exerted in the works of grace, but that the whole strength and every attempt and act spring from grace. The Apostle says only that free-will is in itself insufficient, not that it has no power whatever. Just as an infirm man has a certain amount of strength, but not enough for walking, and has enough for walking if any one else help him, and give him a start and support, so too free-will is of itself insufficient for good works, but is sufficient if it be urged on, strengthened, and helped by prevenient grace. <\/p>\n

It may be said that the sufficiency Paul speaks of here may be, as Theophylact and the Syriac render it, power, strength, or might. I answer that this is true; for the power and strength of free-will for a supernatural work, and of grace, which makes it supernatural, pleasing, to God, and worthy and meritorious of eternal life, are not from free-will, but from exciting and co-operating grace. When free-will has this, it is sufficiently able to believe freely, to love, and to work any supernatural work whatever. For free-will has for every work natural strength able to produce a free work; therefore these two causes concur here in the same work, one natural, viz., free-will, the other supernatural, viz., grace. Each, too, has its corresponding effect: the effect of grace is that it is a supernatural work, of free-will that it is free and the work of man. In the same way an infirm man is not only not strong enough, but wholly unable to walk, because it is a task beyond his strength; but he becomes able if he is given strength by a friend, or from some other source, and then he unites his own strength, however little it be, with that lent to him, and is able to walk. Still the strength that comes from without has to start him and begin his walking, and the whole force and energy with which he walks is to be found in the strength that is given him. That he tries to walk beyond his strength is not from himself but from without; but when it is once given, he puts forth his own strength and co-operates with it, and produces an effect commensurate to his efforts. In the same way free-will co-operates with exciting grace, and acts as a companion to it in every super- natural work in such way as its strength enables it. <\/p>\n

We learn from this passage to recognise in every good work our own weakness, and to ascribe to Christ’s grace all the goodness and worth of what we do. S. Gregory (Morals, lib. xxii. c. 19), says: “Let no one think himself to have any virtue, even when he can do anything successfully; for if he be abandoned by the strength that cometh from above he will be suddenly overthrown helplessly on the very ground where he was boasting of his firm standing.” S. Augustine (contra Julian, lib. ii. c. 8) commends the refutation of the Pelagians by S. Cyprian in the words: “They trust in their strength and exclaim that the perfection of their virtue is from themselves; but you, 0 Cyprian, reply that no one in his own strength is strong, but is safe only under the merciful indulgence of God.” The Psalmist, too, says the same thing (Psa 59:9): “My strength will I guard unto Thee,” meaning that he would lay it up in safety under his ward, hoping to over-come his enemies in God’s strength and not in his own, because God is the Fount of all virtue and strength. Cf. Ezek 29:3:5, where Pharaoh is forewarned of his fate for ascribing his power and success to himself. <\/p>\n

Again, this passage teaches us to pray to God constantly that He would direct our thoughts, and inspire us with heavenly thoughts and desires, for such are the fount and beginning of all good works. This is beautifully expressed in the Collect for the Ninth Sunday after Trinity. S.Bernard (Serm. 32 in Cantic.) says learnedly and piously: “Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything good as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God. When, therefore, we find evil thoughts in our heart, they are our own; if we find a good thought, it is the word of God: Our heart utters the former and hears the latter. ‘I will hear,’ it says, ‘what the Lord God will say in me, for He shall speak peace to His people.’ So, then, he speaks in us peace, righteousness, godliness; we do not think such things of ourselves, but we hear them within ourselves; but murders, adulteties, thefts, blasphemies, and such things proceed from the heart: we do not hear them, we say them,” or at all events they are suggested to us by the devil. <\/p>\n

Ver. 6.-<\/span>Not of the letter but of the spirit. Not of the law, but of grace. I am a minister of the New Testament, but not in such a way that I bring tables of the law and of the covenant and its words, as did Moses in the Old Testament, but so that God may by my words inspire into you heavenly thoughts and desires. Cf. Augustine. (de Spirit. et Lit. c. iii.). <\/p>\n

For the letter killeth. (1.) Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustine (de Doctr. Christ. lib. iii. c. 4) explain this to be that the letter of the law convicts and condemns them to death who do not obey this letter, i.e., the precepts of the law relating to righteousness and charity. For this letter of the law enacts that whosoever breaketh the law is to die the death. (2.) S. Augustine gives another explanation. If you abuse the literal meaning, and neglect the sense of Scripture, and fall into error, as Jews and heretics do, then the letter killeth. (3.) When metaphorical sayings are taken literally (S. Augustine, ibid. c. v., vi.). (4.) When types of the new law contained in the old are understood to be still binding in their literal meaning (ibid. Cf. also Origen, contra Celsum, lib. iii.; Didymus, de Spirit. Sanct. lib. iii.). The Fathers in general frequently say that the letter, i.e., the literal meaning of the law killeth, but the spirit, i.e., the spiritual and allegorical meaning, giveth life. This is because it is not now lawful to Christians to observe the ceremonies and ritual precepts of the old law literally under penalty of death; but they are bound to do what those ceremonies allegorically signified if they wish to attain the life of grace and glory. (5.) S. Augustine again in the same place says that the letter, both of the old and new law, killeth if separated from the spirit; but that this passage refers to the old law alone, because Moses, when he gave the law, gave only the letter, but Christ gave the spirit and the letter, and from this he lays down that the law cannot be fulfilled by the strength of nature alone, but requires the grace of Christ. (6.) S. Augustine once more and Anselm say that the letter killeth by giving occasion to sin; for the law is the occasion by which concupiscence is kindled and sin produced which kills the soul. This sense and the first are the most literal. <\/p>\n

