Text -- 2 Corinthians 3:6 (NET)

3:6 who made us adequate to be servants of a new covenant not based on the letter but on the Spirit, for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: 2Co 3:6

Who also made us sufficient for such confidence ( hos kai hikanōsen hēmas ).

Late causative verb from hikanos (2Co 3:5) first aorist active indicative, "who (God) rendered us fit."In N.T. only here and Col 1:12.

Robertson: 2Co 3:6

As ministers of a new covenant ( diakonous kainēs diathēkēs ).

Predicate accusative with hikanōsen . For diathēkē see note on Mat 26:28 and for diakonos see note on Mat 20:26 and for kainēs (fresh and effective) see Luk 5:38. Only God can make us that.

Vincent: 2Co 3:6

Hath made us able ministers ( ἱκάνωσεν ἡμᾶς διακόνους )

An unfortunate translation, especially in view of the conventional sense of able . The verb ἱκανόω from ἱκανός sufficient (see on Rom 15:23), means to make sufficient or fit . It occurs only here and Col 1:12. The correct sense is given by Rev., hath made us sufficient as ministers . Compare enabled (ἐνδυναμώσαντι ), 1Ti 1:12.

Vincent: 2Co 3:6

Of the new testament ( καινῆς διαθήκης )

See on Mat 26:28, Mat 26:29. There is no article. Render, as Rev., of a new covenant , in contrast with the Mosaic. See on Heb 9:15. Of course the term is never applied in the gospels or epistles to the collection of New-Testament writings.

Vincent: 2Co 3:6

Of the letter ( γράμματος )

Depending on ministers , not on covenant . For letter , see on writings , Joh 5:47. Here used of the mere formal, written ordinance as contrasted with the Gospel, which is " spirit and life." Compare Rom 2:29; Rom 7:6.

Vincent: 2Co 3:6

Killeth

See on Rom 5:12, Rom 5:13; see on Rom 7:9; see on Rom 8:2. Compare 1Co 15:56. " The living testimony borne to his authority in the Corinthian Church suggests strongly the contrast of the dreary, death-like atmosphere which surrounded the old, graven characters on which his opponents rested their claims" (Stanley).

Wesley: 2Co 3:6

Of the new, evangelical dispensation. Not of the law, fitly called the letter, from God's literally writing it on the two tables.

Wesley: 2Co 3:6

Of the gospel dispensation, which is written on the tables of our hearts by the Spirit.

Wesley: 2Co 3:6

The law, the Mosaic dispensation.

Wesley: 2Co 3:6

Seals in death those who still cleave to it.

Wesley: 2Co 3:6

The gospel, conveying the Spirit to those who receive it.

Wesley: 2Co 3:6

Both spiritual and eternal: yea, if we adhere to the literal sense even of the moral law, if we regard only the precept and the sanction as they stand in themselves, not as they lead us to Christ, they are doubtless a killing ordinance, and bind us down under the sentence of death.

JFB: 2Co 3:6

Rather, as the Greek is the same, corresponding to 2Co 3:5, translate, "sufficient as ministers" (Eph 3:7; Col 1:23).

JFB: 2Co 3:6

"the new covenant" as contrasted with the Old Testament or covenant (1Co 11:25; Gal 4:24). He reverts here again to the contrast between the law on "tables of stone," and that "written by the Spirit on fleshly tables of the heart" (2Co 3:3).

JFB: 2Co 3:6

Joined with "ministers"; ministers not of the mere literal precept, in which the old law, as then understood, consisted; "but of the Spirit," that is, the spiritual holiness which lay under the old law, and which the new covenant brings to light (Mat. 5:17-48) with new motives added, and a new power of obedience imparted, namely, the Holy Spirit (Rom 7:6). Even in writing the letter of the New Testament, Paul and the other sacred writers were ministers not of the letter, but of the spirit. No piety of spirit could exempt a man from the yoke of the letter of each legal ordinance under the Old Testament; for God had appointed this as the way in which He chose a devout Jew to express his state of mind towards God. Christianity, on the other hand, makes the spirit of our outward observances everything, and the letter a secondary consideration (Joh 4:24). Still the moral law of the ten commandments, being written by the finger of God, is as obligatory now as ever; but put more on the Gospel spirit of "love," than on the letter of a servile obedience, and in a deeper and fuller spirituality (Mat. 5:17-48; Rom 13:9). No literal precepts could fully comprehend the wide range of holiness which LOVE, the work of the Holy Spirit, under the Gospel, suggests to the believer's heart instinctively from the word understood in its deep spirituality.

JFB: 2Co 3:6

By bringing home the knowledge of guilt and its punishment, death; 2Co 3:7, "ministration of death" (Rom 7:9).

JFB: 2Co 3:6

The spirit of the Gospel when brought home to the heart by the Holy Spirit, gives new spiritual life to a man (Rom 6:4, Rom 6:11). This "spirit of life" is for us in Christ Jesus (Rom 8:2, Rom 8:10), who dwells in the believer as a "quickening" or "life-giving Spirit" (1Co 15:45). Note, the spiritualism of rationalists is very different. It would admit no "stereotyped revelation," except so much as man's own inner instrument of revelation, the conscience and reason, can approve of: thus making the conscience judge of the written word, whereas the apostles make the written word the judge of the conscience (Act 17:11; 1Pe 4:1). True spirituality rests on the whole written word, applied to the soul by the Holy Spirit as the only infallible interpreter of its far-reaching spirituality. The letter is nothing without the spirit, in a subject essentially spiritual. The spirit is nothing without the letter, in a record substantially historical.

Clarke: 2Co 3:6

Who hath made us able ministers - This is a more formal answer to the question, Who is sufficient for these things? προς ταυτα τις ἱκανος ; 1Co 2:16. God, says the apostle, has made us able ministers; ἱκανωσεν ἡμας διακονους, he has made us sufficient for these things; for the reader will observe that he uses the same word in both places. We apostles execute, under the Divine influence, what God himself has devised. We are ministers of the new covenant; of this new dispensation of truth, light, and life, by Christ Jesus; a system which not only proves itself to have come from God, but necessarily implies that God himself by his own Spirit is a continual agent in it, ever bringing its mighty purposes to pass. On the words καινη διαθηκη, new covenant, see the Preface to the gospel of St. Matthew

Clarke: 2Co 3:6

Not of the letter, but of the Spirit - The apostle does not mean here, as some have imagined, that he states himself to be a minister of the New Testament, in opposition to the Old; and that it is the Old Testament that kills, and the New that gives life; but that the New Testament gives the proper meaning of the Old; for the old covenant had its letter and its spirit, its literal and its spiritual meaning. The law was founded on the very supposition of the Gospel; and all its sacrifices, types, and ceremonies refer to the Gospel. The Jews rested in the letter, which not only afforded no means of life, but killed, by condemning every transgressor to death. They did not look at the spirit; did not endeavor to find out the spiritual meaning; and therefore they rejected Christ, who was the end of the law for justification; and so for redemption from death to every one that believes. The new covenant set all these spiritual things at once before their eyes, and showed them the end, object, and design of the law; and thus the apostles who preached it were ministers of that Spirit which gives life

Every institution has its letter as well as its spirit, as every word must refer to something of which it is the sign or significator. The Gospel has both its letter and its spirit; and multitudes of professing Christians, by resting in the Letter, receive not the life which it is calculated to impart. Water, in baptism, is the letter that points out the purification of the soul; they who rest in this letter are without this purification; and dying in that state they die eternally. Bread and wine in the sacrament of the Lord’ s Supper, are the letter; the atoning efficacy of the death of Jesus, and the grace communicated by this to the soul of a believer, are the spirit. Multitudes rest in this letter, simply receiving these symbols, without reference to the atonement, or to their guilt; and thus lose the benefit of the atonement and the salvation of their souls. The whole Christian life is comprehended by our Lord under the letter, Follow me. Does not any one see that a man, taking up this letter only, and following Christ through Judea, Galilee, Samaria, etc., to the city, temple, villages, seacoast, mountains, etc., fulfilled no part of the spirit; and might, with all this following, lose his soul? Whereas the Spirit, viz. receive my doctrine, believe my sayings, look by faith for the fulfillment of my promises, imitate my example, would necessarily lead him to life eternal. It may be safely asserted that the Jews, in no period of their history, ever rested more in the letter of their law than the vast majority of Christians are doing in the letter of the Gospel. Unto multitudes of Christians Christ may truly say: Ye will not come unto me that ye may have life.

Calvin: 2Co 3:6

6.Who hath made us competent ³⁷⁶ He had acknowledged himself to be altogether useless. Now he declares, that, by the grace of God, he has been qualified ³⁷⁷ for an office, for which he was previously unqualified. From this we infer its magnitude and difficulty, as it can be undertaken by no one, that has not been previously prepared and fashioned for it by God. It is the Apostle’s intention, also, to extol the dignity of the gospel. There is, at the same time, no doubt, that he indirectly exposes the poverty of those, who boasted in lofty terms of their endowments, while they were not furnished with so much as a single drop of heavenly grace.

Not of the letter but of the spirit He now follows out the comparison between the law and the gospel, which he had previously touched upon. It is uncertain, however, whether he was led into this discussion, from seeing that there were at Corinth certain perverse ³⁷⁸ devotees of the law, or whether he took occasion from something else to enter upon it. For my part, as I see no evidence that the false apostles had there confounded the law and the gospel, I am rather of opinion, that, as he had to do with lifeless declaimers, who endeavored to obtain applause through mere prating, ³⁷⁹ and as he saw, that the ears of the Corinthians were captivated with such glitter, he was desirous to show them what was the chief excellence of the gospel, and what was the chief praise of its ministers. Now this he makes to consist in the efficacy of the Spirit. A comparison between the law and the gospel was fitted in no ordinary degree to show this. This appears to me to be the reason why he came to enter upon it.

There is, however, no doubt, that by the term letter, he means the Old Testament, as by the term spirit he means the gospel; for, after having called himself a minister of the New Testament, he immediately adds, by way of exposition, that he is a minister of the spirit, and contrasts the letter with the spirit. We must now enquire into the reason of this designation. The exposition contrived by Origen has got into general circulation — that by the letter we ought to understand the grammatical and genuine meaning of Scripture, or the literal sense, (as they call it,) and that by the spirit is meant the allegorical meaning, which is commonly reckoned to be the spiritual meaning. Accordingly, during several centuries, nothing was more commonly said, or more generally received, than this — that Paul here furnishes us with a key for expounding Scripture by allegories, while nothing is farther from his intention. For by the term letter he means outward preaching, of such a kind as does not reach the heart; and, on the other hand, by spirit he means living doctrine, of such a nature as worketh effectually (1Th 2:13) on the minds of men, ³⁸⁰ through the grace of the Spirit. By the term letter, therefore, is meant literal preaching — that is, dead and ineffectual, perceived only by the ear. By the term spirit, on the other hand, is meant spiritual doctrine, that is, what is not merely uttered with the mouth, but effectually makes its way to the souls of men with a lively feeling. For Paul had an eye to the passage in Jeremiah, that I quoted a little ago, (Jer 31:31,) where the Lord says, that his law had been proclaimed merely with the mouth, and that it had, therefore, been of short duration, because the people did not embrace it in their heart, and he promises the Spirit of regeneration under the reign of Christ, to write his gospel, that is, the new covenant, upon their hearts. Paul now makes it his boast, that the accomplishment of that prophecy is to be seen in his preaching, that the Corinthians may perceive, how worthless is the loquacity of those vain boasters, who make incessant noise ³⁸¹ while devoid of the efficacy of the Spirit.

It is asked, however, whether God, under the Old Testament, merely sounded forth in the way of an external voice, and did not also speak inwardly to the hearts of the pious by his Spirit. I answer in the first place, that Paul here takes into view what belonged peculiarly to the law; for although God then wrought by his Spirit, yet that did not take its rise from the ministry of Moses, but from the grace of Christ, as it is said in Joh 1:17 —

The law was given by Moses;
but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

True, indeed, the grace of God did not, during all that time, lie dormant, but it is enough that it was not a benefit that belonged to the law. ³⁸² For Moses had discharged his office, when he had delivered to the people the doctrine of life, adding threatenings and promises. For this reason he gives to the law the name of the letter, because it is in itself a dead preaching; but the gospel he calls spirit, because the ministry of the gospel is living, nay, lifegiving.

I answer secondly, that these things are not affirmed absolutely in reference either to the law or to the gospel, but in respect of the contrast between the one and the other; for even the gospel is not always spirit. When, however, we come to compare the two, it is truly and properly affirmed, that the nature of the law is to teach men literally, in such a way that it does not reach farther than the ear; and that, on the other hand, the nature of the gospel is to teach spiritually, because it is the instrument of Christ’s grace. This depends on the appointment of God, who has seen it meet to manifest the efficacy of his Spirit more clearly in the gospel than in the law, for it is his work exclusively to teach effectually the minds of men.

When Paul, however, calls himself a Minister of the Spirit, he does not mean by this, that the grace of the Holy Spirit and his influence, were tied to his preaching, so that he could, whenever he pleased, breathe forth the Spirit along with the utterance of the voice. He simply means, that Christ blessed his ministry, and thus accomplished what was predicted respecting the gospel. It is one thing for Christ to connect his influence with a man’s doctrine. ³⁸³ and quite another for the man’s doctrine ³⁸⁴ to have such efficacy of itself. We are, then, Ministers of the Spirit, not as if we held him inclosed within us, or as it were captive — not as if we could at our pleasure confer his grace upon all, or upon whom we pleased — but because Christ, through our instrumentality, illuminates the minds of men, renews their hearts, and, in short, regenerates them wholly. ³⁸⁵ It is in consequence of there being such a connection and bond of union between Christ’s grace and man’s effort, that in many cases that is ascribed to the minister which belongs exclusively to the Lord. For in that case it is not the mere individual that is looked to, but the entire dispensation of the gospel, which consists, on the one hand, in the secret influence of Christ, and, on the other, in man’s outward efforts.

For the letter killeth. This passage was mistakingly perverted, first by Origen, and afterwards by others, to a spurious signification. From this arose a very pernicious error — that of imagining that the perusal of Scripture would be not merely useless, but even injurious, ³⁸⁶ unless it were drawn out into allegories. This error was the source of many evils. For there was not merely a liberty allowed of adulterating the genuine meaning of Scripture, ³⁸⁷ but the more of audacity any one had in this manner of acting, so much the more eminent an interpreter of Scripture was he accounted. Thus many of the ancients recklessly played with the sacred word of God, ³⁸⁸ as if it had been a ball to be tossed to and fro. In consequence of this, too, heretics had it more in their power to trouble the Church; for as it had become general practice to make any passage whatever ³⁸⁹ mean anything that one might choose, there was no frenzy so absurd or monstrous, as not to admit of being brought forward under some pretext of allegory. Even good men themselves were carried headlong, so as to contrive very many mistaken opinions, led astray through a fondness for allegory.

The meaning of this passage, however, is as follows — that, if the word of God is simply uttered with the mouth, it is an occasion of death, and that it is lifegiving, only when it is received with the heart. The terms letter and spirit, therefore, do not refer to the exposition of the word, but to its influence and fruit. Why it is that the doctrine merely strikes upon the ear, without reaching the heart, we shall see presently.

Defender: 2Co 3:6

Paul is no doubt referring to his very specific call by God, as recorded in Act 9:3, and further in Act 22:14-16 and Act 26:16-18. The "new testament" refers to God's "new covenant," as contrasted with His "old covenant," as made with Moses and the children of Israel. Compare Heb 9:15.

Defender: 2Co 3:6

This contrast between the "letter" and the "spirit" does not refer to a supposed superiority of "spiritual interpretation" over "literal interpretation" of Scripture. While it may be profitable to draw occasional spiritual, allegorical or analogical applications from Scripture, these must always depend for any validity they may have on the basic literal accuracy and truthfulness of the written text. Otherwise, the meaning simply reflects the bias of the interpreter, rather than the intent of the writer. Whenever the writer intended to use a figure of speech to convey his meaning, he always made this clear in the context. Remember also that the human writers were writing under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, whose intent was to reveal God's Word, not hide it.

Defender: 2Co 3:6

In context here, the "letter" is referring to the written Law, inscribed on tables of stone. This Law is "holy, and just, and good" (Rom 7:12), but in and of itself can only condemn sinners, not save them, for "by the law is the knowledge of sin" (Rom 3:20), and "all have sinned" (Rom 3:23)."

TSK: 2Co 3:6

hath : 2Co 5:18-20; Mat 13:52; Rom 1:5; 1Co 3:5, 1Co 3:10, 1Co 12:28; Eph 3:7, Eph 4:11, Eph 4:12; Col 1:25-29; 1Ti 1:11, 1Ti 1:12, 1Ti 4:6; 2Ti 1:11

the new : 2Co 3:14; Jer 31:31; Mat 26:28; Mar 14:24; Luk 22:20; 1Co 11:25; Heb 7:22; Heb 8:6-10, Heb 9:15-20, Heb 12:24, Heb 13:20 *marg.

not : Rom 2:27-29, Rom 7:6

for : 2Co 3:7, 2Co 3:9; Deu 27:26; Rom 3:20, Rom 4:15, Rom 7:9-11; Gal 3:10-12, Gal 3:21

but the : Joh 6:63; Rom 8:2; 1Jo 1:1

giveth life : or, quickeneth, Joh 5:21; Rom 4:17; 1Co 15:45; Eph 2:1, Eph 2:5; 1Pe 3:18

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: 2Co 3:6

Who also hath made us able ministers ... - This translation does not quite meet the force of the original. It would seem to imply that Paul regarded himself and his fellowlaborers as people of talents, and of signal ability; and that he was inclined to boast of it. But this is not the meaning. It refers properly to his sense of the responsibility and difficulty of the work of the ministry; and to the fact that he did not esteem himself to be sufficient for this work in his own strength 2Co 2:16; 2Co 3:5; and he here says that God had made him sufficient: not able, talented, learned, but sufficient ἱκάνωσεν ἡμᾶς hikanōsen hēmas ; he has supplied our deficiency; he has rendered us competent, or fit; if a word may be coined after the manner of the Greek here, "he has sufficienced us for this work."There is no assertion, therefore, here, that they were people of talents, or special ability, but only that God had qualified them for their work, and made them by his grace sufficient to meet the toils and responsibilites of this arduous office.

Of the New Testament - Of the new covenant (note, Mat 26:28), in contradistinction from the old covenant, which was established through Moses. They were appointed to go forth and make the provisions of that new covenant known to a dying world.

Not of the letter - Not of the literal, or verbal meaning, in contradistinction from the Spirit; see the notes on Rom 2:27, Rom 2:29; Rom 7:6. This is said, doubtless, in opposition to the Jews, and Jewish teachers. They insisted much on the letter of the Law, but entered little into its real meaning. They did not seek out the true spiritual sense of the Old Testament; and hence, they rested on the mere literal observance of the rites and ceremonies of religion without understanding their true nature and design. Their service, though in many respects conformed to the letter of the Law, yet became cold, formal, and hypocritical; abounding in mere ceremonies, and where the heart had little to do. Hence, there was little pure spiritual worship offered to God; and hence also they rejected the Messiah whom the old covenant prefigured, and was designed to set forth.

For the letter killeth - compare notes on Rom 4:15; Rom 7:9-10. The mere letter of the Law of Moses. The effect of it was merely to produce condemnation; to produce a sense of guilt, and danger, and not to produce pardon, relief, and joy. The Law denounced death; condemned sin in all forms; and the effect of it was to produce a sense of guilt and condemnation.