But the Spirit giveth life. (1.) The Spirit gives to the soul the supernatural life of grace and charity. (2.) He gives motives and strength for good works and for fulfilling the law. (3.) He guides us towards that eternal life promised by the law to them that keep it. Of this life and Spirit the Apostles were sent by Christ as ministers. <\/p>\n

Ver. 7.-<\/span>If the ministration of death . . . was glorious. If the ministration and promulgation of the old law, which threatened and brought death and condemnation, were glorious, i.e., accompanied by thundering and the sound of the heavenly trumpet, by an earth-quake and the splendour of Moses’ countenance: if the old law, engraven on tables of stone, was so gloriously promulgated, how much more glorious is the Gospel? <\/p>\n

Paul here calls the old law the attendant and lictor of death, because it could indeed slay them that broke it but not give life to them that kept it. From this we may gather that S. Paul is writing against the false apostles, and that they were Jews who were endeavouring to blend the old and the new law. He therefore silences the Jews by depreciating the old law as the law of condemnation, and by extolling himself and his fellow-apostles as the ministers of the evangelical law of righteousness and the life of the Spirit. Cf. in this connection chaps. x. and xi. <\/p>\n

Ver. 8.-<\/span>How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? This glory of the evangelical law of righteousness was seen in the mighty wind and the different tongues of fire which, when the new law was promulgated, glorified the Apostles before all nations. It was seen too in the gifts of tongues, of prophecy, &c., which used to descend visibly on Christians, as appears from 1Co 14:26; even as now the graces, gifts and virtues of the Holy Spirit are received invisibly. <\/p>\n

So that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance. God as a sun so brilliantly shone on the face of Moses on the mount that his face shone as a second sun. The Vulgate rendering of Exo 34:29 is that “he wist not that his face was horned while He talked with him,” where the “horns” of course refer to the appearance of rays of light. <\/p>\n

Which glory was to be done away. This bright glory left Moses when he was dying, to signify that the old law would fade away with its glory when the new came. <\/p>\n

Ver. 10<\/span>.-<\/span>For even that which was made glorious, &c. For, by a common Hebraism, is here assertive, not causal. The glory of Moses cannot be called glory when compared with that of the Apostolic office, which far excels it. “As,” says Theodoret, “the light of a lantern shines at night, but is at noonday overpowered by the sun, so was the glory of Moses overshadowed by Christ.” This is the bearing of the phrase “by reason of the glory that excelleth.” <\/p>\n

Ver. 12.-<\/span>Seeing then that we have such hope. Since the Lord diffuses the spirit of grace by us His Apostles, we have hope that He will hereafter give us glory far beyond that of Moses. <\/p>\n

We use great plainness of speech. We preach the Gospel boldly, freely, frankly, openly. <\/p>\n

Ver. 13.-And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face. Moses veiled his face, but we do not veil the face of Christ, but with great freedom bid all gaze upon it. From Exo 24:33 we gather that Moses in his first interview with the people spoke to them with unveiled face because of the reverence due to the majesty of the law, but that he afterwards veiled his face that he might with the greater freedom speak to them. But when he entered the tabernacle (Exo 33:8), to converse with God, he took away the veil. In this and the next three verses, S. Paul gives the allegorical meaning of this veiling; for to the Jews the Old Testament is covered with a veil, so that they do not see the light of the New Testament, and Christ contained in it. From us, however, Christ has taken away the veil, and will take it away from the Jews when they are converted at the end of the world. <\/p>\n

S. Gregory (Pastor. pt. iii. c. 5) says tropologically: “The preacher should, like Moses, suit himself to his hearers: what is deep ought to be concealed from many that hear, and be opened out to very few.” <\/p>\n

That the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end. This is the reading of the Greek MSS., the Syriac, and the older Latin authors, as Ambrose, but the Latin reads to the face. The end is Christ, mystically signified by the unveiled brightness of the face of Moses, as Ambrose and Theodoret say. Others take it more literally: they could not look on the perfect splendour of the face of Moses, or again, they could not look on the extremity of the surface of his face. Theophylact again explains it: “The ignorant Israelites could not see that the law was to have an end and be abolished.” But this is a mystical meaning; the second is the literal meaning. <\/p>\n

Which is abolished. The splendour of Moses was to be abolished, or the brightness of his face. These words may refer either to the face or to the veil, but it is better to understand them of the veil, especially as the following verses refer to the removal of the veil of Moses by the light of the law of the New Testament. <\/p>\n

Theodoret observes that the sun-like splendour of the face of Moses typified the glorious brightness of the law of Christ, while the veil typified the shadow under which the dumb ceremonies of Moses lay. The Jews have not even yet been able to see the face of Moses without the veil, because they unbelievingly insist on the reality of their shadowy ceremonies, and have no eyes for the light of the Gospel. <\/p>\n

Ver. 14<\/span>.-<\/span>But their minds were blinded. They were blinded by the brightness of the face of Moses, and, allegorically, blinded by the Gospel light. As this clause is the antithesis to the preceding both meanings are included. <\/p>\n

Until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament. The Apostle is still continuing the allegorical sense. Moses and the Old Testament till to-day are veiled to the Jews, so that they cannot see that Christ is signified by so many figures, prophecies, ceremonies, and sacrifices. Again, the Old Testament is veiled to them, because they read it but do not understand its meaning nor see its end and intent, its light and splendour, which is Christ: the eyes of their mind are dull and heavy, as formerly were the eyes of their body when they could not gaze on the shining face of Moses. <\/p>\n

Which vail is done away in Christ. This veil, by the grace and faith of Christ is removed, so that we can clearly see Christ foreshadowed in the Old Testament. <\/p>\n

Ver. 15.-The vail is upon their heart. This veil is the foolish pertinacity with which the Jews still stubbornly cling to the carnal sacrifices and rites of the Old Law, and so are blinded that they cannot see Christ typified by them <\/p>\n

Ver. 17<\/span>.-<\/span>Now the Lord is that Spirit. (1.) The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not body but spirit. Spirit in this explanation is taken essentially for what is common to the Three Persons. So S. Ambrose. (2.) Spirit here way stand for the Holy Spirit: the Greek MSS. have the definite article, and Roman Bibles and others spell it with a capital; for the Jews acknowledge one Lord and God, but deny that there is a plurality of Persons, and that the Holy Spirit is God. When the Jews shall have the veil taken away and shall be converted to the Lord and to belief in the Blessed Trinity then will they serve the Lord their God, not in the letter, with dumb corporeal ceremonies, but in the spirit. The God to whom they shall be converted is Spirit, and the Holy Spirit will give them the law of the Spirit of liberty, that with the eyes of their spirit they may see Christ veiled, under the law, and may worship Him in spirit and in truth. Cf. S. John iv. 23. S. Augustine (ad Serapion) thus explains this last passage: “We must worship the Father in truth, i.e., in the Son and Holy Spirit. We must worship the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” But this is the mystical meaning. <\/p>\n

Literally, Christ said this against the Samaritans and Jews, for the Samaritans worshipped God with worship that was false and devised by themselves, and so worshipped God together with idols; consequently the God of their worship was not the true God, but a created god of their imaginations, and the companion of idols. The Jews worshipped the true God indeed, but under fixed corporeal signs, which were shadows of things to come. To both of these Christ opposes Christians, who worship God in spirit and not in corporeal signs, and in truth instead of in shadows, falsehood, and ignorance. God is an incorporeal and pure Spirit. Spirit, therefore, in this passage denotes the spiritual worship of faith, hope, charity, and other virtues, by which God is worshipped in truth, i.e., most truly, rightly, and properly, and not by shadows. Wherefore the sacraments and ceremonies of the New Law, since they are not shadows of the Old Law, but ornaments and helps of the Spirit, belong to the Spirit. Theophylact, Theodoret, Chrysostom thus explain the passage, and prove from it against Macedonius that the Holy Spirit is God. <\/p>\n

It may be said that the same Spirit is afterwards called “the Spirit of the Lord.” How, then, is He the Lord? The answer is: He is “the Lord” because He is God; He is “of the Lord” because He proceeds from the Father and the Son. <\/p>\n

And where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. Liberty denotes a spontaneous, frank, free, and clearly illuminated will. Now that the veil of Moses has been taken away, we can, with clear and spontaneous will, walk according to the law of God. So Theophylact. <\/p>\n

Notice that liberty is not here opposed to the obligation of law, Divine or human, as heretics think, but both to the veil of Moses, or the obscurity of the Old Law, and to the letter, or to the servile compulsion, fear, and deadness of the law. This liberty, therefore, is twofold. See notes to ver. 6. <\/p>\n