But the spirit giveth life - The spirit, in contradistinction from the mere literal interpretation of the Scriptures. The Spirit, that is, Christ, says Locke, compare 2Co 3:17. The spirit here means, says Bloomfield, that new spiritual system, the gospel. The Spirit of God speaking in us, says Doddridge. The spirit here seems to refer to the New Testament, or the new dispensation in contradistinction from the old. That was characterized mainly by its strictness of Law, and by its burdensome rites, and by the severe tone of its denunciation for sin. It did not in itself provide a way of pardon and peace. Law condemns; it does not speak of forgiveness. On the contrary, the gospel, a spiritual system, is designed to impart life and comfort to the soul. It speaks peace. It comes not to condemn, but to save. It discloses a way of mercy, and it invites all to partake and live. It is called "spirit,"probably because its consolations are imparted and secured by the Spirit of God - the source of all true life to the soul. It is the dispensation of the Spirit; and it demands a spiritual service - a service that is free, and elevated, and tending eminently to purify the heart, and to save the soul; see the note on 2Co 3:17.

Poole: 2Co 3:6

This verse plainly openeth what he had said before, and lets us know what sufficiency of God that was of which he there spake. He hath (saith the apostle) not found, but made us sufficient. We were men before, and, through the creating power and providence of God, we had an ability to think and to speak; but God hath made us sufficient, by a supervening act and influence of his grace, to be ministers of the new testament, that is, of the gospel; which being the new revelation of the Divine will, and confirmed by the death of Christ, is called the new testament.

Not of the letter, but of the Spirit: by the letter, here, the apostle understandeth the law; for the law is called the letter, Rom 2:27 Rom 7:6 : Who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law; that is: While thou, by some external acts, professest a subjection to the law (particularly by circumcision) in a multitude of other actions, (which are more valuable in the sight of God than those external acts), thou transgressest the law. The law, in opposition to the gospel, is called the letter, sometimes a dead letter; because it was only a revelation of the will of God concerning man’ s duty, no revelation of God’ s grace, either in pardoning men their omissions of duty, and doing acts contrary to duty, or assisting men to the performance of their duty. As the gospel is also called the Spirit, both in opposition to the carnal ordinances of the law, and because Christ is the matter, subject, and argument of it; and chiefly because, that the preaching of it is so far attended by the Spirit of grace, that where men do not turn their ears from the hearing of it, nor shut their eyes against the light of it, nor harden their hearts against the precepts and rule of it, it becomes (through the free grace of God) effectual to change their hearts, and to turn them from the power of Satan unto God, and to make them truly spiritual and holy.

For the letter (that is, the law) killeth the law showeth men their duty, accuseth, condemneth, and denounceth the wrath of God against men for not doing their duty, but gives no strength for the doing of it. But the

spirit (that is, the gospel) giveth life: the gospel, in the letter of it, showeth the way to life; and the gospel, in the hand of the Spirit, or with the Spirit, working together with it, (the Holy Spirit using it as its instrument), giveth life; both that life which is spiritual, and that which is eternal, as it prepareth the soul for life and immortality.

Haydock: 2Co 3:5-6

To think any thing of ourselves, that may deserve a reward in heaven. ---

But Christ hath made us fit ministers of his New Testament by the Spirit: for the letter of the Old Testament killeth, but the Spirit of the New Testament giveth life. (Witham) ---

The letter. Not rightly understood, and taken without the spirit. (Challoner) ---

This verse, (6th) refers to that in the last chapter, where he says: And for these things who is so fit? Who is so capable of such a ministry? It is God alone who gives us strength, light and grace. I am far from giving a part only to God, and a part ot myself. It all exclusively belongs to him. (St. John Chrysostom)

Gill: 2Co 3:6

Who also hath made us able ministers,.... This is an answer to the question in 2Co 2:16 who is sufficient for these things? no man is of himself; we are indeed sufficient for them, but not of ourselves; our sufficiency is of God, he hath made us able, or sufficient ministers: such ministers as are not of men's, but God's making, are sufficient ones; and none are sufficient but whom God makes so; and those he makes able and sufficient, by giving them spiritual gifts, fitting them for the ministry: and these are ministers

of the New Testament, or "covenant"; the covenant of grace, of which Christ is the Mediator and surety; called "new", not because newly made, for it was made with Christ from everlasting; nor newly revealed, for it was made known to Adam after his fall, and to all the Old Testament patriarchs, and was exhibited under the legal dispensation, though but darkly, in types, shadows, sacrifices, &c. which therefore waxing old is vanished away; and the covenant of grace is now more clearly revealed under the Gospel dispensation, free from all the obscurity it before laboured under; and therefore is called "new", as well as because it will always continue so, and never give way to another covenant: now the Gospel, and the ministry of it, is nothing else but an exhibition of the covenant of grace, its blessings and promises; and the work and business of those who are ministers of it is not to insist upon the covenant of works, the terms, conditions, obligations, promises, and threatenings of that covenant; but to open and explain the nature, promises, and blessings of the covenant of grace: for such who are fit and proper ministers, are ministers

not of the letter, but of the spirit; which is to be understood, not of any difference between the books of the Old and the New Testament, for a faithful minister of the word may and will bring forth things new and old, out of the one as well as the other; nor of the literal and allegorical, or mystical sense of the Scriptures, as if the latter and not the former was only to be attended to; nor of the difference of communicating the Gospel by letters, and preaching it by word of mouth; since both methods may be used for the spread of it, as were by the apostles themselves; but of the difference there is between the law and the Gospel. The law is "the letter", not merely because written in letters, for so likewise is the Gospel; but because it is a mere letter, hereby showing what is to be done or avoided, without any efficacy in it, or communicating any to enable persons to obey its commands, to give life to its observers, or either to sanctify or justify any who are under it, or of the works of it; it is a mere letter, as observed by an unregenerate man, who only regards the externals of it, being unacquainted with its spirituality. The Gospel is "the spirit"; see Joh 6:63 it contains spiritual things, and not things merely natural, moral, and civil, as does the law, but spiritual blessings and promises; it penetrates into the spirit and soul of man, and comes from, and is attended with the Spirit of God. The law is

the letter that

killeth, by irritating and provoking to sin, the cause of death, which though not the design and natural tendency of the law, and therefore not to be blamed, yet so it is, through the corruption of human nature; and by convincing of sin when the sinner is killed, and it dead in his own apprehension; and by not only threatening with death, but by cursing, condemning, and punishing with it:

but the Gospel is

the spirit, which

giveth life; it is a means in the hand of the Spirit of God, of quickening dead sinners, of healing the deadly wounds of sin, of showing the way of life by Christ, and of working faith in the soul, to look to him, and live upon him; it affords food for the support of the spiritual life, and revives souls under the most drooping circumstances. The apostle may allude to a distinction among the Jews, between the body and soul of the law; the words, they say, are גופא תורה, "the body of the law"; and the book of the law is the clothing; and besides these, there is נשמתא דאוריתא, "the soul of the law"; which wise men look into ^w.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: 2Co 3:6

¹ tn Or “competent.”

² sn This new covenant is promised in Jer 31:31-34; 32:40.

Geneva Bible: 2Co 3:6

^{( 2 )} Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the ^{( f )} letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

^{( 2 )} He amplifies his ministry and his fellows: that is to say, the ministry of the Gospel comparing it with the ministry of the Law, which he considers in the person of Moses, by whom the Law was given: against whom he sets Christ the author of the Gospel. Now this comparison is taken from the very substance of the ministry. The Law is as it were a writing in itself, dead, and without efficacy: but the Gospel, and new Covenant, as it were the very power of God itself, in renewing, justifying, and saving men. The Law offers death, accusing all men of unrighteousness: the Gospel offers and gives righteousness and life. The administration of the Law served for a time to the promise: the Gospel remains to the end of the world. Therefore what is the glory of the Law in comparison of the majesty of the Gospel?

^{( f )} Not of the Law but of the Gospel.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: 2Co 3:1-18

1 Lest their false teachers should charge him with vain glory, he shows the faith and graces of the Corinthians to be a sufficient commendation of his ministry.

6 Whereupon entering a comparison between the ministers of the law and of the gospel,

12 he proves that his ministry is so far the more excellent, as the gospel of life and liberty is more glorious than the law of condemnation.

MHCC: 2Co 3:1-11

Even the appearance of self-praise and courting human applause, is painful to the humble and spiritual mind. Nothing is more delightful to faithful ministers, or more to their praise, than the success of their ministry, as shown in the spirits and lives of those among whom they labour. The law of Christ was written in their hearts, and the love of Christ shed abroad there. Nor was it written in tables of stone, as the law of God given to Moses, but on the fleshy (not fleshly, as fleshliness denotes sensuality) tables of the heart, Eze 36:26. Their hearts were humbled and softened to receive this impression, by the new-creating power of the Holy Spirit. He ascribes all the glory to God. And remember, as our whole dependence is upon the Lord, so the whole glory belongs to him alone. The letter killeth: the letter of the law is the ministration of death; and if we rest only in the letter of the gospel, we shall not be the better for so doing: but the Holy Spirit gives life spiritual, and life eternal. The Old Testament dispensation was the ministration of death, but the New Testament of life. The law made known sin, and the wrath and curse of God; it showed us a God above us, and a God against us; but the gospel makes known grace, and Emmanuel, God with us. Therein the righteousness of God by faith is revealed; and this shows us that the just shall live by his faith; this makes known the grace and mercy of God through Jesus Christ, for obtaining the forgiveness of sins and eternal life. The gospel so much exceeds the law in glory, that it eclipses the glory of the legal dispensation. But even the New Testament will be a killing letter, if shown as a mere system or form, and without dependence on God the Holy Spirit, to give it a quickening power.

Matthew Henry: 2Co 3:6-11

Here the apostle makes a comparison between the Old Testament and the New, the law of Moses and the gospel of Jesus Christ, and values himself and his fellow-labourers by this, that they were able ministers of the New Testament, that God had made them so, 2Co 3:6. This he does in answer to the accusations of false teachers, who magnify greatly the law of Moses.

I. He distinguishes between the letter and the spirit even of the New Testament, 2Co 3:6. As able ministers of the New Testament, they were ministers not merely of the letter, to read the written word, or to preach the letter of the gospel only, but they were ministers of the Spirit also; the Spirit of God did accompany their ministrations. The letter killeth; this the letter of the law does, for that is the ministration of death; and if we rest only in the letter of the gospel we shall be never the better for so doing, for even that will be a savour of death unto death; but the Spirit of the gospel, going along with the ministry of the gospel, giveth life spiritual and life eternal.

II. He shows the difference between the Old Testament and the New, and the excellency of the gospel above the law. For, 1. The Old Testament dispensation was the ministration of death (2Co 3:7), whereas that of the New Testament is the ministration of life. The law discovered sin, and the wrath and curse of God. This showed us a God above us and a God against us; but the gospel discovers grace, and Emmanuel, God with us. Upon this account the gospel is more glorious than the law; and yet that had a glory in it, witness the shining of Moses's face (an indication thereof) when he came down from the mount with the tables in his hand, that reflected rays of brightness upon his countenance. 2. The law was the ministration of condemnation, for that condemned and cursed every one who continued not in all things written therein to do them; but the gospel is the ministration of righteousness: therein the righteousness of God by faith is revealed. This shows us that the just shall live by his faith. This reveals the grace and mercy of God through Jesus Christ, for obtaining the remission of sins and eternal life. The gospel therefore so much exceeds in glory that in a manner it eclipses the glory of the legal dispensation, 2Co 3:10. As the shining of a burning lamp is lost, or not regarded, when the sun arises and goes forth in his strength; so there was no glory in the Old Testament, in comparison with that of the New. 3. The law is done away, but the gospel does and shall remain, 2Co 3:11. Not only did the glory of Moses's face go away, but the glory of Moses's law is done away also; yea, the law of Moses itself is now abolished. That dispensation was only to continue for a time, and then to vanish away; whereas the gospel shall remain to the end of the world, and is always fresh and flourishing and remains glorious.

Barclay: 2Co 3:4-11

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 (0410) Shaddai (07706), 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.

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!"

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.

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.

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 (3501), which means new in point of time and that alone. A young person is neos (3501) because he is a newcomer into the world. Second, there is kainos (2537), which means not only new in point of time, but also new in quality. If something is kainos (2537) it has brought a fresh clement into the situation. It is the word kainos (2537) 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.

Wherein does this difference lie?

(i) The old covenant was based on a written document. We can see the story of its initiation in Exo 24:1-8. 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.

(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.

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. © It killed strength. It was perfectly able to tell a man what to do, but it could not help him to do it.

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. © 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.

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). 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.

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.

Constable: 2Co 1:12--8:1

II. ANSWERS TO INSINUATIONS ABOUT THE SINCERITY OF PAUL'S COMMITMENT TO THE CORINTHIANS AND TO THE MINISTRY 1:12--7:16

Second Corinthians is a rather difficult book to outline because it is a very personal letter.

"Traditionally, Paul's two letters to Timothy and one to Titus are called the Pastorals.' But 2 Corinthians has a strong claim to be recognized as the Pastoral Epistle par excellence, because it contains not pure' but applied' pastoralia."⁶³

Paul's purpose in writing was not to teach doctrine primarily, though he did so to a considerable extent. It was primarily to answer the criticisms of opponents who were seeking to undermine his ministry, especially in Corinth.

"Here it is his strong feeling rather than any deliberate arrangement that suggests the order of his utterances. Nevertheless, although exact analysis is seldom possible owing to digressions and repetitions, yet some divisions are fairly clear, and the letter becomes more intelligible when they are noted."⁶⁴

Constable: 2Co 3:1--6:11

B. Exposition of Paul's view of the ministry 3:1-6:10

The apostle proceeded to explain his view of Christian ministry further so his readers would appreciate and adopt his viewpoint and not lose heart.

Constable: 2Co 3:1-11

1. The superiority of Christian ministry to Mosaic ministry 3:1-11

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.

"The countermissionaries in Corinth are, in some significant way, exponents of the Mosaic ministry. They are, to use the term imprecisely, Judaizers.'"¹¹⁸

Constable: 2Co 3:4-11

The old and new covenants 3:4-11

3:4 Jesus Christ had given Paul confidence that the changes that the gospel had produced in the Corinthians validated his apostolic credentials. That confidence was not merely the product of Paul's imagination.

3:5 Paul did not want his readers to confuse this confidence with the confidence that comes from feeling adequate or self-sufficient. Our service is really God working through us rather than we serving Him. God is the one who makes us adequate servants. Paul was contrasting God-confidence with self-confidence.

3:6 Paul proceeded to identify seven contrasts between the New Covenant (agreement, Gr. diatheke) under which Christians serve God and the Old Covenant under which believing Israelites served God.¹²¹ He did so to heighten understanding of and appreciation for the ministry of Christians. The Old Covenant in view is the Mosaic Covenant, and the New Covenant is the covenant that Jesus Christ ratified by His death (Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25; Heb. 13:20).¹²²

The Old Covenant was very specific concerning human responsibilities. It was essentially an objective, external standard that God revealed for His people Israel without any special enabling grace. However the New Covenant rests on promises that include the indwelling and empowering presence of God's Holy Spirit who enables the believer to obey (John 14:17; 16:13; Acts 1:4, 8; Rom. 8:4). It is also more general in its demands.

The outcomes or results of each covenant differ too. The Old Covenant slew people in the sense that it showed how impossible it was to measure up to God's requirements. Moreover it announced a death sentence on all who fell short (cf. Rom. 7:9-11; Gal. 3:10). The New Covenant, on the other hand, leads to fullness of life because God's Spirit helps the believer do God's will (cf. Rom. 7:6; 8:3).

Paul used "Spirit" in this passage in a double sense. On the one hand, he contrasted the letter or exact wording of the Old Covenant with the spirit or true intention of the New Covenant. On the other hand, he contrasted the non-enabling, external words of the Old Covenant with the enabling, internal Holy Spirit of the New Covenant (cf. Rom. 2:28-29; 7:6).¹²³ The second of these senses is more primary.

3:7-8 Another contrast between the two covenants concerns the medium God used to carry them to His people. He employed stone tablets for the Old Covenant but His Holy Spirit for the New Covenant. These vehicles represent the nature of each covenant: hard and unbending compared to personal and friendly.

Another contrast is the relative glory of the ministries that marked the economies that the covenants created.¹²⁴ Both covenants involved ministry to God that resulted in glory for God. However the glory of the New Covenant far surpasses the glory of the Old Covenant. Here Paul began to think about the glory that appeared on Moses' face when he descended from Mt. Sinai after he had communed with God for 40 days and nights (Exod. 34:29-35). The glory (i.e., the manifest evidence of God's presence) was so strong when Moses reentered the camp that the Israelites could not look at him for very long. The evidence of God's presence was very strong during the economy when a covenant leading to death governed God's people. How much stronger, Paul argued, will be the manifestation of God's glory in an age when His life-giving Spirit inhabits His people?

3:9-10 The New Covenant is also more glorious than the Old in that it manifests the character and purposes of God more fully and finally. Similarly the dawning of the sun transcends and supercedes the illumination of a lamp. Greater glory attends the proclamation of the gospel than was true when God gave the Mosaic Law.

The purpose of the New Covenant is to produce righteousness. The purpose of the Old Covenant was to show that humans stand condemned because we cannot please God by obeying Him completely. Both covenants had both purposes, but their primary characteristics are what Paul contrasted here. This is Paul's sixth contrast.

3:10 The New Covenant glorifies God so much more than the Old Covenant did that Paul could say the Old Covenant had no glory by comparison.

3:11 Paul's seventh and last contrast is between the temporary character of the Old Covenant and the permanent character of the New. The New will remain (cf. Heb. 13:20). The Old has passed away (cf. Rom. 10:4; Gal. 5:1; Heb. 7:12). Paul compared the fading glory on Moses' face with the fading glory of the Old Covenant.

The New Covenant went into effect and replaced the Old Covenant when Jesus Christ died. Some of its benefits began to bless all people immediately (vv. 6-11; cf. Heb. 10:1-18). However other of its benefits, specifically those on Israel, will not take effect until God resumes dealing with Israel as a nation (Jer. 31:31-34). This will happen when Jesus Christ returns to the earth and restores Israel as her Messiah.

Summary of Contrasts between the Old and New Covenants
1.	economy	(old)	new	v. 6
2.	type	letter	spirit	v. 6
3.	results manward	death	life	v. 6
4.	vehicle	stone	Spirit	v. 7
5.	results Godward	some glory	greater glory	vv. 7, 8, 10
6.	purpose	condemnation	righteousness	v. 9
7.	duration	temporary	permanent	v. 11

"The thrust of these covenantal contrasts is that the New Covenant provides divine enablement and has replaced the Old Covenant. In this way Paul firmly established the superiority of his apostolic ministry over that of his Judaizing opponents."¹²⁵

Paul was not saying the Old Covenant involved laws but the New Covenant does not. Both covenants include both laws and grace, though there were more laws in the Old Covenant and there is more grace in the New. His purpose was to contrast the spirit, emphasis, and primary characteristics of each covenant.

"In II Corinthians 3:7-11 Paul makes the comparison between what is ministered through Moses and what is ministered through Christ. That which Moses ministered is called a ministration of death and it is specifically said to have been written and engraved in stones. The only part of the Mosaic Law which was written in stones was the Ten Commandments--that category which some designate as the moral part of the law. Thus, this passage says that the Ten Commandments are a ministration of death; and furthermore, the same passage declares in no uncertain terms that they are done away (vs. 11). Language could not be clearer, and yet there are fewer truths of which it is harder to convince people."¹²⁶

The best explanation for the Christian's relationship to the Ten Commandments that I have found is as follows. God has terminated the whole Mosaic code, of which the Ten Commandments were a part, as a code. We are now under a new code (covenant), the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2), which contains nine of the Ten Commandments.¹²⁷

College: 2Co 3:1-18

2 CORINTHIANS 3

2. A Living Letter of Recommendation Sent (3:1-3)

3:1 Are we beginning to commend ourselves again?

Paul asks this question tongue-in-cheek with a twinkle in his eye because it seems to have been a criticism leveled against him by the Corinthians or their newly come advisors. He pokes fun at his accusers on this point since he has just associated himself in 2:14-17 with those who are the aroma of Christ, sent by God, through whom Christ speaks. This is hardly boastful self-commendation. It is divine commendation to a hard life of service and suffering.