1. Liberty is, says Chrysostom, an understanding, and clear knowledge of the mystery of the Trinity, of the incarnation, and other things that are obscure to the Jews. It is also a knowledge of true religion and of Divine worship, which the Jews supposed to consist in the sacrifice of bulls and goats, though God wills to be worshipped in spirit and in truth. Just as heaviness, dulness, perplexity, and ignorance of the understanding, which hold the mind as it were fast bound in chains, are rightly called slavery, so on the other hand illumination of the intellect and clear knowledge are rightly called liberty, because the mind, set free from ignorance, error, and crass conceptions, is able to freely devote itself to truth, to God, to things spiritual and Divine. Hence Aristotle, Plutarch, Seneca, and others used to say that the wise man alone was free. <\/p>\n

2. Liberty, as S. Augustine says, is to be found in the affections and in the love of righteousness, in freedom from fear of punishment, in the spontaneous fulfilling of the law from love of virtue, and not from fear of punishment. This free spirit of Christian love is contrasted with the slavery of Jewish fear. This is evident from the context. The Begardi, three hundred years ago, and the Suencfeldiani and Libertines of the present day, are therefore as impious, as ignorant, and foolish (a) in rejecting, on the supposed authority of ver. 6, the written word of God, as though it were a sun that had set, and in holding that the light within is sufficient for our guidance; (b) in teaching that a holy and perfect man is set free from the law and does not sin, even if he commit fornication. (c) They are followed by many others, who deduce the invalidity of all human laws. Cf. Bellarmine (de Justific. lib. iv. c. 3 and 4), and Belliolanus, in the fifteen books he wrote on Christian Liberty. S. Augustine (de Continentia, c. iii.) says excellently: “We are not under a law which orders good and does not give it, but we are under grace, which makes us love what the law orders, and which can, therefore, give orders to free men.” Cf. the same Father (de Spirit. et Lit. c. x., and de Natura et Grat. c. 57). <\/p>\n

Ver. 18<\/span>.-<\/span>But we all with open face. The open face is that of Christ incarnate or of the mysteries of the faith. We, looking on them, see the glorious Godhead of the Lord and His grace, and the work of our redemption foreshadowed in Moses and the Old Testament. <\/p>\n

Beholding as in a glass. “Seeing as in a mirror, not beholding as from a watch-tower,” says S. Augustine (de Trin. lib. xv. c. 8); but Erasmus renders the passage, “representing in a mirror,” because he says this is the image of the glory of God. But the Greek verb is clearly to see, not represent in a mirror, and besides the representation is spoken of in the next phrase, “are changed into the same image.” Since we see the glory of God in Christ and His Gospel, as though in a mirror, we are by this transformed into the same image of God, and we represent in ourselves this glory. This mirror, therefore, is the cause of the image, not the image itself. <\/p>\n

The Apostle here means by mirror the Word clothed in flesh, and made visible, and whatever is put before our eyes in the Gospel and in the Church, and he contrasts all this with Moses veiled. Hence, in the next chapter, he speaks of the image of God; for Christ as God is the Word and image of the Father, as Man He is the mirror of the Deity and His grace and glory; consequently the Gospel of Christ is nothing but a most clearly polished mirror of the glory of God. Hence S. Augustine calls his “Sentences” a mirror. <\/p>\n

“Mirror” may also be taken here to mean the faith through which, as through a mirror darkly, we behold God and the things of God. Cf. notes to 1Co 13:12. <\/p>\n

Are changed into the same image. Not essentially, as though our essence were changed into the Divine Essence, or into its archetypal being, which it had in God from eternity before it was created, of which S. John speaks when he says, “That which was made was in Him life.” This is the error of Almaric and other fanatics, which is refuted by Gerson in his two epistles written against Ruisbroch, and of Ruisbroch himself (de Vera Contembl.). But we are changed per accidens, i.e., by the rays of the light of Christ being reflected on us as from a mirror, we become bright with the light of the faith and grace of Christ, and so we become like mirrors flashing out the light of heaven, and like suns illuminating others, as Chrysostom and Theophylact say. Nay, we become as gods, sharing in the Divine Nature, as S. Peter says. “God foreknew and predestinated us to be conformed to the image of His Son,” says S. Paul. He alludes to Moses, who, beholding God and conversing with Him, received the rays of light reflected from God, as was said in the note to ver. 7. Moses did not see God Himself, but in a glorious, assumed body which acted as a mirror. Tertullian (contra Marcion, lib. v.) reads here, we are transfigured, as though Paul was alluding to the transfiguration of Christ on Mount Tabor, when Christ, brilliant with the light of His glory, shed it over Moses and Elias and the Apostles, and as it were transfigured them. In the same way, by the Gospel and the grace and faith of Christ, we are transformed and transfigured, inasmuch as we are made partaker of the truth, brightness, and glory of God, so that we are able to communicate them to others, and at last we reflect them on God Himself, from whom they first came. <\/p>\n

“The whole life of Christ,” says S. Augustine, “which was spent as man on earth, was a mirror giving us a pattern of good living.” How wise are they who gaze constantly into this mirror, and do all they can to conform their lives to it, and so are transformed into different men, into heavenly, angelic, and Divine beings! <\/p>\n

From glory to glory. (1.) From the glory of Christ into our own glory, so that we become clear and bright with grace and wisdom, even as Christ. (2.) From the brightness of faith into the brightness of sight. (3.) From the brightness of creation into the brightness of justification, according to Anselm. (4.) Daily growing more and more glorious, till we come to the glory of the Beatific Vision. Cf. notes to Rom 1:17. Maldonatus (Nota mss.) gives a further explanation. “Progressing from the glory of the 0ldTestament to the glory of the New.” So it is said in Rom 1:17, “from faith to faith.” <\/p>\n

Even as by the Spirit of the Lord. This change is through the Spirit of the Lord. Even as denotes the cause that is suitable to, and worthy of, so great a change, such, i.e., as it becomes the Holy Spirit to work. S. Basil and Chrysostom argue from these words against Macedonius that the Holy Spirit is God, and that it is He that taketh away the veil and gives understanding of the Scriptures. Tertullian finally (contra Marcion, lib. v. c. 11) reads here: “Even as by the Lord of Spirits.”<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Fuente: Cornelius Lapide Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

1. The superiority of Christian ministry to Mosaic ministry 3:1-11<\/span><\/p>\n

Paul contrasted the ministry of Christians with the ministry of Moses. He did so to enable his readers to understand and appreciate the glory of their ministry and its superiority over that of the Mosaic economy.<\/p>\n

"The countermissionaries in Corinth are, in some significant way, exponents of the Mosaic ministry. They are, to use the term imprecisely, ’Judaizers.’" [Note: Ibid., pp. 160-61.] <\/span><\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

B. Exposition of Paul’s view of the ministry 3:1-6:10<\/span><\/p>\n

The apostle proceeded to explain his view of Christian ministry further so his readers would appreciate and adopt his viewpoint and not lose heart.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Testimonial letters 3:1-3<\/span><\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

The preceding verses could have drawn offense from the Corinthians because Paul told them things about himself that they already knew and should have remembered. He mentioned these things as though they were new. He explained that his intention was not to introduce himself to them again in a self-commending fashion. Letters written with pen and ink for this purpose were superfluous since they had already received a much better letter of commendation. He had lived his life among them as an open book.<\/p>\n

Representatives of the Jewish authorities in Judea carried letters of commendation (recommendation) to the synagogues of the Dispersion (cf. Act 9:2; Act 22:5). The early Christians evidently continued this practice (Act 18:27; Rom 16:1). Paul contrasted himself with the legalistic teachers of Judaism and early Christianity who believed that observance of the Mosaic Law was essential for justification and sanctification (cf. Act 15:5).<\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Chapter 8<\/p>\n

LIVING EPISTLES.<\/p>\n

2Co 3:1-3 (R.V)<\/p>\n

“ARE we beginning again to commend ourselves?” Paul does not mean by these words to admit that he had been commending himself before: he means that he has been accused already of doing so, and that there are those at Corinth who, when they hear such passages of this letter as that which has just preceded, will be ready to repeat the accusation. In the First Epistle he had found it necessary to vindicate his apostolic authority, and especially his interest in the Corinthian Church as its spiritual father, {1Co 9:1-27; 1Co 4:6-21} and obviously his enemies at Corinth had tried to turn these personal passages against him. They did so on the principle Qui sexcuse saccuse. “He is commending himself,” they said, “and self-commendation is an argument which discredits, instead of supporting, a cause.” The Apostle had heard of these malicious speeches, and in this Epistle makes repeated reference to them. {see 2Co 5:12; 2Co 10:18; 2Co 13:6} He entirely agreed with his opponents that self-praise was no honor. “Not he who commendeth himself is approved, but he whom the Lord commendeth.” But he denied point-blank that he was commending himself. In distinguishing as he had done in 2Co 2:14-17 between himself and his colleagues, who spoke the Word “as of sincerity, as of God, in the sight of God,” and “the many” who corrupted it, nothing was further from his mind than to plead his cause, as a suspected person, with the Corinthians. Only malignity could suppose any such thing, and the indignant question with which the chapter opens tacitly accuses his adversaries of this hateful vice. It is pitiful to see a great and generous spirit like Paul compelled thus to stand upon guard, and watch against the possible misconstruction of every lightest word. What needless pain it inflicts upon him, what needless humiliation! How it checks all effusion of feeling, and robs what should be brotherly intercourse of everything that can make it free and glad! Further on in the Epistle there will be abundant opportunity of speaking on this subject at greater length; but it is proper to remark here that a ministers character is the whole capital he has for carrying on his business, and that nothing can be more cruel and wicked than to cast suspicion on it without cause. In most other callings a man may go on, no matter what his character, provided his balance at the bank is on the right side; but an evangelist or a pastor who has lost his character has lost everything. It is humiliating to be subject to suspicion, painful to be silent under it, degrading to speak. At a later stage Paul was compelled to go further than he goes here; but let the indignant emotion of this abrupt question remind us that candor is to be met with candor, and that the suspicious temper which would fain malign the good eats like a canker the very heart of those who cherish it.<\/p>\n