It is not apparent that "again" refers back to some point in 2 Corinthians or 1 Corinthians, nor is it possible to know if it has to do with something he said in the Severe Letter or during the Painful Visit. All that is certain is that Paul does not desire anything he has just said or will say to be construed by anyone as patting himself on the back. This is no moot issue since the verb "commend" (sunivsthmi, synistçmi) returns a hefty eight more times in 2 Corinthians (4:2; 5:12; 6:4; 7:11; 10:12; 10:18 - twice; 12:11) with Paul seeming to struggle internally to speak positively about himself and his ministry without disconnecting his accomplishments and personal pride from God's working through him. He severely criticizes others, probably the outside agitators, particularly in 2 Cor 10:12-18, for working too hard to make themselves look good and ignoring that only God's approval is worth anything in the long run.

The answer to the question, then, is both "yes" and "no." Paul does commend himself in what God has done and is doing through him but not in anything of himself alone. Again, Paul models a healthy spiritual condition for those called to minister in his day and in ours.

Or do we need, like some people, letters of recommendation to you or from you?

The question of his own self-commendation leads Paul to the question he really wants to get to: the matter of formal letters of recommendation. Such letters were commonplace in the Greco-Roman world of Paul's day, used between synagogues as well (Acts 9:2; 22:50), and were a necessity within the church as missionaries and other Christian travelers moved among the congregations stretched out from one end of the Mediterranean to the other.

Congregations supplied these letters to travelers who had proved their value and their genuineness as Christian representatives as they set off for their next destinations, which suggests that the troublesome visitors to Corinth may be gone or about to go. Evidence of this practice can be seen in Acts 18:27 concerning Apollos. Certainly Paul is not opposed to such recommendations since he himself often provides them, usually at the end of his letters for his couriers (Rom 16:1 - Phoebe; 1 Cor 16:10 - Timothy; Phil 2:19 - Timothy and Epaphroditus; 2 Cor 8:22 - Titus; Col 4:7 - Tychicus and Onesimus). The practice is not so different from recommendations for revival speakers or even ministerial candidates churches rely on today.

Paul's question, accompanied by the untranslated negative particle (mhv, mç), presumes a vigorous objection. Paul does not believe that he, as founding apostle of the Corinthian congregation, should be expected to show such a letter to them now or could have been in the past. To whom would he have shown such a letter on his founding visit? No congregation existed. Surely, the mushrooming of the Corinthian congregation and its vitality now are more than enough commendation of his authentic credentials, as Paul will seek to establish in the following verses. Paul, indeed, would neither need letters "to you" nor "from you" since he either travels to pioneer churches or back to churches he has already planted. He lets others "water," as he says in 1 Cor 4:6.

The word "some" links to the word "many" in 2 Cor 1:17, indicating a meddlesome bunch who have come to Corinth and have not only violated the true gospel by their conduct and their message but made a mess for Paul to deal with. These have come to Corinth apparently flaunting their letters from other congregations as well as attempting to diminish Paul's stature among the Corinthians because he came with no letters (and perhaps questioning his apostolic status because he was not one of the original twelve apostles). From where did these travelers receive their letters? Attempts to show that their letters came from principals in the Jerusalem church like James and Peter forces too much of a connection with Galatians. They would hardly seem to need letters from the Corinthian church they seem to be requesting if they already had such a weighty recommendation.

3:2 You yourselves are our letter,

By adding "yourselves" the NIV achieves the emphasis suggested by the very appearance of the pronoun "you" (uJmei'", hymeis ) which is unnecessary in Greek. Dramatically, Paul lowers the boom which should make the Corinthians kick themselves for allowing the outsiders to influence them into thinking badly of Paul. They themselves are the best recommendation letter possible.

written on our hearts,

The fact that Paul speaks of "our hearts" (kardivai" eJmw'n, kardiais hemôn) suggests that he primarily has in mind a letter "from" the Corinthians to other congregations, the easily overlooked last phrase of the second question in 2 Cor 3:1. The story of their conversion, the power of the Spirit in reorienting their lives, the maturing of their congregation, has been permanently recorded on his heart (signified by the verb eggravfw, engraphô only used here and in 3:2 in the NT) and will always be carried there, as one might keep a precious letter from a loved one close in safe-keeping.

Some translations (namely RSV) and interpreters favor replacement of "our" with "your" since the latter does appear in a few Greek manuscripts and would seem at first to be in harmony with what Paul is saying, especially as he appears to refer to hearts of the Corinthians in 2 Cor 3:3. However, they do so in the face of overpowering textual evidence for "our," abandoning also the normal criterion that the more difficult reading is usually correct and downplaying the significance of 2 Cor 7:3, where Paul tells the Corinthians specifically that they "have a place in our hearts."

Once one thinks about it, a letter of recommendation the Corinthians would write would be carried by Paul, not themselves. If they wrote this letter Paul carries on his heart, doesn't this mean they know its content themselves and have it on their hearts as well rather than on paper, evidencing Paul's authenticity? This would account for Paul's wording of "our hearts" as well as provide reasonable transition to verse 3.

known and read by everybody.

The present passive form of the participles, translated by the NIV as "known" (ginwskomevnh, ginôskomenç) and "read" (ajnaginwskomevnh, anaginôskomenç), underscores that, despite its personal nature to himself, Paul has in mind an open letter even now being scrutinized by the general public. The word "everybody," though something of an exaggeration, certainly assists with this idea. Corinth was, it must be remembered, a very well-known, even notorious city of its time, and knowledge of Christianity settling among its people would be notable to those learning of it, whether from Paul and his associates, or from the witness of the Corinthians themselves to their neighborhoods or to the surrounding regions.

The order of the participles "known" and "read" is reversed from the normal experience of studying a document before understanding its content. However, the purpose of this may be a matter of emphasis or intensity, since the two words are to a certain extent synonymous and philologically related, with anaginôskomenç being built from ginôskomenç. Paul also may be trying to balance the actual experience of becoming acquainted with people like the Corinthian believers with the metaphor he has working of calling them a letter.

It may well be that Paul intends a contrast between the public availability of his letter of recommendation and the letters held close-to-the-vest by the visiting troublemakers. Nevertheless, all of what Paul is saying coincides with what he already told the Corinthians in 1 Cor 9:2-3: "You are the seal of my apostleship."

3:3 You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry,

While the Corinthian letter of recommendation may be inscribed on Paul's heart, Paul now clarifies that the origin, or author, of the letter is not himself nor the Corinthians but Christ alone. This they "show" or "exhibit" (fanerovw, phaneroô) to others by their changed lives made possible only by his power at work in them.

The NIV's "the result of our ministry" is a generic translation of a participle (diakonhqei'sa, diakonçtheisa) which probably is intended to have more color here. True enough, the word as a verb (diakonevw, diakoneô) or a noun (diakoniva, diakonia ) usually refers to ministering or caring for someone in the more than 60 times these two words are found in the NT. However, the word can refer to someone simply administrating a task, such as the collection, as it is used in 2 Cor 8:19 and 8:20. In fact, the word can also, quite appropriate to the present context, refer to someone who either "delivers" (found in the RSV, NEB, TEV, and NAB for this verse) a letter or acts as secretary to "pen" a letter (technically, an amanuensis). The preposition uJpov ( hypo ), not translated by the NIV, usually translated "by" or "by means of," can even be translated "at the hands of," which would result in the translation "having been delivered by our hands."

Paul means to convey two ideas at the same time, then. First, he has had a vital role in bringing the Corinthian church into being, having done so through his nurturing ministry with them. Second, desiring to complement his letter metaphor, the "result," as the NIV puts it, is that he delivered Christ's letter, the Corinthians, for all to read.

written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God,

Ink in Paul's day combined carbon soot with a gummy solution. This resulted in all ink being black, explaining why the noun "ink" (mevlan, melan ) derives from the adjective "black" (mevla", melas ). The writing surface was normally an 8¥10 sheet of papyrus, formed from crosswise strips of the tubular hollow reed of the same name manufactured in Egypt. Twenty sheets of papyrus glued together formed a scroll, called a "biblos." Broken pieces of pottery might be used particularly as receipts for sales of goods. The writing instrument was a reed pen, called a "kalamos," mentioned in 3 John 13.

Paul further removes the letter he is describing from being anything like a normal letter. This letter of recommendation, the Corinthians themselves, is so unusual, and by implication, superior, to a normal letter of this type that the writing material is not even plain old ink, signifying that a pen is not used either. Rather, the lettering flows through the Holy Spirit who transmits the very desire of God himself, convicting people of their need for salvation. This viewpoint is consistent with what Paul says elsewhere about the Spirit's power in 2 Cor 1:22; 1 Cor 2:4; Gal 3:2-5; and 1 Thess 1:5-6. Thus, Paul establishes that not only is his ministry divinely appointed (2 Cor 2:14-17) but so also is his letter of recommendation. What he has, then, is eminently more prestigious than anything his accusing rivals might display.

Paul's use of the phrase "the living God" clamors back to rudimentary Jewish orientation which conceives of God in contrast to dead, stone idols. Paul elegantly speaks to this issue at the Areopagus of Athens in Acts 17:24-31, suitable arguing for the present context that God should be seen rather in the life he has given to humanity and in the resurrected life of Christ now present in believers. The phrase appears often in the OT (Deut 5:26; Josh 3:10; 1 Sam 17:26,36; 2 Kgs 19:4; Ps 84:3; and Isa 37:4,17, as representative), and Paul employs it when this distinctively Jewish perspective on God seems particularly poignant, as he does in 2 Cor 6:16 and 1 Thess 1:9.

not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

Paul offers yet a final contrast between a normal letter and the superior, divine letter he has in mind. The power of this image goes far beyond anything one would have expected. Readers might have anticipated a final contrast between this letter written on the heart and inferior ones written on papyrus, or scrolls. But Paul leaves readers breathless by trading in this mundane antithesis for one which rocks them to the core. "Tablets of stone" can refer to nothing else but the Ten Commandments, identified as being written on two "tablets of stone" on Mt. Sinai by the very finger of God (Exod 24:12; 31:18; Deut 9:10-11).

What suggests this striking switch to Paul must have been Ezek 11:19 and 36:26. There, the prophet tells the Jews in exile that God will revolutionize the way the law is known, no longer on tablets of clay but on human hearts. He will do surgery on their hearts, too, no longer to be dead hearts of stone but vibrant hearts of flesh. This he will accomplish by putting his Spirit in them so they will know his laws and live by his decrees. Coinciding with this prophecy, though not as suggestive in its exact wording, is the more familiar Jer 31:33 in which God promises to "put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts."

Paul's shift in imagery suggests the unthinkable, that Jewish legalism is nothing more than idol worship, replacing God with stone plaques, no better than what pagans do (compare Romans 1-2). God may have inscribed the plaques and provided the laws but he never intended to be confined by them - or the greater horror - squeezed out by them. Jesus in fact confronts Jews with this very point relentlessly in the gospels (Matt 5-6; 12:1-8; Mark 7; Luke 6:6-11; 13:10-21), and Paul just as vehemently continues Jesus' campaign against this same Jewish monster (Galatians 3; Romans 2-3) which has raised its ugly head within Christianity, threatening to destroy it as Paul views the situation (2 Cor 3:6).

Mention of this phrase "tablets of stone" sets the table for Paul's full-blown exposι on the subject in 2 Cor 3:7-18. For now, Paul wants readers to understand that Christianity marks a fundamentally new way in which God does business with people and that this can be seen, not only in Paul's heart and in the hearts of the Corinthians but also in the heart and life of every believer impacted by God's Spirit. This is profoundly more important than any human-originated letter of recommendation to or from any congregation. It is certainly more significant toward identifying a true minister of the gospel, despite the urgings of this group of transient "Christian" leaders currently in Corinth, who, more than likely, are relentless, ignorant purveyors of such a legalistic, Jewish-oriented message throughout the church of Paul's day.

3. A Personal Reference Provided (3:4-6)

3:4 Such confidence as this is ours through Christ before God.

Paul's confidence in the adequacy of his calling as a minister and an apostle to the Corinthians does not come from himself. Rather, the confidence he has in mind refers back to the Corinthians themselves as the letter on his heart, which itself depends really on their own confidence in displaying themselves as an open letter for all to see. Both his personal confidence and his confidence in them, then, flow out of his relationship with God which is made possible only because of Christ.

3:5 Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God.

Paul essentially repeats himself and thereby emphasizes his point about the origin of his confidence, substituting the word "confidence" with "competence." The word "competence" (iJkanoiv, hikanoi ) is the plural form of the exact same word he used in his searching question, "Who is equal to such a task?" in 2 Cor 2:16 (translated by NIV there as "equal"). He employs the rare noun form of the word, found only here in the NT, translated as "competence" (iJkanovth", hikanotçs) by the NIV in the second clause of this verse. Again in 3:6, he will use a rare verb form of the word, the verb "has made competent" (iJkanovw, hikanoô), used only here and in Col 1:12 in the NT. Paul leaves little doubt that he means to answer the question posed in 2 Cor 2:16 in these verses.

Paul also emphasizes, at the expense of considerable awkwardness, the fact that whatever he has - or whatever anyone has for that matter - that is useful for ministry neither is "from ourselves" (ajf= eJautw'n, aph' heautôn) nor comes "out of ourselves" (ejx eJautw'n, ex heautôn), which the NIV translates as "in ourselves" and "for ourselves." It is not self-generated from any natural abilities. Thereby, no one can calculate (NIV's "claim," for logivzomai, logizomai ), either for the purpose of compensation or for the sake of honor or tribute, their personal value to the cause of Christ. All originates "from God."

3:6 He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant-

Paul declares the answer to his question of 2 Cor 2:16, as already noted there, to be both a resounding "yes" and a vibrant "no." He is adequate for ministry. Because God, who is all-sufficient, made him so, how could he be anything less? But, has he raised himself up by his own bootstraps in order to plant churches clear across Asia Minor and Greece? Absolutely not! God deserves all the credit. As he will say in 2 Cor 10:13-18, he has nothing to boast about other than what God has accomplished through him. As he already said in 1 Cor 15:9-11, only "by the grace of God I am what I am."

What Paul says here amounts to providing a personal reference at the end of his resumι for his qualifications as a minister, which already details his competence in the form of the Corinthian believers: "For further questions, interviewers may follow-up by contacting God." Whether Greeks or Romans actually applied for jobs in this contemporary way is unknown, but it does help readers today get the point.

The term "ministers of a new covenant" is only found here in the NT, though it is as apt a term as any for describing both what Paul and contemporary leaders of the church are. The term "minister" (diavkono", diakonos ) and its cognates "ministry" ( diakonia ) and "to minister" (diakoneô) appear frequently in Paul's letters and in the NT to describe the nature and task of leadership in the church, building upon the mundane use of the word for those who wait tables (Matt 8:15) and leading to the formal title for church leaders as "deacons" (1 Tim 3:8-13).

The concept of "a new covenant" (kainhÉ diaqhvkh, kainç diathçkç) originates in Jer 31:31, the only OT reference which mentions it, in which the Lord declares through his prophet: "I will make a new covenant with my house of Israel." Recognizing that the old covenant had been broken by Israel, a new one empowering them to keep his laws through internal motivation (written on heart and mind) was needed and would one day come. Jesus identifies his death with the arrival of this new covenant, achieved through his blood, when he institutes the drinking of the cup in the Lord's Supper (Luke 22:20).

Hebrews develops the concept most extensively, employing the word "covenant" 17 times in its pages. Paul distinguishes the "two covenants" most decisively in Gal 4:21-31, identifying the old one (though he does not use the term "new" or "old" in the passage) with Hagar, the slave, and the new one with Sarah, the free woman. Paul presumes and builds on all of this when he so poignantly draws on the term here in 2 Cor 3:6, the only time he actually uses the expression "new covenant" other than in his account of the Lord's Supper institution in 1 Cor 11:25.

Paul, then, views what he does for God as being one who serves the purposes of this new covenant, launched with Christ's relatively recent death but backed by God's centuries-old promise. This new covenant, now for all and not just Jews, is rooted in the church and has been implemented in the Corinthian congregation.

Suggestions that Paul uses the term "ministers of the new covenant" because of its prior use by the current visitors to the Corinthian church seem unnecessary in light of the rich, biblical tradition of this phrase.

not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Paul articulates the nature, character, and power of the new covenant in contrast to the old covenant, the latter not mentioned specifically but presumed by the antithetical construction ("but") of what he says. It is really a microcosm of ideas which he will unpack in 2 Cor 3:7-12.

The key point of discussion among interpreters is what he intends to convey by his use of "letter" (gravmma, gramma ), used twice in this passage. Does he mean the words of the OT which require the insight of Christ's Spirit for people to truly understand? Though the plural word "letters" can in fact refer to the OT, as evidenced by 2 Tim 3:15, where it is translated by the NIV as "holy Scriptures ," the singular isn't used in this way. The literal sense normally refers to characters of a written language (Luke 23:28; Gal 6:11), to a posted "letter" (Acts 28:21), or to a book. One must keep in mind that Paul is speaking of covenant here, which comprised God's working relationship with Israel, different from "the Old Testament," which is a post-first century term for the Hebrew Scriptures.

Serious division occurs among interpreters over whether it simply refers figuratively to the old covenant law as such or to legalistic use of these laws, a distortion of their proper use. Under the first view, "letter" is synonymous with "law" and the very concept of law is seen as opposed to the new spiritual realities of the new dispensation. Important in this regard are Romans 2, particularly 2:27-29, where gramma is used twice (translated "the written code" by the NIV), and Rom 7:6, where gramma again appears. Both passages seem to offer no middle ground between law and Spirit. Indeed, it must be said in favor of this view that Paul's development of the issue in 2 Cor 3:7-18 does seem to distinguish any legalistic concept of law.

Yet, it must be said that however much he may distance law from spirit, even saying that it is used by "sin" to "put me to death" (Rom 7:11), he never jettisons the law completely, nor does he label it evil. In fact, Paul says the law itself "is good" (Rom 7:16); it is the evil within people that must be blamed for their sin and thereby their death (Rom 7:19). So, it must be an improper use of the law or, at least, some way of distorting the law which Paul has in mind.

"Letter" ( gramma ) refers to a superficial regard for the law, thinking that simply obeying it is all God wants. It consists of effectively worshiping the letters on the pages as if they are a golden statue instead of finding a relationship with the God who gave the laws as an act of his covenant born out of his love for humanity. It allows the words to be a barrier to God, keeping him forever at arms length. This way of dealing with covenant law indeed "kills" (ajpokteivnw, apokteinô). It kills meaningful life in this present world, and, if maintained apart from knowing Christ and receiving his Spirit, its result will be eternally lethal.

The "Spirit," in contrast "gives life" because he reaches into the heart and transforms the will to have the desire and the capability to overcome the lure of evil (Romans 8) and indeed to know what God wishes to be done or not done in life circumstances. The Spirit is not subject to the whims of interpretation as is law but convicts as the reader is open to be led. The Spirit puts believers in whom he indwells in direct relationship with God, with Christ developing the relationship, not mere letters or a distortion of them hindering it.

Notably, the word "give life" (zw/opoievw, zôopoieô) in the NT consistently is distinguished as a capacity of God (John 5:21; Rom 4:17; 1 Tim 6:13), of the Son (John 5:21) and Christ (1 Cor 15:22), of the Spirit, as here (1 Pet 3:18), and all three in their distinctive roles in Rom 8:11. Pointedly, however, giving life is not within the capacity of law (Gal 3:21), whether Jewish or of another cultural stripe. Law simply is insufficient for this noble task, so crucial for human existence in this life and in the next.

B. SUPERIOR TO THE OLD COVENANT (3:7-18)

1. Glory Unsurpassed (3:7-11)

3:7 Now if the ministry that brought death,

Paul picks up on "the letter kills" in 3:6 and probably also "the smell of death" back in 2:16 as he prepares to expound at greater length and from the scriptural base of Exod 34:29-35 on the unparalleled superiority of the new covenant in which he ministers to that of the old covenant administered by Moses (and those who follow in his footsteps) and the Jewish law. "Death" (qavnato", thanatos ) refers to physical death as a consequence of the law's judgment upon our sin as well as to the eternal, spiritual consequences of our inability to rectify our severed relationship with God under the old covenant or in any other way on our own.

"Ministry" (diakoniva, diakonia ) brings forward Paul's discussion on the subject initiated in 3:4-6, the related word "ministers" first occurring in 3:6. The word "ministry" will repeat three more times in this immediate context (3:8; 3:9 - twice), three more times in the extended context (4:1; 5:18; 6:3), and four more times specifying the Jerusalem collection (8:4; 9:1,12,13). In most cases Paul modifies "ministry" with another noun describing what servants in that ministry are helping to effect, here "death"; in 3:9, "the Spirit" and "righteousness"; and in 5:18, "reconciliation."

Paul's exposition on the superiority of the new covenant to the old hooks into the overall defense of his ministry against that of the opponents in the Corinthian church who have attacked his. Exposing the inferiority of the old covenant from the OT Scripture, specifically, a key incident in the life of Moses himself upon delivering the Law is a juggernaut he does not believe his opponents can squirm out of.

which was engraved in letters on stone,

The word "letters" (plural of gramma ) connects the two tablets of the Ten Commandments received by Moses to the kind of letters which "kill," referred to in 3:6. To say that the Ten Commandments (as the keystone for the entire system of Jewish law) kills is an astounding assertion which stabs the heart of Judaism. Paul had introduced "tablets of stone" in 3:3 as inferior to the writing of the Spirit, but his thoughts here are more inflammatory than imaginable.

He accents the irreversibility of the death outcome of this type of ministry by describing it as being "engraved," or "chiseled" into stone, like a headstone ordered by the undertaker (an appropriate contemporary association not likely shared by Paul's original readers). This dismal future for the law is cast from its beginning. It is not reversible as was the tombstone for Ebenezer Scrooge pointed to by the death angel's bony finger in Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol .

came with glory,

The word "glory" (dovxa, doxa ) dominates Paul's thoughts here, being used eight times within the paragraph of 3:7-11, returning two more times in 3:18, and appearing another seven times in the rest of the book. In the OT and the NT, "glory" is always the quality of God which sets him apart from all else. This quality of his may be manifest in creation, in Israel, and especially in the sanctuary of the temple but also in Christ and in salvation, as Paul will draw out here. In some sense it is the magnitude of his presence but also the radiant effect of those who come into his presence, comparable to the moon's reflection of the sun's light. It is what God has and is which the rest of creation has only in reference to him.

As spoken of the people of Israel and their receiving of the law, it can rightly be said that Jewish law, epitomized by the Ten Commandments, reflects the character, purpose, and authority of God. As spoken of Moses, it is a staple of Jewish understanding, that Moses permanently retained the glorious effect of his personal contact with God upon receiving the Ten Commandments and as he continued to consult with God in the tabernacle.

It is paradoxical that Paul can associate what he calls the ministry of death with the glory of God. It is even more surprising that his fundamental point will be that both the ministry of death and the ministry of the Holy Spirit and righteousness are fueled by this same glory. The insurmountable difference is that under the old covenant people must be shielded from prolonged contact with this glory or be annihilated. Under the new covenant and ministry which Paul represents, people may now feast directly on the glory to their eternal exaltation. This is all the difference in the world, and for Paul, is made manifestly clear in the fact that Moses forever had to veil his face, protecting Israel from the full glory of the Lord.

so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory,

At this point, Paul attaches his argument directly to the narrative account lodged in Exod 34:30. The evidence that the glory of the Lord accompanied the Ten Commandments is Moses' face and the reaction of the Israelites to it. Paul's statement that they "could not look steadily" is conveyed by the word ajtenivzw (atenizô), used by Paul only here and in 3:13. It is more prominent in Acts (10 times) and consistently conveys the idea of "looking intently at," "gazing," or "staring," as when the disciples "look intently up" into heaven when Jesus ascends (Acts 1:10) or just before someone is miraculously healed as with the lame man at Lystra in Acts 14:9.

Exodus 34:30 never actually says the Israelites couldn't or wouldn't look at Moses, only that they "were afraid to come near him" because of the radiance of his face, concerning which Moses himself was at first unaware. However, the inference that they couldn't look had been drawn from the text by others in Jewish teaching previous to Paul as evidenced by Philo's rendition of the occasion, saying that when Moses descended from the mountain his face was so much more beautiful than before he had ascended that the eyes of those who stood in awe and amazement could not "continue to stand the dazzling brightness that flashed from him like the rays of the sun."

Paul seems to imply that the Israelites at first attempted to look at Moses but could not and had to turn away or shield their eyes. After Aaron informed Moses of the problem, he placed the veil over his face for their ease and protection. Their fear would certainly have arisen over the mysterious nature of what they saw, but the brilliance of Moses' face also probably inflicted their eyes with severe pain because, as we would understand today, continuing to look at something so bright would damage the retina. One can't help but be reminded of Paul's own similar experience on the Damascus road, narrated in Acts 9:3-9, when he is blinded by the light of Christ's presence at his own conversion.

In 2 Corinthians Paul refers to Moses only here and a bit later in this context, in 3:13 and 3:15. Elsewhere, Moses is mentioned by Paul only in Romans (5:14; 9:15; 10:5,19) and 1 Corinthians (9:9; 10:2). The mention of Moses in those places is incidental compared to here. Since Paul chooses other approaches to show the superiority of the new covenant to the old, for example in Romans and Galatians, it seems probable that his focus on this seminal aspect of Moses' "ministry" is prompted by the opposing forces in Corinth who tout Moses as their spiritual model.

Whether the opposition themselves drew upon Exodus 34 in a way which supported their teaching (which Paul specifically counters) is difficult to know for sure. They may have simply latched on to Moses as symbolic mentor for the importance of Christians following Jewish law. Paul, then, introduces this passage into the debate as a means of supporting the legitimate, spiritual leadership of Moses while at the same time demonstrating that the inferiority of the old covenant Moses represents to the new covenant Paul represents can be observed at its very initiation.

fading though it was,

Although the NIV translation "fading" parallels the RSV and NASB, such a rendering for the verb katargevw (katargeô), even as a passive as it is here, is unsupportable. If it does mean "fade," indicating gradual disappearance, this would be the only context in which Paul (who uses the word 21 other times) or anyone else in Greek literature uses the word this way. Understanding it correctly is crucial since Paul will use it three more times in this context (3:11,13,14) but never again in 2 Corinthians. Despite being present passive in all four uses in this context, the NIV only translates the participles found here and in 3:11 and 3:13 as "fade." The finite verb (katargei'tai, katargeitai ) in 3:14, referring to the removal of Moses' veil in Christ, is rendered "is taken away," indicating an abrupt, definitive action.

"Nullify," "destroy," "abolish" are the consistent renderings elsewhere in the NT, even by the NIV, and translations related to these are advocated as more appropriate in the name of consistency for this context by commentaries which consider the issue. These commentaries do so thinking that Paul primarily has in mind, not the glory of Moses' face but the glory of the old covenant which Moses represents. Despite the initial attraction of this line of thinking, if Paul intended only this, he would have juxtaposed katargeitai with "ministry" not with "glory," which is described as that of Moses' "face" (provswpon, prosôpon). Additionally, Paul is being made to use the verb katargeitai in the opposite sense that he uses it in Rom 3:31 in which he denies vehemently that "we nullify the law by this faith."

How does Moses' face relate to what Paul is talking about? The answer lies in Paul's anticipation of 3:13 and 3:14 in which he focuses on the veil which the Exodus text says Moses placed over his face. It is the veil by which the glory of Moses' face effectively "is nullified." Such a view is consistent with the generalized definition of katargeô found in the NIDNTT which states that "though katargeô is elusive in translation . . . its basic meaning of rendering something inoperative is clear and consistent."

The veil, then, obstructs or blocks the effect of Moses' glorious face, symbolizing the severe limitation of the Jewish legal system in providing people access to God's glory. That this limitation is indicated from the very beginning of receiving the law through Moses by the veil amounts to Paul's checkmate over his opponents.

Further support for this understanding comes from Jewish tradition. No rabbi ever that we know of even suggested that the glory on Moses' face ever faded or diminished. In fact, they glory in the opposite. It was believed that the brilliance of Moses' face remained steady throughout the rest of his life, even though it never comes up again outside of Exodus 34. He continued to cover himself with the veil forever after speaking to the people in this incident.

When katargeô is understood correctly, then, there is no need to suggest that Paul is going against Jewish tradition to make his point. It is more likely that he would want to make his point within the prevailing Jewish assumptions. Despite notice in many commentaries, Paul is not making a point here about the old covenant being transitory or temporary. If he wanted to say that, he could have drawn from other OT passages as he does in Romans and Galatians. Neither must one suggest that Paul believed Moses continued to wear the veil to deceive the people that his face still glowed with the glory of God, when in fact it was gradually losing its luster.

No, Paul maintains that his ministry and Moses' share in being empowered by the legitimate glory of God himself. Only for Moses, this had to be veiled or continual exposure to it would destroy the people because of their sin. In the ministry of the new covenant, when people are made righteous through the blood of Christ, the veil is removed, and people may indeed bask continually in the glow of God's powerful love and develop a direct, personal relationship with him like Moses.

Paul's point, then, would be better served by translating thÉn katargoumevnhn (tçn katargoumençn) "which is rendered ineffective" or "which is obstructed" rather than the NIV's "fading though it was." This is consistent with its function as an adjectival participle modifying "glory."

3:8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious?

Paul's rhetorical question expects a positive reply based on how he has described the inaccessibility of the glory working through Moses, having also associated it with the ministry of death. Paul's argument style of lesser to greater most likely imitates the same powerful approach employed by rabbis of his day, which one can observe him using also in Rom 5:9-17; 11:12,24; Phil 2:12; and Phlm 16.

Paul's argument presumes continuity between the two ministries, the one of death and the one of the Spirit and in fact states that this continuity is the presence of the glory of God in both. Paul will unpack his full thoughts on why the ministry of the Spirit is greater in what follows. For now, he draws upon what he said in 3:3, the obvious superiority of the actual, living, Spirit of God to mere letters on a page, or all the more, to letters carved in stone.

Although Paul expresses himself in the future tense, his sense should not be restricted to the eschatological future. His whole point is that this superior ministry of the Spirit coincides with his own ministry. Indeed, it has been operational since Pentecost when the Spirit came in full force upon the disciples. Prior to that, the Spirit enveloped the ministry of Christ himself. Though the Spirit does function in the OT, Paul presumes his audience will recognize the immense difference between that and what is going on in the NT period.

Paul does not normally come across as one who revels in the glorious cause so intricate to his life. He views true apostles as ignominious and himself as the runt of the litter, so described in 1 Cor 4:9-13 and later in this context, in 2 Cor 4:7-12. If he revels in anything, it is his own suffering for the cause of Christ. It is this very self-effacing feature of Paul that his opponents in Corinth may have latched on to and magnified in comparison with Moses in order to lure the Corinthians to their side. Moses, indeed, cuts a more charismatic figure as a leader than Paul. Following rules on a page is simpler to explain than following the Spirit. Perhaps for this very reason Paul attaches himself to glory superior to that of Moses.

The word "glorious" is actually a prepositional phrase "in glory" (ejn dovxh/, en doxç), the same as in 3:7, translated by the NIV as "with glory." Most likely Paul means to convey the same idea in both phrases, that both the ministry of death and the ministry of the Spirit develop out of the very glory of God, only the ministry of the Spirit more so.

3:9 If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness!

Essentially, Paul restates his point in a formally constructed conditional clause which presumes that if the first clause is true or proven, the second clause is true also. In this case, with the idiom "how much more" (pollw'/ ma'llon, pollô mallon) he adds the lesser to greater wrinkle initiated in 3:8. He further emphasizes the superiority of the ministry of righteousness by inserting the verb perisseuvw (perisseuô), weakly translated as merely "is" in the NIV but which is normally translated "abound" or "overflow" (so translated by the NIV in every other instance in 2 Corinthians, 2 Cor 1:5; 3:9; 4:15; 8:2,7; 9:8,12) indicating more than enough or a surplus.

What Paul contrasted as the ministry of death and the ministry of the Spirit in 3:7-8, he now calls the ministry of condemnation and the ministry of righteousness here in 3:9. Both words, "condemnation" (katavkrisi", katakrisis ) and "righteousness" (dikaiosunhv, dikaiosynç), are employed as courtroom language outside the NT and are frequent in Paul's theological vocabulary of salvation. "Condemnation" means that the defendant is judged guilty of the crime and is sentenced to be executed. "Righteousness" is used to declare the defendant innocent and, thus, set free. In Romans 5:18-21, Paul also employs both words in the same context, describing man's deserved condemnation because of sin which is turned into a pronouncement of acquittal because of the actions of Jesus Christ in taking the deserved death sentence upon himself. The same sense seems to be presumed here.

How can one ministry which produces condemnation and another ministry which produces a declaration of righteousness both be "glorious," or associated with the glory of God? Despite the fact that the law comes from God, it is used by sin to pronounce all people irrefutably guilty, as Paul carefully explains in Romans 7. We deserve our just condemnation as our breaking of God's law makes perfectly plain. The law serves God's purpose of helping us know our defenselessness before him and enabling us to recognize our need for salvation which can only come as a free gift of God made possible by Christ's sacrifice. Sticking only to the law, as if it is some kind of alternative to Paul's ministry of righteousness, is a certain march into the gas chamber. The law can only condemn to death. The ministry which leads people to depend on Christ is infinitely superior because only in this way can people be pronounced righteous.

3:10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory.

Paul now provides an explanation, indicated by "for" (gavr, gar ), intended to support his pronouncement that the ministry of righteousness is superior to the ministry of condemnation. The NIV does a good job getting across the sense of this verse which is awkward in the Greek. Literally, Paul sets up an abrupt paradox, "what has been glorified has not been glorified." He could mean this in the sense that it has become un-glorified or, more consistent with his point, that its glory is now imperceptible given the arrival of a super-glory.

A common comparison to what Paul is saying is the relationship of the moon to the sun at night versus the day, or the difference between shining a flashlight at night to "shining" it in full sunlight. In the new situation, it still gives off light, but this is completely dwarfed by the full glory of the sun. The key word he uses to convey this is "surpassing" (a participle from uJperbavllw, hyperballô). It means to "go beyond," or "outdo," and Paul uses it elsewhere to describe God's grace (2 Cor 9:2; Eph 2:7), God's power (Eph 1:19), and the love of Christ (Eph 3:19). All of these are really immeasurable as is the glory Paul has in mind here. If it is immeasurable or infinite, then whatever glory, however real, given off by something else, may as well be zero, for all practical purposes.

Paul's statement supposes that the greater ministry arrived on the scene after the other had been up and functioning reasonably successfully for a period of time. He cannot simply be referring to Moses' glowing face but must have in mind also the legal institution of Israel initiated by God through Moses. The ministry of the "surpassing glory" is that of the new covenant in which Paul serves. With this language, Paul is not likely saying that the ministry of the new covenant builds upon the old. Rather, he is saying that the old has served its time and is now replaced. Because it comes from God also, it still has some legitimate function, but the new totally encompasses this and does what it was never designed to do. In technology, we could compare the computer to a typewriter, CD's to records, or soon, digital TV to current analog TV.

It should be noted that Paul's language is stronger than the NIV's "in comparison." The word being translated is eiJvneken, ( heineken ) which is routinely translated "because" elsewhere. It is important to see that Paul views the coming of the new covenant as the cause which shoves aside the ministry of the old covenant.

3:11 And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater glory is the glory of that which lasts!

For the third time (previously 3:7-8 and 3:9), Paul sets up a conditional sentence as the vehicle for applying lesser to greater logic in contrasting the two ministries, that of the old covenant, Moses', and that of the new covenant, his. His language for doing this is exactly what he used in 3:9, "for if" (eij gavr, ei gar ) . . . "how much more" (pollw'/ ma'llon, pollô mallon), though the NIV has switched to "how much greater" here in 3:11 and drops out the "for" in both instances.

He contrasts the two ministries by describing the one as "what was fading away" (participle of katargevw, katargeô) and the other as "that which lasts" (participle of mevnw, menô). The latter is new to this context but is a common word in the NT translated variously as "remain," "endure," or "live." It describes permanence, something which will not be replaced. The other word was introduced first in 3:7 and received extensive attention when that verse was discussed. It will be reused in 3:13 and 3:14 and its meaning is central to Paul's thoughts here. As noted in 3:7, consistency demands that the translation "fade" be rejected and replaced by "nullify," or better "obstruct" in reference to Moses' veil.

Paul's point is not that the old covenant gradually dissipates but rather that its obsolescence is built into it from its inception, signalled by the need for a veil to cover the glory of Moses' face. It has now been abruptly replaced by the coming of a superior glory open for all to see in Christ through the gospel. This glory comes uncovered from the beginning indicating that it is everlasting, never to be replaced.

As before, Paul emphasizes that both covenants persist because of their relationship to God's glory. It is possible to argue that Paul's use of prepositions "through" (diav, dia ) in connecting God's glory to the covenant which is abolished and "in" (ejn, en ) in connecting God's glory to the covenant which endures reinforces the superiority of the latter. Most commentators are reluctant to rest too much on this since Paul refers to both covenants as being "in glory" in 3:7-8, and Paul is prone to vary his prepositions for stylistic purposes.

2. Glory Unobstructed (3:12-18)

3:12 Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold.

Paul intends to continue his exposition of Exod 34:29-34, which he will do in the verses which follow. First, though, he reconnects his analysis of two very different kinds of ministries to his initial concern in 3:1, the charge of rude, overconfident, self-commendation being leveled at him from his Corinthians opponents. His confidence - not arrogance though - comes directly out of knowing that he serves in a superior ministry, indeed, one that is infinitely superior to that of even Moses, exclaimed in 3:11.

The opening "therefore" (ou , ouv ) explicitly connects, then, the thoughts of 3:12-18 to those of 3:1. The word "hope" (ejlpiv", elpis ) gathers up Paul's exposition regarding the superior ministry of the Spirit conveyed in 3:7-11 into one word. It is not at all unique for "hope" to function in such a capacity. Paul and other NT authors subsume the totality of the Christian truth system within it elsewhere (Rom 8:24; Eph 8:1; 1 Pet 1:21). The word has the unique capacity to represent the truth of Christianity over against the falseness of other world-views, as well as convey all of this as the concrete basis for Christian behavior and expectation of complete, personal and corporate future fulfilment. "Hope" says that Christianity is everything everyone longs for deep within.

Paul asserts not only that he and others who serve in this superior ministry have such hope in their possession - the find of a lifetime - but that this gives them a distinct boldness in their conduct, which, indeed, may seem brash to those who do not understand the supreme nature of what they are part of. The translation "is" by the NIV unfortunately washes out the nuance of the Greek verb Paul uses here. The word kravomai ( kraomai ) usually is translated "make use of" or "employ" as in 2 Cor 3:10, or "act, proceed" as Paul just used it in 2 Cor 1:17. Paul is talking then about how Christian hope energizes his actions and his speech in the way he relates to people. Of course, this will characterize all those who serve in the powerful ministry of Jesus Christ back then, and still today.