From the serious tone the Apostle passes suddenly to the ironical. “Or need we, as do some, epistles of commendation to you or from you?” The “some” of this verse are probably the same as “the many” of 2Co 2:17. Persons had come to Corinth in the character of Christian teachers, bringing with them recommendatory letters which secured their standing when they arrived. An example of what is meant can be seen in Act 18:27. There we are told that when Apollos, who had been working in Ephesus, was minded to pass over into Achaia, the Ephesian brethren encouraged him, and wrote to the disciples to receive him-that is, they gave him an epistle of commendation, which secured him recognition and welcome in Corinth. A similar case is found in Rom 16:1, where the Apostle uses the very word which we have here: “I commend unto you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the Church that is at Cenchreae: that ye receive her in the Lord, worthily of the saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever matter she may have need of you: for she herself also hath been a succorer of many, and of mine own self.” This was Phoebes introduction, or epistle of commendation, to the Church of Rome. The Corinthians were evidently in the habit both of receiving such letters from other Churches, and of granting them on their own account; and Paul asks them ironically if they think he ought to bring one, or when he leaves them to apply for one. Is that the relation which ought to obtain between him and them? The “some,” to whom he refers, had no doubt come from Jerusalem: it is they who are referred to in 2Co 11:22 ff. But it does not follow that their recommendatory letters had been signed by Peter, James, and John; and just as little that those letters justified them in their hostility to Paul. No doubt there were many-many myriads, the Book of Acts says-at Jerusalem, whose conception of the Gospel was very different from his and who were glad to counteract him whenever they could; but there were many also, including the three who seemed to be pillars, who had a thoroughly good understanding with him, and who had no responsibility for the “some” and their doings. The epistles which the “some” brought were plainly such as the Corinthians themselves could grant, and it is a complete misinterpretation to suppose that they were a commission granted by the Twelve for the persecution of Paul.<\/p>\n

The giving of recommendatory letters is a subject of considerable practical interest. When they are merely formal, as in our certificates of Church membership, they come to mean very little. It is an unhappy state of affairs perhaps, but no one would take a certificate of Church membership by itself as a satisfactory recommendation. And when we go past the merely formal, difficult questions arise. Many people have an estimate of their own character and competence, in which it is impossible for others to share, and yet they apply without misgiving to their friends, and especially to their minister or their employer, to grant them “epistles of commendation.” We are bound to be generous in these things, but we are bound also to be honest. The rule which ought to guide us, especially in all that belongs to the Church and its work, is the interest of the cause, and not of the worker. To flatter is to do a wrong, not only to the person flattered, but to the cause in which you are trying to employ him. There is no more ludicrous reading in the world than a bundle of certificates, or testimonials, as they are called. As a rule, they certify nothing but the total absence of judgment and conscience in the people who have granted them. If you do not know whether a person is qualified for any given situation or not, you do not need to say anything about it. If you know he is not, and he asks you to say that he is, no personal consideration must keep you from kindly but firmly declining. I am not preaching suspicion, or reserve, or anything ungenerous, but justice and truth. It is wicked to betray a great interest by bespeaking it for incompetent hands; it is cruel to put any one into a place for which he is unfit. Where you are confident that the man and the work will be well matched, be as generous as you please; but never forget that the work is to be considered in the first place, and the man only in the second.<\/p>\n

Paul has been serious, and ironical, in the first verse; in 2Co 3:2 he becomes serious again, and remains so. “You,” he says, answering his ironical question, “you are our epistle.” Epistle, of course, is to be taken in the sense of the preceding verse. “You are the commendatory letter which I show, when I am asked for my credentials.” But to whom does he show it? In the first instance, to the captious Corinthians themselves. The tone of 2Co 9:1-15. in the First Epistle is struck here again: “Wherever I may need recommendations, it is certainly not at Corinth.” “If I be not an apostle to others, yet doubtless I am to you: the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.” Had they been a Christian community when he first visited them, they might have asked who he was; but they owed their Christianity to him; he was their father in Christ; to put him to the question in this superior, suspicious style was unnatural, unfilial ingratitude. They themselves were the living evidence of the very thing which they threw doubt upon-the apostleship of Paul.<\/p>\n