The word translated "bold" (parrhsiva, parrçsia) is variously translated as "publicly," "plainly," "boldly," and "confidence." It has a significant history outside the NT. In classical Greek politics, it is the placard guaranteeing citizens free speech and, thus, the mention of "freedom" later in 3:17 is not likely coincidental. In Greek moral philosophy, "frankness" characterizes a person of honesty and good character. In Philo (a Greek-Jewish philosopher), the moral quality of the word moves into the spiritual realm as a gift of God and the fruit of wisdom (which comes from having a relationship with God). This particular word may have suggested itself to Paul because its literal meaning is "to uncover the head," the opposite of a veil, which covers the head, to be mentioned in the very next verse. A covered head may suggest shame in Greek culture, while an uncovered head suggests honest pride and self-confidence.

Paul's boldness should be taken as a sign of his confidence in who he is as God's servant and in the unequivocal truth of the gospel message. One should not be insulted by boldness in Paul or other Christians, even today, whether on abortion or creationism or any other controversial issue, but view this as evidence of moral and spiritual honesty and an exercise of free speech. Paul, then, is not afraid to say what he thinks regardless of the consequences, as shown by the Severe Letter he recently had written to the Corinthians, and really also by what is exhibited in 2 Corinthians itself, even right here. This will be even more evidenced in chapters 10-13, where Paul pulls no punches in reprimanding the Corinthians.

3:13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face

Paul specifically refers to Moses' regular practice, described in Exod 35:33-35, of donning a veil, likely a mask or hood of some kind, between his pronouncement of God's commandments to Israel and his visits with God in the tabernacle. He contrasts his own bold practices and that of others who serve the gospel ministry with Moses' concealing actions. He does not intend to imply that Moses himself is somehow shameful, timid, or deceitful but only that his ministry to the old covenant in itself is shown from its very initiation to be inferior to the ministry of the gospel. The veil itself, not Moses' intentions, is the symbol of this difference between the two ministries.

to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away.

Paul describes the purpose of the veil as preventive. It did not allow the Israelites to continue viewing Moses' face after he gave his pronouncements. Exod 34:29-32 indicates that after initially fleeing from Moses because of the pain to their retinas and fear of what this glow meant, the leaders and the people reassembled to hear the commandments. After this had been accomplished, Exod 34:33-35 mentions that Moses began to wear the veil and continued to wear it, except for the times he consulted with God and the times he proclaimed the laws God had revealed to him. So, the Israelites were not actually prevented from looking upon Moses' glowing face, only prevented from continually looking at it. Why?

Many seem to assume that the glow on Moses' face somehow faded in between his regenerating visits with God and go on to project that Paul believed Moses was deceptively concealing this truth about the temporariness of God's presence in the old covenant. However, this goes considerably beyond the description in Exodus, which says nothing about "fading" as noted in comments on 3:7. It also goes beyond Paul, since the word katargevw (katargeô) means "to render ineffective," abolish," "annul," even "obstruct" but not "fade" anyway (also noted in comments on 3:7). Perhaps, Moses dons the veil so that the people are not permitted to look at his glowing face during the mundane and routine, as a way of elevating the significance of the times he speaks directly for God. It may also ensure their submissive reverence when he reads the law by forcing them to look down.

Paul need not be forcing a sinister motive on Moses either, despite preponderance of this assumption in commentaries. Does Moses know the veil symbolizes the eventual displacement of the old covenant by the superior new covenant? This seems to be expecting too much of one who had only just received God's laws. Rather, it is Paul who interprets the veil this way and is capable of doing so from his perspective as an apostle of the new covenant. Such interpretive methodology is based upon Paul's view of biblical inspiration which as a matter of course identifies such OT words as this one (veil) to provide insight for those who are prepared to accept it in light of the new covenant. He approaches words like "seed" (Rom 4:13-17; Gen 17:17-19) and "credited" (Rom 4:1-3; Gen 15:6,22) in the same manner, planted by God's inspiration of biblical authors for people of the new covenant to discover.

The NIV "gazing" translates the same Greek word (atenizô) rendered in 3:7 as "look steadily." It would seem that looking briefly at Moses' face is quite possible, and is in fact done by the Israelites as they hear the laws spoken, but staring or looking continuously, it is implied, would be harmful, and, thus, is obstructed by the veil.

The NIV takes considerable liberty with the Greek in introducing the word "brilliance" into this sentence. It is certainly implied that it is the "glory" (dovxa, doxa ) of Moses' face which is being obstructed or nullified by the veil since the word does appear in the similar description in 3:7 and recurs numerous times in Paul's discussion in 3:7-11. However, the word does not occur in 3:13. In fact, it is notably replaced by a different word altogether. This word (tevlo", telos ), usually translated as either "end," in terms of termination, or "goal," in terms of purpose or objective, is translated by the NASB as "end." Paul's use of the word in Rom 10:4 to say that "Christ is the end of the law" is normally interpreted as goal rather than termination, but later in 2 Cor 11:15, he clearly uses the word in the sense of termination when he says regarding his Corinthian opponents: "their end will be what their actions deserve."

When applied here to 3:13, the most immediate conclusion is that Paul means telos to be understood as "termination" since it is modified by katargeô, the word for "annul" or "obstruct." Thus, the veil prevents the Israelites from witnessing the complete termination of the old covenant's abolishment. Most who hold this view presume that the Israelites would have been able to deduce the gradual annulment or the transitoriness of the law because if they could have peeked behind Moses' mask, they could have observed the glory "fading" from his face. The gradual fading aspect of this, suspect as it is, need not be tied to taking telos literally.

Paul could simply be saying that observing the termination of the old covenant was not possible for them, in any case, because God did not want them, or Moses for that matter, to know that then. But God does want Israel to know now, and he does want them to allow the Spirit to remove the veil - which could not be done back then - as Paul will conclude in 3:17-18. The fact that Paul switches from "glory" to "end" here would suggest, at least, that he intends readers to be moving away from thinking in terms of Moses' face literally to the real issue, which is the replacement of the old covenant by the new.

An alternative conclusion regarding the interpretation of "end" ( telos ) is that it should be taken figuratively as it is in Rom 10:4. In this view, the issue of what was occurring to Moses' face, quite rightly, is set aside, to focus on the issue of the old and new covenants. What the Israelites are prevented from seeing is the goal of the annulment of the law, which is Christ. Although an attractive view in some ways, it boils down to the absurdity that Moses conspired with God to keep people away from following Christ. Not only does this introduce a needless divine contradiction into the situation, it is also crudely anachronistic in introducing Christ into this early phase of Moses' relationship between Israel and God. It puts the cart before the horse.

It is the future, abrupt termination (not the gradual fading) of the covenant, even as they are just beginning to see it through Moses' pronouncements, which Israel can't see. Who could expect them to see it? This is no fault of theirs. All that can be expected of them, they do. They stand in awe and amazement that God is imparting the specifics of their covenant relationship with God through Moses in their own hearing. The veil which turns off their ability to see God in Moses' face during their everyday routines functions dually: 1) it protects them from ever approaching God casually, 2) for Paul and all who will observe the inspired use of the word in Exodus 34, it symbolizes that an immeasurably better covenant was yet to come, which God in his wisdom and providence did not allow them to know about then (note 3:14). Paul is saying in this text, let Israel celebrate in the first story of the house God is building, as described in Exodus. But now that the second, immaculate floor has been built, as constructed through Christ and the gospel and always in God's blueprints, let them now move into it and not remain in the comparatively drab first floor. Worse yet, let no one (even if well meaning) drag Gentile Christians like the Corinthians, who went directly to the second floor by following the gospel, back to the obsolete first floor. Let no one describe the ministry of bringing people to the second floor of God's house as inferior to bringing them into the first floor, when the opposite can be observed from Scripture.

3:14 But their minds were made dull,

Of the six times the word "mind" (novhma, noçma) appears in the NT, five are in 2 Corinthians (later, 3:14; 4:4; 10:5; 11:3). Paul recognizes that Christianity is a battle over the world of people's thoughts. Such a battle to see rightly God's plan will begin even with Moses and the Israelites.

The phrase "were made dull" comes from one word, the verb pwrovw (pôroô), which describes something turning into stone, like petrified wood, or even a kidney stone. Today, we might think of the hardening of concrete or the Snow Queen of Narnia turning people into statues. The word is not frequent in the NT. Three times it is used in the gospels in terms of one's heart (as opposed to the mind) hardening (Mark 6:52; 8:17; John 12:4) in the sense of being prevented from understanding. Paul's use may stem conceptually from Isa 29:10 and Deut 29:4 which he will also take up in Rom 11:7. It may just as well have come from early church tradition which knows of Jesus' citation of Isa 6:10, "Make the heart of this people calloused; make their ears dull," which appears in John 12:40.

The fact that pôroô is passive reinforces the idea already suggested in the word's other biblical uses that the petrifying is not self-imposed but rather stems from God's own providential will, or at least that these are symbiotic. Such a divine passive suggests that during the time of Moses Israel was not prepared to be able to perceive what Paul and we today can deduce from this incident as recorded in Exodus 34. They cannot see that the veil suggests that the covenant they are receiving does not encompass all of God's plan. Their blinding is not just because of the veil. Remember, Moses only dons the veil after reading out the Lord's commandments. Their blinding is due to their own spiritual condition at that time. They are not ready to hear or to know that this covenant being read out by Moses will one day be scrapped and replaced. Why should they be? Now, in light of the cross and the resurrection, it is another condition altogether. The Israel of Paul's day - and ours - should be able to see.

Opening this clause with "but" (ajllav, alla ) seems puzzling at first because it is not obvious to what the desensitized minds of the Israelites is intended to contrast: the sharpened minds of whom? Most likely the contrast is not with Moses or someone else. Rather, it is with the possibly-conveyed wrong idea that the true barrier for the Israelites was the hood covering Moses' face. That, in fact, was merely symbolic of the actual spiritual barrier to their understanding that he means to address.

for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read.

Paul dramatically replaces the picture of the Israelites' listening to Moses read out the law as God had given it to him to the Jews of his own day hearing the Scripture read to them in their synagogues by the rabbis. The scenes are comparable because he says the barrier hood persists. Clearly, the hood is no longer the one over Moses' head but the one clouding people's minds in both scenes.

Paul emphasizes the abrupt transition of his ideas from ancient to contemporary by the way he expresses "this day," literally, "today's day." The word "read" (ajnavgnwsi", anagnôsis), assumes a public reading, not private or personal. Only the rich and the learned in ancient days possessed copies of Scripture. People heard it read to them in lectionary 3-year cycles, a practice maintained today in many churches as they present the OT, Gospel, and Epistle reading for each Sunday worship.

Many note that this is the first appearance of the term "old" attached to "covenant" in Scripture. This is an important division in Paul's mind both to separate and keep unified what he is talking about. The uninterrupted connection of God's glory and grace is continuous in God's covenant. The incalculable difference between the emphasis on law in the covenant previously and the emphasis on grace in the covenant now in Christ is subsumed under the terms "old" and "new." Paul does not use "new" in this immediate context but did just use it in 3:6. The idea of a "new" covenant in the NT is no doubt founded upon Jesus' institution of the Lord's Supper (Luke 22:20) but is developed primarily in Hebrews (9:15; 12:24).

Paul's reference to "old covenant" is not likely intended to describe the OT Scripture itself since the idea of the NT canon of Scripture does not emerge until the late second century. The old aspect of the covenant has primarily to do with its laws, particularly Jewish reverence for them which blocks understanding grace and the purpose of the cross.

It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away.

In Greek, "it has been removed" is one word, a participle (ajnakaluptovmenon, anakalyptomenon ) built upon the key word "veil" (kavlumma, kalymma ). Thus, it literally refers to "lifting the veil." Paul means to emphasize the stubborn permanence of the veil shutting out those Jews who do not accept Christ. It remains indefinitely, really forever, apart from Christ, as Paul will elaborate.

At face value, Paul's full statement appears self-contradictory: the veil cannot be lifted, but Christ can lift it. It also sounds like Jews yet await the lifting. Paul will explain his full meaning in the verses that follow. The veil remains firmly intact but only over the hearts of those Jews who fail to believe in Christ. The potential of having the veil removed is very much available and is what Paul desires to happen as he presents the gospel to his fellow Jews. He is also keenly aware of how the veil impedes his success.

The word "is taken away" (katargei'tai, katargeitai ) is the verb form of the word which the NIV has persistently translated "fade" when the participial form was used in 3:7, 3:11, and 3:13. Here, it becomes obvious that "fade" is not appropriate. Christ's action of "destroying," "annihilating," or "rendering it ineffective," is not gradual and slow. Christ's action of destroying the "old" approach to the covenant is as immediate as his death and resurrection. Just so, is the unveiling of Jewish hearts immediate upon their acceptance of Christ's work to reconcile them to God as opposed to their faith in the law.

3:15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts.

The sentence restates and clarifies what Paul has already said. What was referred to as the "old covenant" in 3:14 is now more tightly defined as "Moses," referring to the Pentateuch where the laws delivered to Moses are encased. Such a personalized way of titling the Pentateuch can also be found in 2 Chr 25:4, Neh 13:1, and Mark 12:26.

The veil is now described as covering "their hearts" rather than "their minds" with no apparent shift in meaning. Most notable is that the word translated "hearts" (kardivan, kardian ) is actually singular rather than plural. This signals that Paul views the blinded Israel as a collective whole and not so much as individual Jews. This coincides with his approach in Rom 9-11 when he contemplates their wholesale rejection of their Messiah in his own day.

Once again, Paul has in view the routine oral reading of the law within the synagogue.

3:16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

Paul shifts from the specific context of unconverted Jews to a generic principle involved in the conversion of everyone, Jew or Gentile. So far, he has only specified a veil blocking Israel's full spiritual vision of God in Moses' day and surrounding most Jews of his own day. In spite of that, with his unspecified subject here, he begins to bring the reader back to his original concern, Gentiles who are being told they must obey Moses to be true Christians. In reality, a kind of veil restricted most Gentiles, including those in Corinth, from beholding the true glory and reality of God until the message of Christ became available to them. Ultimately, Paul means to point to the folly of Gentiles donning yet another veil, a decidedly Jewish one, when they had only so recently had their Gentile kind of veil removed.

The word "is taken away" (periairei'tai, periaireitai ), though the NIV translates it the same as the verb katargeitai in 1:14 , is different in Greek. Rather than meaning "render ineffective," the word here means "remove all around," in a military sense of destroying a city's walls or simply in taking a soldier's helmet from his head. The passive sense of the verb presumes that the person does not remove the veil himself, rather that God removes it.

The word "turn" (ejpistrevfw, epistrephô) is employed eight times in Acts to describe conversion (Acts 3:19; 9:35; 11:21; 14:15; 15:19; 26:18; 26:20; 28:27). The word is also used this way in 1 Thess 1:9 and 1 Pet 2:25. When the identity of the one being turned to is named as something other than "the Lord," as here, the one named is always "God" (Acts 3:19; 15:19; 26:20; 1 Thess 1:9) or assumed to be God, the only exception being 1 Pet 2:25.

Although the reference of "Lord," as being to God or Christ, or even the Spirit is much discussed, the above evidence makes it most likely that Paul has in mind "God." It is certainly true that Paul has already said that the veil is removed by Christ and Paul has been talking about Jews who have not been converted to Christ. However, the dominating visual idea of this context since 3:7 has been the issue of being prevented from seeing the glory of God , not Christ. Christian conversion is really turning to God through belief in the reconciliation made possible by Christ's sanctifying work anyway. It is not merely conversion to Christ. Even Jews of Moses' day and also of Paul's day are unable to "convert" fully to God because of the veil over their hearts Paul has been talking about. So, to say that Jews don't need to be converted to God as some do flies in the face of all that Paul has been saying here. Besides, his generic subject widens out his statement to include Gentiles, anyway.

Paul can certainly be speaking from personal experience about having the veil removed when one recalls his own dramatic conversion on the Damascus road.

3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.

At first blush, it would seem that Paul is simply trying to define what he intended by "Lord" in 3:16. However, it is more likely that he desires to associate God with the transforming power of his Spirit which is so bountiful in the age of the new covenant as opposed to the old. Remember, in 3:3 and 3:6 Paul has already placed upon the Spirit the vitality which makes the new covenant fundamentally superior to the old, which must rely on the letter which kills. To connect the Lord, meaning God, to this Spirit, after all the other ideas he has presented since then is important as he moves to a conclusion of his whole argument.

With his mention of "the Spirit of the Lord," Paul gets as close as he will ever get in this passage to a christological reference. It is by the Spirit that Christ removes the veil. But we must be careful about splitting "the Spirit of the Lord" too neatly between God and Christ. Clearly, in NT theology, the Spirit is one entity of God, not two, but is interchangeably termed the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God (Rom 8:9). It is to the one Spirit, who transforms Christians, that Paul refers, even though the origin of the Spirit as from God or from Christ is multilayered here.

As noted in comments on 3:12, the mention of "freedom" (ejleuqeriva, eleutheria ), despite being the only use of the word in 2 Corinthians, does not really come out of the blue as it may first seem to the casual reader. Its connection to the word "bold" (parrhsiva, parresia ) had long been a staple of political rights in Greek democratic philosophy. Although Paul seems to take for granted that freedom and the Spirit are intertwined, he develops his thoughts in this regard in Romans 8 and Galatians 4-5. Galatians 4 (particularly 4:6-7) maintains that Christians are no longer slaves of sin but sons of the Father, and Galatians 5 (particularly 5:18) asserts that a person led by the Spirit is no longer under law. Romans 8 (particularly 8:2) declares that a Christian has been set free from the law of sin and death by the "Spirit of life."

The freedom Paul has in mind in this context is freedom not only from the law and sin but also the freedom to boldly radiate the glory of God in spreading the true gospel of Christ. The Spirit in the life of the Christian is this full glory of God, impossible to perceive until Christ came along and still unavailable to Jew or Greek apart from conversion to belief in Christ. Freedom is also Paul's boldness against his opposition in Corinth, as well as the signature of the superiority of the new covenant to the old.

3:18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect ^a the Lord's glory,

^a 18 Or contemplate

Paul now describes the results of the freedom all believers have. This freedom makes it possible not only to see the full glory of God unhindered but also to have this glory actively reconfiguring their own lives so that they show forth more and more the character of God for others thereby to see God's glory.

Few commentaries support a translation like the NIV's "reflect" for the Greek word katoptrivzomai ( katoptrizomai ) . Not used outside the NT, the word can mean simply "look at," "look at oneself as in a mirror," or "reflect." The translation "reflect" leaps too quickly over the primary meaning in order to connect to the idea of Christians reflecting Christ in their lives. It forgets that the "we" in this passage contrasts not with Moses, who reflected the glory of God, but to Israel, who cannot look steadily on Moses' face, and to unbelieving Jews and Gentiles, whose minds and hearts are veiled.

First and foremost, Paul must be saying that true believers, because of Christ, can and do look directly at the glory of God without fear or damage. This is the impenetrable difference between the new and old covenant he has been getting at throughout this context.

Second, though, he is implying that what believers are looking at is in fact Christ, the perfect image of God's glory. Thirdly, he will go on to elaborate that believers, through the Spirit of God/Christ, are undergoing reconstruction to reflect the glory of God seen in the face of Christ. So, they are looking in a mirror, but what they see are themselves looking more and more like Christ, who is himself a perfect reflection of the glory of God.

The difficulty in translation is that Paul is trying to get across multiple ideas with the one word. However, the consensus of current commentators, "looks at as in a mirror" best allows these layers to be fleshed out as the rest of the verse unfolds.

Some bring up the point that ancient mirrors were polished metal and not glass, and so did not reflect perfect images as they do now. Thus, Paul would be referring either to Christ in human flesh as an imperfect reflection of God's glory or Christians as imperfect reflections of Christ. However, it is not likely that Paul would make such significant distinctions based on such a subtle point. Neither is it at all clear that ancients viewed their mirrors as flawed (since they can't compare theirs to ours). In fact, Corinth as a city prided itself on the high quality of their polished bronze mirrors. It is best, therefore, to understand that Paul perceives the metaphorical mirror to reflect true images.

are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

Paul only uses the word "transformed" (metamorfovw, metamorphoô) elsewhere in Rom 12:2 where he calls Christians apart from the world to demonstrate to others the true nature of God. This Greek word comes across into English as "metamorphosis," commonly used to describe the spectacular changeover of caterpillars to butterflies. Today, we might also compare the idea to "transformer" toys which can change from trucks into helicopters. Paul affirms that believers are in the process of such a dynamic change in a spiritual and moral sense. The character of God is emerging in human lives as the Spirit does its work.

In the classical Greek period, it was believed that when a human looked upon a god or goddess, this would result in both physical and spiritual changes, and the word "transformed" was used to describe this. Nonbiblical Jewish writers in the intertestamental period also wrote of the transformation of God's elect who behold the glory of God in the coming eschatological day. Paul seems informed by both of these ideas, with the Christian distinction that the eschaton begins for believers at their conversion. The rest of their lives move toward that final conclusion of total transformation into the image of God from which men and women were stamped in the first place, as Gen 1:27 describes.

"Likeness" (eijkwvn, eikôn), also translated "image" sometimes, is a key word in Paul's concept of humanity and christology. In just a few more verses, he will speak of Christ as the "image of God," as he does elsewhere (Col 1:15). He can also speak of people bearing the image of Adam, "the earthly man" with the potential of bearing the image of Christ, "the man from heaven" (1 Cor 15:49). Indeed, "being conformed to the likeness of his Son" appears to be the ultimate destiny of all believers (Rom 2:9). In this passage, Paul seems to envisage believers becoming like Christ in that Christ is the image of God. He appears to be playing off the mirror presumed in the earlier word, "reflect." As Paul uses them here, "image" and "glory of God" are virtually synonymous, which the next phrase suggests.

"Ever-increasing glory" literally is "from glory to glory." Basking in the glory of God is permanent for believers as opposed to the situation of the Israelites back with Moses. Its effect on believers is ever-transforming. It is not that more of God's glory is revealed. Rather, it is that more is made evident in believers as they increasingly are empowered to overcome their sinful urges and live within God's will living through the power of the Spirit. One cannot help but contrast this totally new way of living to the way the Jews lived under the law, confined and powerless.

With "Lord," Paul reasserts one more time that it is indeed the glory of God that believers are beholding in Christ and which is causing the effects of God's glory to continue to grow in them. He also, one more time, connects the Spirit of God indwelling believers with the full glory of God which could not be viewed permanently by Israel. He also presumes that believers know this is one and the same with the Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit, they received upon their conversion.

With 3:7-18, Paul has now shown the superiority of the new covenant over the old, the second step in defending the legitimacy of his apostolic ministry.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

McGarvey: 2Co 3:6

who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the spirit [i. e., not a minister of the old, legal dispensation, but of the new, spiritual dispensation]: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. [And I have such bold assurance through Christ that God will thus consider you to be my epistle. Not that I am sufficient of myself to account myself as having truly done any part of that which makes you an epistle, save as I have received the power from God. The truth which, written in your hearts, has thus transformed you, is wholly of God; so that our ability or sufficiency to write such an epistle as ye are, is all from God, who made us thus sufficient by calling us to be ministers of that new covenant which performs such wonders of regeneration, instead of calling us to be (as my Judaizing opponents ever seek to coerce me to be) a minister of the old covenant. This old covenant was given in letters graven on stone, and hence was a law of letters governing us wholly from without. But the new covenant, though also committed to writing, and hence in a sense external to us, is a code of principles governing us from within, through the power of the Holy Spirit. This law of letters without could only bring upon us condemnation and death (Rom 7:7-11 ; 1Co 15:56); but this law of the spirit within us (2Co 3:2) gives us life (Rom 2:27-29 ; Rom 6:4 ; Rom 6:11 ; Rom 8:2 ; Rom 8:10-11 ; 1Co 15:45 ; Gal 5:18). The contrast in 2Co 3:6 is not between the outward and inward sense of Scripture, but between the outward and inward power of those two great dispensations, Jewish and Christian. That perversion of the passage which gave it the former meaning, has been used to countenance those baneful allegorical interpretations of Scripture which have been the pest of the church from the days of Origen to the present time. Having shown that the minister of the new covenant had a power not enjoyed by that of the old, Paul proceeds to show that he likewise has a glory (and Paul's enemies were criticizing him for glorying) not enjoyed by any minister of the old dispensation; no, not even by Moses himself.]

Lapide: 2Co 3:1-18

CHAPTER III.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

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.

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.

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.

Ver. 1.— 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.

Or need we. . . epistles of commendation to you . . . or from you? ie., written by you to commend me to others.

Ver. 2.— 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.

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.

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 σάρκινος, used here, and οαρκικός : 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.

Ver. 4.— 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.

Ver. 5.— 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 Prædest. Sanct. c. ii.).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Ver. 6.— 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.).

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.

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.

Ver. 7.— 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?

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.

Ver. 8.— 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.

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.

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.

Ver. 10 . — 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."

Ver. 12.— 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.

We use great plainness of speech. We preach the Gospel boldly, freely, frankly, openly.

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.

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. "

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.

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.

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.

Ver. 14 . — 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.

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.

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.

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

Ver. 17 . — 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

Ver. 18 . — 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.

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.

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.

"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.

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.

"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!

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."

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."

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

Second Corinthians

From Macedonia a.d. 54 Or 55

By Way of Introduction

The Pauline authorship is admitted by all real scholars, though there is doubt by some as to the unity of the Epistle. J.H. Kennedy ( The Second and Third Letters of St. Paul to the Corinthians , 1900) has presented the arguments in a plausible, but not wholly convincing, manner for the plea that chapters 2 Corinthians 10-13 really represent a separate and earlier letter, the one referred to in 2Co_2:3, which was later tacked on to chapters 1-9 as part of the same Epistle. This theory does explain the difference in tone between chapters 1 to 7 and 10 to 13, but that fact is sufficiently clear from the stubborn minority against Paul in Corinth reported by Titus after the majority had been won to Paul by First Corinthians and by Titus (2Co_2:1-11). There are in fact three obvious divisions in the Epistle. Chapters 1 to 7 deal with the report of Titus about the victory in Corinth and Paul’s wonderful digression on the glory of the ministry in 2 Corinthians 2:12-6:10; chapters 8 and 2Co_9:1-15 discuss the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem already mentioned in 1Co_16:1. and which Titus is to press to completion on his return to Corinth; chapters 10 to 13 deal sharply with the Judaizing minority who still oppose Paul’s leadership. These three subjects are in no sense inconsistent with each other. The letter is a unity. Nowhere do we gain so clear an insight into Paul’s own struggles and hopes as a preacher. It is a handbook for the modern minister of inestimable value. One can hear Paul’s heart throb through these chapters. The syntax is often broken by anacolutha. The sentences are sometimes disconnected. Grammatical agreements are overlooked. But there is power here, the grip of a great soul holding on to the highest ideals in the midst of manifold opposition and discouragements. Christ is Master of Paul at every turn.

The date of the Epistle is clearly after I Corinthians, for Paul has left Ephesus and is now in Macedonia (2Co_2:13), probably at Philippi, where he met Titus, though he had hoped to meet him at Troas on his return from Corinth. At a guess one may say that Paul wrote in the autumn of a.d. 54 or 55 of the same year in the spring of which he had written I Corinthians, and before he went on to Corinth himself where he wrote Romans (Act_20:1-3; Rom_16:1).

The occasion for writing is the return of Titus from Corinth with mixed news of the Pauline majority and the minority in opposition. So Titus is sent back with this Epistle to finish the task while Paul waits awhile for matters to clear up (2Co_13:1-10).

It is not certain whether the letter mentioned in 2Co_2:3 is our I Corinthians or a lost letter like the one alluded to in 1Co_5:9. If it is a lost one, we know of four Corinthian Epistles (the one in 1Co_5:9, our I Corinthians, the one in 2Co_2:3, our II Corinthians), assuming the unity of II Corinthians. Few things in Paul’s ministry gave him more concern than the troubles in Corinth. The modern city pastor finds little in his work that Paul has not faced and mastered. There is consolation and courage for the preacher in the conduct and counsels of this greatest of all preachers.

JFB: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

THE following reasons seem to have induced Paul to write this Second Epistle to the Corinthians: (1) That he might explain the reasons for his having deferred to pay them his promised visit, by taking Corinth as his way to Macedonia (1Co 4:19; 2Co 1:15-16; compare 1Co 16:5); and so that he might set forth to them his apostolic walk in general (2Co 1:12, 2Co 1:24; 2Co 6:3-13; 2Co 7:2). (2) That he might commend their obedience in reference to the directions in his First Epistle, and at the same time direct them now to forgive the offender, as having been punished sufficiently (2Co 2:1-11; 2Co 7:6-16). (3) That he might urge them to collect for the poor saints at Jerusalem (2Co 8:1-9, 2Co 8:15). (4) That he might maintain his apostolic authority and reprove gainsayers.

The external testimonies for its genuineness are IRENÆUS [Against Heresies, 3,7,1]; ATHENAGORAS [Of the Resurrection of the Dead]; CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA [Miscellanies, 3, p. 94; 4, p. 101]; TERTULLIAN [On Modesty, 13].

The TIME OF WRITING was after Pentecost, A.D. 57, when Paul left Ephesus for Troas. Having stayed in the latter place for some time preaching the Gospel with effect (2Co 2:12), he went on to Macedonia, being eager to meet Titus there, having been disappointed in his not coming to Troas, as had been agreed on between them. Having heard from him the tidings he so much desired of the good effect produced on the Corinthians by his First Epistle, and after having tested the liberality of the Macedonian churches (2Co 8:1), he wrote this Second Epistle, and then went on to Greece, where he abode for three months; and then, after travelling by land, reached Philippi on his return at Passover or Easter, A.D. 58 (Act 20:1-6). So that this Epistle must have been written about autumn, A.D. 57.

Macedonia was THE PLACE from which it was written (2Co 9:2, where the present tense, "I boast," or "am boasting," implies his presence then in Macedonia). In Asia (Lydian Asia) he had undergone some great peril of his life (2Co 1:8-9), whether the reference be [PALEY] to the tumult at Ephesus (Acts 19:23-41), or, as ALFORD thinks, to a dangerous illness in which he despaired of life. Thence he passed by Troas to Philippi, the first city which would meet him in entering Macedonia. The importance of the Philippian Church would induce him to stay there some time; as also his desire to collect contributions from the Macedonian churches for the poor saints at Jerusalem. His anxiety of mind is recorded (2Co 7:5) as occurring when he came into Macedonia, and therefore must have been at Philippi, which was the first city of Macedonia in coming from Troas; and here, too, from 2Co 7:6, compared with 2Co 7:5, must have been the scene of his receiving the comforting tidings from Titus. "Macedonia" is used for Philippi in 2Co 11:9, as is proved by comparison with Phi 4:15-16. So it is probably used here (2Co 7:5). ALFORD argues from 2Co 8:1, where he speaks of the "grace bestowed on the churches (plural) of Macedonia," that Paul must have visited other churches in Macedonia, besides Philippi, when he wrote, for example, Thessalonica, Berea, &c., and that Philippi, the first on his route, is less likely to have been the scene of his writing than the last on his route, whichever it was, perhaps Thessalonica. But Philippi, as being the chief town of the province, was probably the place to which all the collections of the churches were sent. Ancient tradition, too (as appears from the subscription to this Epistle), favors the view that Philippi was the place from which this Epistle was sent by the hands of Titus who received, besides, a charge to prosecute at Corinth the collection which he had begun at his first visit (2Co 8:6).

The STYLE is most varied, and passes rapidly from one phase of feeling to another; now joyous and consolatory, again severe and full of reproof; at one time gentle and affectionate, at another, sternly rebuking opponents and upholding his dignity as an apostle. This variety of style accords with the warm and earnest character of the apostle, which nowhere is manifested more beautifully than in this Epistle. His bodily frailty, and the chronic malady under which he suffered, and which is often alluded to (2Co 4:7; 2Co 5:1-4; 2Co 12:7-9; compare Note, see on 2Co 1:8), must have been especially trying to one of his ardent temperament. But besides this, was the more pressing anxiety of the "care of all the churches." At Corinth, as elsewhere, Judaizing emissaries wished to bind legal fetters of letter and form (compare 2Co. 3:3-18) on the freedom and catholicity of the Church. On the other hand, there were free thinkers who defended their immorality of practice by infidel theories (1Co 15:12, 1Co 15:32-36). These were the "fightings without," and "fears within" (2Co 7:5-6) which agitated the apostle's mind until Titus brought him comforting tidings from Corinth. Even then, while the majority at Corinth had testified their repentance, and, as Paul had desired, excommunicated the incestuous person, and contributed for the poor Christians of Judea, there was still a minority who, more contemptuously than ever, resisted the apostle. These accused him of crafty and mercenary motives, as if he had personal gain in view in the collection being made; and this, notwithstanding his scrupulous care to be above the possibility of reasonable suspicion, by having others besides himself to take charge of the money. This insinuation was palpably inconsistent with their other charge, that he could be no true apostle, as he did not claim maintenance from the churches which he founded. Another accusation they brought of cowardly weakness; that he was always threatening severe measures without daring to execute them (2Co 10:8-16; 2Co 13:2); and that he was vacillating in his teaching and practice, circumcising Timothy, and yet withholding circumcision from Titus; a Jew among the Jews, and a Greek among the Greeks. That most of these opponents were of the Judaizing party in the Church, appears from 2Co 11:22. They seem to have been headed by an emissary from Judea ("he that cometh," 2Co 11:4), who had brought "letters of commendation" (2Co 3:1) from members of the Church at Jerusalem, and who boasted of his purity of Hebrew descent, and his close connection with Christ Himself (2Co 11:13, 2Co 11:23). His partisans contrasted his high pretensions with the timid humility of Paul (1Co 2:3); and his rhetoric with the apostle's plain and unadorned style (2Co 11:6; 2Co 10:10, 2Co 10:13). It was this state of things at Corinth, reported by Titus, that caused Paul to send him back forthwith thither with this Second Epistle, which is addressed, not to Corinth only (1Co 1:2), but to all the churches also in Achaia (2Co 1:1), which had in some degree been affected by the same causes as affected the Corinthian Church. The widely different tone in different parts of the Epistle is due to the diversity which existed at Corinth between the penitent majority and the refractory minority. The former he addresses with the warmest affection; the latter with menace and warning. Two deputies, chosen by the churches to take charge of the contribution to be collected at Corinth, accompanied Titus (2Co 8:18-19, 2Co 8:22).

JFB: 2 Corinthians (Outline)

• THE HEADING; PAUL'S CONSOLATIONS IN RECENT TRIALS IN ASIA; HIS SINCERITY TOWARDS THE CORINTHIANS; EXPLANATION OF HIS NOT HAVING VISITED THEM AS HE HAD PURPOSED. (2Co. 1:1-24)
• REASON WHY HE HAD NOT VISITED THEM ON HIS WAY TO MACEDONIA; THE INCESTUOUS PERSON OUGHT NOW TO BE FORGIVEN; HIS ANXIETY TO HEAR TIDINGS OF THEIR STATE FROM TITUS, AND HIS JOY WHEN AT LAST THE GOOD NEWS REACHES HIM. (2Co. 2:1-17)
• THE SOLE COMMENDATION HE NEEDS TO PROVE GOD'S SANCTION OF HIS MINISTRY HE HAS IN HIS CORINTHIAN CONVERTS: HIS MINISTRY EXCELS THE MOSAIC, AS THE GOSPEL OF LIFE AND LIBERTY EXCELS THE LAW OF CONDEMNATION. (2Co. 3:1-18) Are we beginning again to recommend ourselves (2Co 5:12) (as some of them might say he had done in his first Epistle; or, a reproof to "some" who had begun doing so)!
• HIS PREACHING IS OPEN AND SINCERE, THOUGH TO MANY THE GOSPEL IS HIDDEN. (2Co. 4:1-18)
• THE HOPE (2Co 4:17-18) OF ETERNAL GLORY IN THE RESURRECTION BODY. (2Co. 5:1-21)
• HIS APOSTOLIC MINISTRY IS APPROVED BY FAITHFULNESS IN EXHORTATION, IN SUFFERINGS, IN EXHIBITION OF THE FRUITS OF THE HOLY GHOST: HIS LARGENESS OF HEART TO THEM CALLS FOR ENLARGEMENT OF THEIR HEART TO HIM. EXHORTATIONS TO SEPARATION FROM POLLUTION. (2Co. 6:1-18)
• SELF-PURIFICATION THEIR DUTY RESULTING FROM THE FOREGOING. HIS LOVE TO THEM, AND JOY AT THE GOOD EFFECTS ON THEM OF HIS FORMER EPISTLE, AS REPORTED BY TITUS. (2Co. 7:1-16)
• THE COLLECTION FOR THE SAINTS; THE READINESS OF THE MACEDONIANS A PATTERN TO THE CORINTHIANS; CHRIST THE HIGHEST PATTERN; EACH IS TO GIVE WILLINGLY AFTER HIS ABILITY; TITUS AND TWO OTHERS ARE THE AGENTS ACCREDITED TO COMPLETE THE COLLECTION. (2Co. 8:1-24)
• REASONS FOR HIS SENDING TITUS. THE GREATER THEIR BOUNTIFULNESS, THE MORE SHALL BE THE RETURN OF BLESSING TO THEM, AND THANKSGIVING TO GOD. (2Co 9:1-15)
• HE VINDICATES HIS APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY AGAINST THOSE WHO DEPRECIATED HIM FOR HIS PERSONAL APPEARANCE. HE WILL MAKE HIS POWER FELT WHEN HE COMES. HE BOASTS NOT, AS THEY, BEYOND HIS MEASURE. (2Co. 10:1-18)
• THROUGH JEALOUSY OVER THE CORINTHIANS, WHO MADE MORE ACCOUNT OF THE FALSE APOSTLES THAN OF HIM, HE IS OBLIGED TO COMMEND HIMSELF AS IN MANY RESPECTS SUPERIOR. (2Co. 11:1-33)
• REVELATIONS IN WHICH HE MIGHT GLORY: BUT HE RATHER GLORIES IN INFIRMITIES, AS CALLING FORTH CHRIST'S POWER: SIGNS OF HIS APOSTLESHIP: HIS DISINTERESTEDNESS: NOT THAT HE IS EXCUSING HIMSELF TO THEM; BUT HE DOES ALL FOR THEIR GOOD, LEST HE SHOULD FIND THEM NOT SUCH AS HE DESIRED, AND SO SHOULD HAVE TO BE SEVERE AT HIS COMING. (2Co. 12:1-21) He proceeds to illustrate the "glorying in infirmities" (2Co 11:30). He gave one instance which might expose him to ridicule (2Co 11:33); he now gives another, but this one connected with a glorious revelation of which it was the sequel: but he dwells not on the glory done to himself, but on the infirmity which followed it, as displaying Christ's power. The oldest manuscripts read, "I MUST NEEDS boast (or glory) though it be not expedient; for I will come." The "for" gives a proof that it is "not expedient to boast": I will take the case of revelations, in which if anywhere boasting might be thought harmless. "Visions" refers to things seen: "revelations," to things heard (compare 1Sa 9:15) or revealed in any way. In "visions" their signification was not always vouchsafed; in "revelations" there was always an unveiling of truths before hidden (Dan 2:19, Dan 2:31). All parts of Scripture alike are matter of inspiration; but not all of revelation. There are degrees of revelation; but not of inspiration.
• HE THREATENS A SEVERE PROOF OF HIS APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY, BUT PREFERS THEY WOULD SPARE HIM THE NECESSITY FOR IT. (2Co 13:1-14)

TSK: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

The most remarkable circumstance in this Epistle, observes Mr. Scott, is the confidence of the Apostle in the goodness of his cause, and in the power of God to bear him out in it. Opposed as he then was by a powerful and sagacious party, whose authority, reputation, and interest were deeply concerned, and who were ready to seize on every thing that could discredit him, it is wonderful to hear him so firmly insist upon his apostolical authority, and so unreservedly appeal to the miraculous power which he has exercised and conferred at Corinth. So far from shrinking from the contest, as afraid of some discovery being made, unfavourable to him and the common cause, he, with great modesty and meekness indeed, but with equal boldness and decision, expressly declares that his opposers and despisers were the ministers of Satan, and menaces them with miraculous judgments, when as many of their deluded hearers had been brought to repentance and re-established in the faith, as proper means could in a reasonable time effect. It is inconceivable that a stronger internal testimony, not only of integrity, but of divine inspiration, can exist. Had there been anything of imposture among the Christians, it was next to impossible but such a conduct must have occasioned a disclosure of it. Of the effects produced by this latter epistle we have no circumstantial account; for the journey which St. Paul took to Corinth, after he had written it, is mentioned by St. Luke only in a few words (Act 20:2, Act 20:3). We know, however, that St. Paul was there after he had written this Epistle; that the contributions for the poor brethren at Jerusalem were brought to him from different parts to that city (Rom 15:26); and that, after remaining there several months, he sent salutations from some of the principal members of that church, by whom he must have been greatly respected, to the church of Rome (Rom 16:22, Rom 16:23). From this time we hear no more of the false teacher and his party; and when Clement of Rome wrote his epistle to the Corinthians, St. Paul was considered by them as a divine apostle, to whose authority he might appeal without fear of contradiction. The false teacher, therefore, must either have been silenced by St. Paul, by virtue of his apostolical powers, and by an act of severity which he had threatened (2Co 13:2, 2Co 13:3); or this adversary of the apostle had, at that time, voluntarily quitted the place. Whichever was the cause, the effect produced must operate as a confirmation of our faith, and as a proof of St. Paul’s divine mission.