This bold utterance may well excite misgivings in those who preach constantly, yet see no result of their work. It is common to disparage success, the success of visible acknowledged conversions, of bad men openly renouncing badness, bearing witness against themselves, and embracing a new life. It is common to glorify the ministry which works on, patient and uncomplaining, in one monotonous round, ever sowing, but never reaping, ever casting the net, but never drawing in the fish, ever marking time, but never advancing. Paul frankly and repeatedly appeals to his success in evangelistic work as the final and sufficient proof that God had called him, and had given him authority as an apostle; and search as we will, we shall not find any test so good and unequivocal at this success. Paul had seen the Lord; he was qualified to be a witness of the Resurrection; but these, at the very most, were his own affair, till the witness he bore had proved its power in the hearts and consciences of others. How to provide, to train, and to test the men who are to be the ministers of the Christian Church is a matter of the very utmost consequence, to which sufficient attention has not yet been given. Congregations which choose their own pastor are often compelled to take a man quite untried, and to judge him more or less on superficial grounds. They can easily find out whether he is a competent scholar; they can see for themselves what are his gifts of speech, his virtues or defects of manner; they can get such an impression as sensible people always get, by seeing and hearing a man, of the general earnestness or lack of earnestness in his character. But often they feel that more is wanted. It is not exactly more in the way of character; the members of a Church have no right to expect that their minister will be a truer Christian than they themselves are. A special inquisition into his conversion, or his religious experience, is mere hypocrisy; if the Church is not sufficiently in earnest to guard herself against insincere members, she must take the risk of insincere ministers. What is wanted is what the Apostle indicates here-that intimation of Gods concurrence which is given through success in evangelistic work. No other intimation of Gods concurrence is infallible-no call by a congregation, no ordination by a presbytery or by a bishop. Theological education is easily provided, and easily tested; but it will not be so easy to introduce the reforms which are needed in this direction. Great masses of Christian people, however, are becoming alive to the necessity for them; and when the pressure is more strongly felt, the way for action will be discovered. Only those who can appeal to what they have done in the Gospel can be known to have the qualifications of Gospel ministers; and in due time the fact will be frankly recognized.<\/p>\n

The conversion and new life of the Corinthians were Pauls certificate as an apostle. They were a certificate known, he says, and read by all men. Often there is a certain awkwardness in the presenting of credentials. It embarrasses a man when he has to put his hand into his breast pocket, and take out his character, and submit it for inspection. Paul was saved this embarrassment. There was a fine unsought publicity about his testimonials. Everybody knew what the Corinthians had been, everybody knew what they were; and the man to whom the change was due needed no other recommendation to a Christian society. Whoever looked at them saw plainly that they were an epistle of Christ; the mind of Christ could be read upon them, and it had been written by the intervention of Pauls hand. This is an interesting though a well-worn conception of the Christian character. Every life has a meaning, we say, every face is a record; but the text goes further. The life of the Christian is an epistle; it has not only a meaning, but an address; it is a message from Christ to the world. Is Christs message to men legible on our lives? When those who are without look at us, do they see the hand of Christ quite unmistakably? Does it ever occur to anybody that there is something in our life which is not of the world, but which is a message to the world from Christ? Did you ever, startled by the unusual brightness of a true Christians life, ask as it were involuntarily, “Whose image and superscription is this?” and feel as you asked it that these features, these characters, could only have been traced by one hand, and that they proclaimed to all the grace and power of Jesus Christ? Christ wishes so to write upon us that men may see what He does for man. He wishes to engrave His image on our nature, that all spectators may feel that it has a message for them, and may crave the same favor. A congregation which is not in its very existence and in all its works and ways a legible epistle, an unmistakable message from Christ to man, does not answer to this New Testament ideal.<\/p>\n

Paul claims no part here but that of Christs instrument. The Lord, so to speak, dictated the letter, and he wrote it. The contents of it were prescribed by Christ, and through the Apostles ministry became visible and legible in the Corinthians. More important is it to notice with what the writing was done: “not with ink,” says St. Paul, “but with the Spirit of the living God.” At first sight this contrast seems formal and fantastic; nobody, we think, could ever dream of making either of these things do the work of the other, so that it seems perfectly gratuitous in Paul to say, “not with ink, but with the Spirit.” Yet ink is sometimes made to bear a great deal of responsibility. The characters of the (“some”) in 2Co 3:1. were only written in ink; they had nothing, Paul implies, to recommend them but these documents in black and white. That was hardly sufficient to guarantee their authority, or their competence as ministers in the Christian dispensation. But do not Churches yet accept their ministers with the same inadequate testimonials? A distinguished career at the University, or in the Divinity Schools, proves that a man can write with ink, under favorable circumstances; it does not prove more than that; it does not prove that he will be spiritually effective, and everything else is irrelevant. I do not say this to disparage the professional training of ministers; on the contrary, the standard of training ought to be higher than it is in all the Churches: I only wish to insist that nothing which can be represented in ink, no learning, no literary gifts, no critical acquaintance with the Scriptures even, can write upon human nature the Epistle of Christ. To do that needs “the Spirit of the living God.” We feel, the moment we come upon those words, that the Apostle is anticipating; he has in view already the contrast he is going to develop between the old dispensation and the new, and the irresistible inward power by which the new is characterized. Others might boast of qualifications to preach which could be certified in due documentary form, but he carried in him wherever he went a power which was its own witness, and which overruled and dispensed with every other. Let all of us who teach or preach concentrate our interest here. It is in “the Spirit of the living God,” not in any requirements of our own, still less in any recommendations of others, that our serviceableness as ministers of Christ lies. We cannot write His epistle without it. We cannot see, let us be as diligent and indefatigable in our work as we please, the image of Christ gradually come out in those to whom we minister. Parents, teachers, preachers, this is the one thing needful for us all. “Tarry,” said Jesus to the first evangelists, “tarry in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high” it is of no use to begin without that.<\/p>\n