TSK: 2 Corinthians 3 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

2Co 3:1, Lest their false teachers should charge him with vain glory, he shows the faith and graces of the Corinthians to be a sufficient commendation of his ministry; 2Co 3:6, Whereupon entering a comparison between the ministers of the law and of the gospel, 2Co 3:12. he proves that his ministry is so far the more excellent, as the gospel of life and liberty is more glorious than the law of condemnation.

Poole: 2 Corinthians 3 (Chapter Introduction)

CORINTHIANS CHAPTER 3

MHCC: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

The second epistle to the Corinthians probably was written about a year after the first. Its contents are closely connected with those of the former epistle. The manner in which the letter St. Paul formerly wrote had been received, is particularly noticed; this was such as to fill his heart with gratitude to God, who enabled him fully to discharge his duty towards them. Many had shown marks of repentance, and amended their conduct, but others still followed their false teachers; and as the apostle delayed his visit, from his unwillingness to treat them with severity, they charged him with levity and change of conduct. Also, with pride, vain-glory, and severity, and they spake of him with contempt. In this epistle we find the same ardent affection towards the disciples at Corinth, as in the former, the same zeal for the honour of the gospel, and the same boldness in giving Christian reproof. The first six chapters are chiefly practical: the rest have more reference to the state of the Corinthian church, but they contain many rules of general application.

MHCC: 2 Corinthians 3 (Chapter Introduction)

(2Co 3:1-11) The preference of the gospel to the law given by Moses.

(2Co 3:12-18) The preaching of the apostle was suitable to the excellency and evidence of the gospel, through the power of the Holy Ghost.

Matthew Henry: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians

In his former epistle the apostle had signified his intentions of coming to Corinth, as he passed through Macedonia (1Co 16:5), but, being providentially hindered for some time, he writes this second epistle to them about a year after the former; and there seem to be these two urgent occasions: - 1. The case of the incestuous person, who lay under censure, required that with all speed he should be restored and received again into communion. This therefore he gives directions about (ch. 2), and afterwards (ch. 7) he declares the satisfaction he had upon the intelligence he received of their good behaviour in that affair. 2. There was a contribution now making for the poor saints at Jerusalem, in which he exhorts the Corinthians to join (ch. 8, 2Co 9:1-15).

There are divers other things very observable in this epistle; for example, I. The account the apostle gives of his labours and success in preaching the gospel in several places, ch. 2. II. The comparison he makes between the Old and New Testament dispensation, ch. 3. III. The manifold sufferings that he and his fellow-labourers met with, and the motives and encouragements for their diligence and patience, ch. 4, 5. IV. The caution he gives the Corinthians against mingling with unbelievers, ch. 6. V. The way and manner in which he justifies himself and his apostleship from the opprobrious insinuations and accusations of false teachers, who endeavoured to ruin his reputation at Corinth, ch. 10-12, and throughout the whole epistle.

Matthew Henry: 2 Corinthians 3 (Chapter Introduction)

The apostle makes an apology for his seeming to commend himself, and is careful not to assume too much to himself, but to ascribe all praise unto God (2Co 3:1-5). He then draws a comparison between the Old Testament and the New, and shows the excellency of the later above the former (2Co 3:6-11), whence he infers what is the duty of gospel ministers, and the advantage of those who live under the gospel above those who lived under the law (2Co 3:12 to the end).

Barclay: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS TO THE CORINTHIANS

The Greatness Of Corinth

A glance at the map will show that Corinth was made for greatness. The southern part of Greece is very nearly an island. On the west the Corinthian Gulf deeply indents the land and on the east the Saronic Gulf. All that is left to join the two parts of Greece together is a little isthmus only four miles across. On that narrow neck of land Corinth stands. Such a position made it inevitable that it should be one of the greatest trading and commercial centres of the ancient world. All traffic from Athens and the north of Greece to Sparta and the Peloponnese had to be routed through Corinth, because it stood on the little neck of land that connected the two.

Not only did the north to south traffic of Greece pass through Corinth of necessity, by far the greater part of the east to west traffic of the Mediterranean passed through her from choice. The extreme southern tip of Greece was known as Cape Malea (now called Cape Matapan). It was dangerous, and to round Cape Malea had much the same sound as to round Cape Horn had in later times. The Greeks had two sayings which showed what they thought of it--"Let him who sails round Malea forget his home," and, "Let him who sails round Malea first make his will."

The consequence was that mariners followed one of two courses. They sailed up the Saronic Gulf, and, if their ships were small enough, dragged them out of the water, set them on rollers, hauled them across the isthmus, and re-launched them on the other side. The isthmus was actually called the Diolkos, the place of dragging across. The idea is the same as that which is contained in the Scottish place name Tarbert, which means a place where the land is so narrow that a boat can be dragged from loch to loch. If that course was not possible because the ship was too large, the cargo was disembarked, carried by porters across the isthmus, and re-embarked on another ship at the other side. This four mile journey across the isthmus, where the Corinth Canal now runs, saved a journey of two hundred and two miles round Cape Malea, the most dangerous cape in the Mediterranean.

It is easy to see how great a commercial city Corinth must have been. The north to south traffic of Greece had no alternative but to pass through her; by far the greater part of the east to west trade of the Mediterranean world chose to pass through her. Round Corinth there clustered three other towns, Lechaeum at the west end of the isthmus, Cenchrea at the east end and Schoenus just a short distance away. Farrar writes, "Objects of luxury soon found their way to the markets which were visited by every nation in the civilized world--Arabian balsam, Phoenician dates, Libyan ivory, Babylonian carpets, Cilician goatsair, Lycaonian wool, Phrygian slaves."

Corinth, as Farrar calls her, was the Vanity Fair of the ancient world. Men called her The Bridge of Greece; one called her The Lounge of Greece. It has been said that if a man stands long enough in Piccadilly Circus he will in the end meet everyone in the country. Corinth was the Piccadilly Circus of the Mediterranean. To add to the concourse which came to it, Corinth was the place where the Isthmian Games were held, which were second only to the Olympics. Corinth was a rich and populous city with one of the greatest commercial trades in the ancient world.

The Wickedness Of Corinth

There was another side to Corinth. She had a reputation for commercial prosperity, but she was also a byword for evil living. The very word korinthiazesthai, to live like a Corinthian, had become a part of the Greek language, and meant to live with drunken and immoral debauchery. The word actually penetrated to the English language, and, in Regency times, a Corinthian was one of the wealthy young bucks who lived in reckless and riotous living. Aelian, the late Greek writer, tells us that if ever a Corinthian was shown upon the stage in a Greek play he was shown drunk. The very name Corinth was synonymous with debauchery and there was one source of evil in the city which was known all over the civilized world. Above the isthmus towered the hill of the Acropolis, and on it stood the great temple of Aphrodite, the goddess of love. To that temple there were attached one thousand priestesses who were sacred prostitutes, and in the evenings they descended from the Acropolis and plied their trade upon the streets of Corinth, until it became a Greek proverb, "It is not every man who can afford a journey to Corinth." In addition to these cruder sins, there flourished far more recondite vices, which had come in with the traders and the sailors from the ends of the earth, until Corinth became not only a synonym for wealth and luxury, drunkenness and debauchery, but also for filth.

The History Of Corinth

The history of Corinth falls into two parts. She was a very ancient city. Thucydides, the Greek historian, claims that it was in Corinth that the first triremes, the Greek battleships, were built. Legend has it that it was in Corinth that the Argo was built, the ship in which Jason sailed the seas, searching for the golden fleece. But in 146 B.C. disaster befell her. The Romans were engaged in conquering the world. When they sought to reduce Greece, Corinth was the leader of the opposition. But the Greeks could not stand against the disciplined Romans, and in 146 B.C. Lucius Mummius, the Roman general, captured Corinth and left her a desolate heap of ruins.

But any place with the geographical situation of Corinth could not remain a devastation. Almost exactly one hundred years later, in 46 B.C. Julius Caesar rebuilt her and she arose from her ruins. Now she became a Roman colony. More, she became a capital city, the metropolis of the Roman province of Achaea, which included practically all Greece.

In those days, which were the days of Paul, her population was very mixed. (i) There were the Roman veterans whom Julius Caesar had settled there. When a Roman soldier had served his time, he was granted the citizenship and was then sent out to some newly-founded city and given a grant of land so that he might become a settler there. These Roman colonies were planted all over the world, and always the backbone of them was the contingent of veteran regular soldiers whose faithful service had won them the citizenship. (ii) When Corinth was rebuilt the merchants came back, for her situation still gave her commercial supremacy. (iii) There were many Jews among the population. The rebuilt city offered them commercial opportunities which they were not slow to take. (iv) There was a sprinkling of Phoenicians and Phrygians and people from the east, with their exotic customs and their hysterical ways. Farrar speaks of "this mongrel and heterogeneous population of Greek adventurers and Roman bourgeois, with a tainting infusion of Phoenicians; this mass of Jews, ex-soldiers, philosophers, merchants, sailors, freedmen, slaves, trades-people, hucksters and agents of every form of vice." He characterizes her as a colony "without aristocracy, without traditions and without well-established citizens."

Remember the background of Corinth, remember its name for wealth and luxury, for drunkenness and immorality and vice, and then read 1Co_6:9-10 .

Are you not aware that the unrighteous will not inherit the

Kingdom of God? Make no mistake--neither fornicators, nor

idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sensualists, nor homosexuals, nor

thieves, nor rapacious men, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor

robbers shall inherit the Kingdom of God--and such were some of

you.

In this hotbed of vice, in the most unlikely place in all the Greek world, some of Paulgreatest work was done, and some of the mightiest triumphs of Christianity were won.

Paul In Corinth

Paul stayed longer in Corinth than in any other city, with the single exception of Ephesus. He had left Macedonia with his life in peril and had crossed over to Athens. There he had had little success and had gone on to Corinth, and he remained there for eighteen months. We realize how little we really know of his work when we see that the whole story of that eighteen months is compressed by Luke into 17 verses (Act_18:1-17 ).

When Paul arrived in Corinth he took up residence with Aquila and Prisca. He preached in the synagogue with great success. With the arrival of Timothy and Silas from Macedonia, he redoubled his efforts, but the Jews were so stubbornly hostile that he had to leave the synagogue. He took up his residence with one Justus who lived next door to the synagogue. His most notable convert was Crispus, who was actually the ruler of the synagogue, and amongst the general public he had good success.

In the year A.D. 52 there came to Corinth as its new governor a Roman called Gallio. He was famous for his charm and gentleness. The Jews tried to take advantage of his newness and good nature and brought Paul to trial before him on a charge of teaching contrary to their law. But Gallio, with impartial Roman justice, refused to have anything to do with the case or to take any action. So Paul completed his work in Corinth and moved on to Syria.

The Correspondence With Corinth

It was when he was in Ephesus in the year A.D. 55 that Paul, learning that things were not all well in Corinth, wrote to the church there. There is every possibility that the Corinthian correspondence as we have it is out of order. We must remember that it was not until A.D. 90 or thereby that Paulcorrespondence was collected. In many churches it must have existed only on scraps of papyrus and the putting it together would be a problem: and it seems that, when the Corinthian letters were collected, they were not all discovered and were not arranged in the right order. Let us see if we can reconstruct what happened.

(i) There was a letter which preceded 1 Corinthians. In 1Co_5:9 Paul writes, "I wrote you a letter not to associate with immoral men." This obviously refers to some previous letter. Some scholars believe that letter is lost without trace. Others think it is contained in 2Co_6:14-18 and 2Co_7:1 . Certainly that passage suits what Paul said he wrote about. It occurs rather awkwardly in its context, and, if we take it out and read straight on from 2Co_6:13 to 2Co_7:2 , we get excellent sense and connection. Scholars call this letter The Previous Letter. (In the original letters there were no chapter or verse divisions. The chapters were not divided up until the thirteenth century and the verses not till the sixteenth, and because of that the arranging of the collection of letters would be much more difficult).

(ii) News came to Paul from various sources of trouble at Corinth. (a) News came from those who were of the household of Chloe (1Co_1:11 ). They brought news of the contentions with which the church was torn. (b) News came with the visit of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus to Ephesus. (1Co_16:17 ). By personal contact they were able to fill up the gaps in Paulinformation. (c) News came in a letter in which the Corinthian Church had asked Paul guidance on various problems. In 1Co_7:1 Paul begins, "Concerning the matters about which you wrote..." In answer to all this information Paul wrote 1 Corinthians and despatched it to Corinth apparently by the hand of Timothy (1Co_4:17 ).

(iii) The result of the letter was that things became worse than ever, and, although we have no direct record of it, we can deduce that Paul paid a personal visit to Corinth. In 2Co_12:14 he writes, "The third time I am ready to come to you." In 2Co_13:1-2 , he says again that he is coming to them for the third time. Now, if there was a third time, there must have been a second time. We have the record of only one visit, whose story is told in Act_18:1-17 . We have no record at all of the second, but Corinth was only two or three daysailing from Ephesus.

(iv) The visit did no good at all. Matters were only exacerbated and the result was an exceedingly severe letter. We learn about that letter from certain passages in 2 Corinthians. In 2Co_2:4 Paul writes, "I wrote to you out of much affliction and anguish of heart and with many tears." In 2Co_7:8 he writes, "For even if I made you sorry with my letter, I do not regret it though I did regret it; for I see that that letter has grieved you, though only for a while." It was a letter which was the product of anguish of mind, a letter so severe that Paul was almost sorry that he ever sent it.

Scholars call this The Severe Letter. Have we got it? It obviously cannot be I Corinthians, because it is not a tear-stained and anguished letter. When Paul wrote it, it is clear enough that things were under control. Now if we read through 2 Corinthians we find an odd circumstance. In 2Cor 1-9 everything is made up, there is complete reconciliation and all are friends again; but at 2Cor 10 comes the strangest break. 2Cor 10-13 are the most heartbroken cry Paul ever wrote. They show that he has been hurt and insulted as he never was before or afterwards by any church. His appearance, his speech, his apostleship, his honesty have all been under attack.

Most scholars believe that 2Cor 10-13 are the severe letter, and that they have become misplaced when Paulletters were put together. If we want the real chronological course of Paulcorrespondence with Corinth, we really ought to read 2Cor 10-13 before 2Cor 1-9. We do know that this letter was sent off with Titus. (2Co_2:13 ; 2Co_7:13 ).

(v) Paul was worried about this letter. He could not wait until Titus came back with an answer, so he set out to meet him (2Co_2:13 ; 2Co_7:5 , 2Co_7:13 ). Somewhere in Macedonia he met him and learned that all was well, and, probably at Philippi, he sat down and wrote 2Cor 1-9, the letter of reconciliation.

Stalker has said that the letters of Paul take the roof off the early churches and let us see what went on inside. Of none of them is that truer than the letters to Corinth. Here we see what "the care of all the churches" must have meant to Paul. Here we see the heart-breaks and the joys. Here we see Paul, the shepherd of his flock, bearing the sorrows and the problems of his people on his heart.

The Corinthian Correspondence

Before we read the letters in detail let us set down the progress of the Corinthian correspondence in tabular form.

(i) The Previous Letter, which may be contained in 2Co_6:14-18 and 2Co_7:1 .

(ii) The arrival of Chloepeople, of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus, and of the letter to Paul from the Corinthian Church.

(iii) 1 Corinthians is written in reply and is despatched with Timothy.

(iv) The situation grows worse and Paul pays a personal visit to Corinth, which is so complete a failure that it almost breaks his heart.

(v) The consequence is The Severe Letter, which is almost certainly contained in 2Cor 10-13, and which was despatched with Titus.

(vi) Unable to wait for an answer, Paul sets out to meet Titus. He meets him in Macedonia, learns that all is well and, probably from Philippi, writes 2Cor 1-9, The Letter of Reconciliation.

The first four chapters of 1 Corinthians deal with the divided state of the Church of God at Corinth. Instead of being a unity in Christ it was split into sects and parties, who had attached themselves to the names of various leaders and teachers. It is Paulteaching that these divisions had emerged because the Corinthians thought too much about human wisdom and knowledge and too little about the sheer grace of God. In fact, for all their so-called wisdom, they are really in a state of immaturity. They think that they are wise men, but really they are no better than babies.

FURTHER READING

2 Corinthians

F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (NCB; E)

J. Hering, The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (translated by A. W. Heathcote and P. J. Allcock)

A. Plummer, 2 Corinthians (ICC; G)

R. V. G. Tasker, The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (TC; E)

Abbreviations

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

NCB: New Century Bible

TC: Tyndale Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: 2 Corinthians 3 (Chapter Introduction)

Each Man A Letter Of Christ (2Co_3:1-3)

The Surpassing Glory (2Co_3:4-11)

The Veil Which Hides The Truth (2Co_3:12-18)

Constable: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical background

First Corinthians did not dispel the problems in the church at Corinth completely. While it resolved some of these, opposition to the Apostle Paul persisted and Paul's critics continued to speak out against him in the church. One man in particular seems to have been the ringleader of the opposition (10:7). He had rallied the support of a significant minority. The issue was Paul's apostolic authority. His critics were claiming authority equal with Paul's. This was in effect a claim to apostolic authority on their part or a denial of the full apostolic authority of Paul.

News of continuing problems in Corinth reached Paul in Ephesus during his prolonged stay there during his third missionary journey. He then made a brief visit to Corinth. However his efforts to resolve the conflicts fell through (2:1; 12:14; 13:1-2). Paul apparently suffered insult and lost face during that visit (2:5-8; 7:12). Consequently this was a painful visit for Paul. He then returned to Ephesus.

Paul's next step in dealing with the situation in Corinth was to send a severe letter from Ephesus by the hand of Titus and another unnamed brother (2:3-4; 7:8-12; 12:18). He apparently directed this letter, now lost, at the party opposed to him and particularly its leader. Some commentators believe that 2 Corinthians 10-13 contains part of this letter, but the evidence for this is not convincing.¹

Paul evidently intended to receive Titus' report concerning the effects of this severe letter in Ephesus. However, persecution there made it expedient for Paul to leave that city earlier than he had anticipated (Acts 20:1). He found an open door for the gospel to the north in Troas. Eager to meet Titus who was taking the land route from Corinth back to Ephesus Paul moved west into Macedonia (2:12-13). There Titus met him and gave him an encouraging report (7:6-16). Most of the church had responded to Paul's directives and the church had disciplined the troublemakers (2:5-11). Unfortunately some in the congregation still refused to acknowledge Paul's authority over them (10:1-13:10).