This idea of the “epistle” has taken such a hold of the Apostles mind, and he finds it so suggestive whichever way he turns it, that he really tries to say too much about it in one sentence. The crowding of his ideas is confusing. One learned critic enumerates three points in which the figure becomes inconsistent with itself, and another can only defend the Apostle by saying that this figurative letter might well have qualities which would be self-contradictory in a real one. This kind of criticism smells a little of ink, and the only real difficulty in the sentence has never misled any one who read it with sympathy. It is this-that St. Paul speaks of the letter as written in two different places. “Ye are an epistle,” he says at the beginning, “written in our hearts”; but at the end he says, “written not on tables of stone, but on tables that are hearts of flesh”-meaning evidently on the hearts of the Corinthians. Of course this last is the sense which coheres with the figure. Pauls ministry wrote the Epistle of Christ upon the Corinthians, or, if we prefer it, wrought such a change in their hearts that they became an epistle of Christ, an epistle to which he appealed in proof of his apostolic calling. In expressing himself as he does about this, he is again anticipating the coming contrast of Law and Gospel. Nobody would think of writing a letter on tables of stone, and he only says “not on stone tables” because he has in his mind the difference between the Mosaic and the Christian dispensation. It is quite out of place to refer to Eze 11:19; Eze 36:26, and to drag in the contrast between hard and tender hearts. What Paul means is that the Epistle of Christ is not written on dead matter, but on human nature, and that too at its finest and deepest. When we remember the sense of depth and inwardness which attaches to the heart in Scripture, it is not forcing the words to find in them the suggestion that the Gospel works no merely outward change. It is not written on the surface, but in the soul. The Spirit of the living God finds access for itself to the secret places of the human spirit; the most hidden recesses of our nature are open to it, and the very heart is made new. To be able to write there for Christ, to point not to anything dead, but to living men and women, not to anything superficial, but to a change that has reached the very core of mans being, and works its way out from thence, is the testimonial which guarantees the evangelist; it is the divine attestation that he is in the true apostolical succession.<\/p>\n

What, then, does Paul mean by the other clause “ye are our epistle, written on our hearts?” I do not think we can get much more than an emotional certainty about this expression. When a man has been an intensely interested spectator, still more an intensely interested actor, in any great affair, he might say afterwards that the whole thing and all its circumstances were engraved upon his heart. I imagine that is what St. Paul means here. The conversion of the Corinthians made them an epistle of Christ: in making them believers through St. Pauls ministry, Christ wrote on their hearts what was really an epistle to the world; and the whole transaction, in which Pauls feelings had been deeply engaged, stood written on his heart for ever. Interpretations that go beyond this do not seem to me to be justified by the words. Thus Heinrici and Meyer say, “We have in our own consciousness the certainty of being recommended to you by yourselves and to others by you”; and they elucidate this by saying, “The Apostles own good consciousness was, as it were, the tablet on which this living epistle of the Corinthians stood, and that had to be left unassailed even by the most malevolent.” A sense so pragmatical and pedantic, even if one can grasp it at all, is surely out of place, and many readers will fail to discover it in the text. What the words do convey is the warm love of the Apostle, who had exercised his ministry among the Corinthians with all the passion of his nature, and who still bore on his ardent heart the fresh impression of his work and its results.<\/p>\n

Amid all these details let us take care not to lose the one great lesson of the passage. Christian people owe a testimony to Christ. His name has been pronounced over them, and all who look at them ought to see His nature. We should discern in the heart and in the behavior of Christians the handwriting, let us say the characters, not of avarice, of suspicion, of envy, of lust, of falsehood, of pride, but of Christ. It is to us He has committed Himself; we are the certification to men of what He does for man; His character is in our care. The true epistles of Christ to the world are not those which are expounded in pulpits; they are not even the gospels in which Christ Himself lives and moves before us; they are living men and women, on the tables of whose hearts the Spirit of the living God, ministered by a true evangelist, has engraved the likeness of Christ Himself. It is not the written Word on which Christianity ultimately depends; it is not the sacraments, nor so-called necessary institutions: it is this inward, spiritual, Divine writing which is the guarantee of all else.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some [others,] epistles of commendation to you, or [letters] of commendation from you? Ch. 2Co 3:1-6. St Paul’s Ministry no self-assumed task, but the communication of the Spirit 1. Do we begin again to commend ourselves? ] A charge had been apparently brought against … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Corinthians 3:1”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-28790","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28790","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28790"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28790\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28790"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=28790"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=28790"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}