Paul rejoiced at the repentance of the majority. However his concern for the unrepentant minority and his desire to pick up the money the Corinthians had begun to collect for their poorer brethren in Jerusalem led him to write 2 Corinthians. Along with these primary motives Paul also felt compelled to refute the charge of fickleness leveled at him by his critics. He had changed his travel plans and had not come to see them as he had said he would.

The whole situation provided him an opportunity to clarify the nature of Christian ministry.

Paul wrote the Second Epistle to the Corinthians from Macedonia, perhaps Philippi, Thessalonica, or Berea, probably in the fall or winter of 56 A.D. A date a year earlier or later is possible.

Some commentators believe Paul wrote 1 Corinthians after his painful visit and after he wrote the severe letter.² I believe it is more probable that he wrote 1 Corinthians before these two events.³ It is very difficult to reconstruct the details of Paul's activities since the data available to us is incomplete.

Paul's Corinthian Contacts
Paul's founding visit	His "former letter"	The Corin-thians' letter to him	First Corin-thians	Paul's "painful visit"	His "severe letter"	Second Corin-thians	Paul's antici-pated visit

"2 Corinthians is very different from the letters between which it was written, 1 Corinthians and Romans. Whereas each of those letters is, in its own way, systematic and orderly, 2 Corinthians is, on the face of it, uneven and digressive. It is no surprise, therefore, that many scholars have suggested that 2 Corinthians is really a collection of letters put together later as a single letter."⁴

"Second Corinthians presents many inspiring texts and passages to the reader and teacher of God's Word. A quick survey reveals approximately eighty individual verses lending themselves to extended meditation and exposition, apart from the sixty or so constituent paragraphs of the letter. This letter is a rich lode for the edification of God's people."⁵

Message⁶

The subject of 2 Corinthians is ministry, the church's work of service in the world. This is the central concept Paul dealt with in this epistle. What did he say about ministry?

He spoke of ministry in two ways. There is ministry per se (philosophy of ministry), and there is ministry to the world (practice of ministry).

Let's consider first what Paul revealed about the ministry of the church per se. This is the way Paul spoke of ministry most often in 2 Corinthians. In 1 Corinthians there is more emphasis on the practice of ministry than on the philosophy of ministry.

Paul had a lot to say about the authority of the church's ministry. Jesus Christ is the church's authority. He is the One who assigns each believer particular ministry within the body of Christ (cf. 1 Cor. 12:11, 18, 28; Eph. 4:11-13). The Corinthian church was having a major problem because some in its company were failing to accept Paul's appointment by Christ as an apostle and their own appointment as non-apostles. This was a practical repudiation of Jesus Christ's authority in the church. We must bow to the authority of Christ in the church by recognizing and responding appropriately to those He has appointed to various roles in the body. We identify these people by their gifts (divinely given abilities) and by their offices (divinely given positions).

Paul also had a lot to say in this epistle about the resources of the church's ministry. He emphasized three primarily.

One important resource is the encouragement of God. Paul spoke of this in the first part of the epistle especially. We read "comfort" in our texts, but the Greek word paraklesis means comfort through encouragement. The same Greek root describes the Holy Spirit as our Paraclete in John 14-16. Paul both taught and demonstrated in this letter that God's encouraging comfort always exceeds our discouragement and distress in ministry. The secret to finding it sufficient is taking God's view of how our ministry is really proceeding. This viewpoint Paul revealed, too.

A second resource is divine revelation. Paul did not preach himself or a message that he had concocted. He preached what God had revealed. Thus, revelation constituted both Paul's public message and his personal encouragement. We, too, have received the same message to communicate as ambassadors of Christ. It is a message of reconciliation, and it is the source of our encouragement.

A third resource is the prayers of the saints. Paul called for and counted on the prayers of God's people to bring God's power into play through him as he ministered (1:11). He realized that his own prayers would not move God to work as well as the concerted prayers of many of God's children (cf. James 4:2). Lack of prayer is often a sign of confidence in self rather than confidence in God.

In addition to the authority and resources of our ministry, Paul also had a lot to say in this epistle about experience in ministry. Three features mark experience in ministry.

First, one thing that marks ministry is tribulation. Paul spoke extensively in 2 Corinthians about the afflictions he experienced during his ministry. Furthermore he revealed that these are part of ministry, anyone's ministry who is carrying it out as God has directed. Some people do not welcome the gospel. To them it is a death scent. We should expect to experience tribulation in ministry. We have all experienced this in witnessing to some extent.

Second, another thing that should mark our ministry is hope. God has revealed the end of our ministry. We will all stand before Jesus Christ and receive a reward one day (5:10). This hope is a certainty. The Christian who loses sight of his or her hope is going to drift and suffer discouragement rather than press toward the mark. The end of our ministry is constantly in view in this epistle.

Third, a mark of Christian ministry is triumph. Paul revealed and illustrated by his own attitude that no matter how response to our ministry may appear to us our ministry is always triumphant. The reason for this is that God is at work through His ministers. One of the problems Paul's critics in Corinth had and that we have is that they were evaluating ministry superficially rather than realistically. We need to evaluate ministry on the basis of what God has revealed is happening, not what appears to be happening.

Paul not only revealed much about ministry per se in 2 Corinthians, he also revealed a lot about the ministry of the church to the world. Three emphases predominate.

First, Paul revealed what the message of the church is: the Word of God. Ours is a ministry of the Word. By "the Word" Paul meant the revelation God has given us. In his day it consisted of the Old Testament Scriptures plus the revelations that he and the other New Testament prophets had received that were for all Christians. Paul contrasted his message and ours with the message of Moses and exulted in its superiority. God has removed the veil and we can now see His glory clearly revealed in the face of Jesus Christ.

Second, Paul revealed the church's equipment to carry on its ministry to the world. We are ready to minister only when we separate from the world's sins and conform to God's will. Paul contrasts with his critics in this letter in all these respects. As these characteristics mark us we, too, will be ready to minister.

Third, Paul revealed the exercise of the church's ministry to the world. In exercising its ministry the church does three things according to this epistle.

1. It exercises discipline to restore the erring to effective ministry. Paul's great concern in this epistle was the restoration of the rebellious critics in the Corinthian church to unity and usefulness.

2. The church also is to give no occasion of stumbling to others. Paul's concern was that the behavior of the Corinthian Christians would be an encouragement to other believers and a base from which the gospel could proceed even farther into unevangelized regions beyond.

3. Third, the church exercises the grace of giving. It seeks to facilitate the principle of equality that God has demonstrated throughout history, namely that those who have should share with those who have not. This applies not only to the gospel message but to the physical necessities of life (chs. 8-9).

From these emphases the message of the book emerges. The church needs to submit to revealed authority, to draw upon supernatural resources and equipment, and to experience triumph through tribulation as it executes its mission. As it does so it will effectively carry out its ministry of proclaiming the message of reconciliation to the world.

Constable: 2 Corinthians (Outline)

Outline

I. Introduction 1:1-11

A. Salutation 1:1-2

B. Thanksgiving for comfort in affliction 1:3-11

1. Thanksgiving for comfort 1:3-7

2. Thanksgiving for deliverance 1:8-11

II. Answers to insinuations about the sincerity of Paul's commitment to the Corinthians and to the ministry 1:12-7:16

A. Defense of his conduct with regard to his promised visit and the offender 1:12-2:17

1. The postponement of the intended visit 1:12-2:4

2. The treatment of the offender and the result of the severe letter 2:5-17

B. Exposition of Paul's view of the ministry 3:1-6:10

1. The superiority of Christian ministry to Mosaic ministry 3:1-11

2. The great boldness of the new ministers 3:12-4:6

3. The sufferings and supports of a minister of the gospel 4:7-5:10

4. The life of a minister of Christ 5:11-6:10

C. Appeal for restoration of the Corinthians' confidence in him 6:11-7:16

1. An appeal for large-heartedness and consistency 6:11-7:4

2. The encouraging response of the Corinthians so far 7:5-16

III. Instructions concerning the collection for the poor saints in Judea 8:1-9:15

A. The example of the Macedonians 8:1-7

B. The supreme motive for giving 8:8-15

C. The delegates of the churches 8:16-24

D. The anticipated visit of Paul 9:1-5

E. The benefits of generous giving 9:6-15

IV. Appeals concerning Paul's apostolic authority 10:1-13:10

A. Replies to charges made against Paul 10:1-18

1. Reply to the charge of cowardice 10:1-6

2. Reply to the charge of weakness 10:7-11

3. Reply to the charge of intrusion 10:12-18

B. Claims made by Paul 11:1-12:18

1. Paul's reasons for making these claims 11:1-6

2. Freedom to minister without charge 11:7-15

3. Paul's service and sufferings 11:16-33

4. Special revelations Paul received 12:1-10

5. Paul's supernatural miracles and paternal love 12:11-18

C. Exhortations in view of Paul's approaching visit 12:19-13:10

1. Paul's concerns 12:19-21

2. Paul's warnings 13:1-10

V. Conclusion 13:11-14

A. The exhortation 13:11-12

B. The salutation 13:13

C. The benediction 13:14

Constable: 2 Corinthians

2 Corinthians

Bibliography

Alford, Henry. The Greek Testament. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, n. d.

Balge, Richard D. "Exegesis of 2 Corinthians 9:1-7." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 85:3 (Summer 1988):220-29.

Barclay, William. The Letters to the Corinthians. 2nd ed. The Daily Study Bible. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1962.

Barnett, Paul. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. The New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997.

Barrett, C. K. A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Harper New Testament Commentaries series. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.

Batey, Richard. "Paul's Interaction with the Corinthians." Journal of Biblical Literature 84 (1965):139-46.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Broomall, Wick. "The Second Epistle to the Corinthians." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1261-82. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Brown, Perry C. "What Is the Meaning of Examine Yourselves' in 2 Corinthians 13:5?" Bibliotheca Sacra 154:614 (April-June 1997):175-88.

Bruce, F. F., ed. 1 and 2 Corinthians. New Century Bible series. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, Oliphants, 1971.

_____. Commentary on The Book of Acts. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948.

Chitwood, Arlen L. Judgment Seat of Christ. Norman, OK. The Lamp Broadcast, Inc., 1986.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

Dahms, John V. "Dying with Christ." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36:1 (March 1993):15-23.

Dalton, William J. "Is the Old Covenant Abrogated (2 Cor. 3:14)?" Australian Biblical Review 35 (1987):88-94.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Decker, Rodney J. "The Church's Relationship to the New Covenant." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:607 (July-September 1995):290-305; 608 (October-December 1995):431-56.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S. v. "Corinthians, Epistles to the," by G. H. Clayton.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S. v. "Corinthians, Second Epistle to the," by A. Robertson.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Doty, W. G. Letters in Primitive Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1973.

Flanagan, James L. "The Relief Offering for the Saints in Jerusalem." Luther Rice Theological Journal 3 (Spring 1985):17-27.

Forbes, Christopher. "Comparison, Self-Praise and Irony: Paul's Boasting and the Conventions of Hellenistic Rhetoric." New Testament Studies 32:1 (January 1986):1-30.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. "The Nature of the Ministry according to Paul." Evangelical Quarterly 54 (1982):129-46.

Furnish, Victor Paul. II Corinthians. Anchor Bible series. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1984.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Gaventa, Beverly R. "Apostle and Church in 2 Corinthians." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 182-99. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Gleason, Randall C. "Paul's Covenantal Contrasts in 2 Corinthians 3:1-11." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:613 (January-March 1997):61-79.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. H. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Harris, Gregory H. "Satan's Work as a Deceiver." Bibliotheca Sacra 156:622 (April-June 1999):190-202.

Harris, Murray J. "2 Corinthians." In Romans-Galatians. Vol. 10 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Hay, David M. "The Shaping of Theology in 2 Corinthians: Convictions, Doubts, Warrants." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 135-55. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Hodge, Charles. An Exposition of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Thornapple Commentaries series. Robert Carter & Brothers, 1859; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980.

Hodges, Zane C. Absolutely Free! A Biblical Reply to Lordship Salvation. Dallas: Redencion Viva, and Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1989.

_____. Grace in Eclipse. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1985.

Hoyt, Samuel L. "The Judgment Seat of Christ and Unconfessed Sins." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:545 (January-March 1980):32-40.

_____. "The Negative Aspects of the Christian's Judgment." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:546 (April-June 1980):125-32.

Hughes, Philip Edgcumbe. Paul's Second Epistle to the Corinthians. The New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S. v. "Corinthians, Second Epistle to the," by R. Dykes Shaw.

Ironside, Harry A. Addresses on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Publishers, n.d.

Kent, Homer A., Jr. A Heart Opened Wide. New Testament Studies series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1982.

Kinnebrew, Jim. "The Gospel of Affluence." Mid-America Theological Journal 9:2 (Fall 1985):49-65.

Kraftchick, Steven J. "Death in Us, Life in You." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 156-81. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Lange, John Peter, ed. A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 10: Romans and Corinthians, by J. P. Lange, F. R. Fay, and Christian Friedrich Kling. Translated by J. F. Hurst, Daniel W. Poor, and Conway P. Wing.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul's First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. Reprint ed., Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961.

Lieu, Judith M. "Grace to You and Peace': The Apostolic Greeting." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 68:1 (Autumn 1985):161-78.

Lindars, Barnabas. "The Sound of the Trumpet: Paul and Eschatology." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:2 (Spring 1985):766-82.

Lowery, David K. "2 Corinthians." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament pp. 551-86. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

_____. "A Theology of Paul's Missionary Epistles." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 243-97. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

_____. The Gospel According to Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1988.

Machen, J. Greshem. The Origin of Paul's Religion. New York: Macmillan, 1921.

Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1986.

_____. "The Setting of 2 Corinthians." Tyndale Bulletin 37 (1986):3-19.

Mason, Clarence E., Jr., "The Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:500 (October-December 1968):352-59.

McCaughey, J. D. "The Glory of God in the Face of Jesus Christ." Australian Biblical Review 35 (1987):95-98.

Morgan, G. Campbell. The Corinthian Letters of Paul. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1946.

_____. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Moulton, James Hope. A Grammar of the Greek New Testament. 4 vols. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark. 1908-76. Vol. 3 (1963): Syntax, by Nigel Turner.

Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome. "Being at Home in the Body We Are in Exile from the Lord' (2 Cor. 5:6b)." Revue Biblique 93:2 (April 1986):214-21.

_____. "Paul and Macedonia: The Connection Between 2 Corinthians 2.13 and 2.14." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 25 (October 1985):99- 103.

O'Neill, John. "The Absence of the In Christ' Theology in 2 Corinthians 5." Australian Biblical Review 35 (1987):99-106.

Phillips, J. B. The New Testament in Modern English. New York: Macmillan, 1958.

Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. Reprint ed. The International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1966.

Pyne, Robert A. "Antinomianism and Dispensationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:610 (April-June 1996):141-54.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Ryrie, Charles C. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):243-44.

Sarles, Ken L. "A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. 8 vols. 1858; 3rd rev. ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1966.

Tasker, R. V. G. The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians. The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. London: Tyndale Press, 1964.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich. Translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. 1964-74. S. v. "apostolos," by Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, 1 (1964):407-47.

Thompson, James W. "Ministry in the New Testament." Restoration Quarterly 27:3 (Third Quarter 1984):143-56.

Thorsell, Paul R. "The Spirit in the Present Age: Preliminary Fulfillment of the Predicted New Covenant According to Paul." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 41:3 (September 1998):397-413.

van Unnik, W. C. "The Christian's Freedom of Speech in the New Testament." Bulletin of the John Rylands Library of the University of Manchester 44 (1961-62):466-88.

_____. "With Unveiled Face,' and Exegesis of 2 Corinthians iii 12-18." Novum Testamentum 6:2-3 (1963):153-69.

Wall, Joe L. Going for the Gold. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Walvoord, John F. "The Church in Heaven." Bibliotheca Sacra 123:490 (April-June 1966):99-103.

_____, ed. Lewis Sperry Chafer's Systematic Theology. 2 vols. Abridged ed. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1988.

Ware, Bruce A. "The New Covenant and the People(s) of God." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 68-97. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Webb, William J. "What Is the Unequal Yoke (hetepozygountes) in 2 Corinthians 6:14?" Bibliotheca Sacra 149:594 (April-June 1992):162-79.

_____. "Who Are the Unbelievers (apistoi) in 2 Corinthians 6:14?" Bibliotheca Sacra 149:593 (January-March 1992):27-44.

Wenham, John. "The Identification of Luke." Evangelical Quarterly 63:1 (1991):3-44.

Whiteley, D. E. H. The Theology of St. Paul. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1964.

Wiersbe, Warren W. Be Encouraged. BE Books. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

Wilkin, Bob. "Test Yourselves to See If You Are in the Faith: Assurance Based on Our Works? 2 Corinthians 13:5." Grace Evangelical Society News 4:10 (October 1990):2.

Woodcock, Eldon. "The Seal of the Holy Spirit." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:618 (April-June 1998):139-63.

Wright, N. T. "On Becoming the Righteousness of God." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 200-208. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

THE SECOND

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE,

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

INTRODUCTION.

The subject and design of this second Epistle to the Corinthians, is much the same as of the former. He comforts and congratulates with those who were now reformed by his admonitions. He blames the faulty with apostolical liberty; and being forced to justify himself and his proceedings against the upstart false teachers, he gives an ample account of his sufferings, and also of the favours and graces, which God had bestowed upon him. This Epistle was written not long after the first, (an. 57. [in the year 57.]) some months before that to the Romans, from some place in Macedonia, perhaps from Philippi, as marked at the end of divers Greek copies, though it is observed, that those subscriptions are not much to be relied upon. (Witham) --- In this Epistle St. Paul comforts those who are now reformed by his admonitions to them in the former, and absolves the incestuous man on doing penance, whom he had before excommunicated for his crime. Hence he treats of true penance, and of the dignity of the ministers of the New Testament. He cautions the faithful against false teachers, and the society of infidels. He gives an account of his sufferings, and also of the favours and graces which God hath bestowed on him. (Challoner) --- St. Paul, not being able to come to the Corinthians as soon as he had promised, writes this Epistle to inform them, that it was not through inconstancy, but on account of several weighty reasons, which had hitherto hindered him. Several other reasons, likewise, compelled him to write. For during his absence, several false teachers of the Jews had come amongst them, teaching them that it was necessary to observe the law of Moses, in order to be saved. St. Paul, therefore, first excuses himself, by saying, that the afflictions and troubles he had met with, had hindered him from coming to them. He next orders the fornicator to be restored to favour; after which, he extols his apostleship, forming a comparison between the law of Christ, and of Moses, wherein he blames the false teachers. He then subjoins an exhortation to a pious and holy life, with liberality in their alms, after the example of the Macedonians. As the false teachers had been very industrious in establishing their own reputation, by detracting from that of St. Paul, he enumerates his own sufferings, and the favours he had received from God, shewing that he had much more reason to glory than they; and concludes by exhorting them to correct those faults with which they still remained infected. (Estius) --- This letter may be justly appreciated as a perfect masterpiece of that animated and solid eloquence, which all interpreters so much admire in St. Paul. (Bible de Vence)

====================

Gill: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 2 CORINTHIANS

This epistle, according to the subscription at the end of it, was written from Philippi of Macedonia; and though the subscriptions annexed to the epistles are not always to be depended on, yet it seems very likely that this was written from thence; for the apostle not finding Titus at Troas, as he expected, went into Macedonia, where he met with him, and had an account from him of the success of his first epistle; of the state and condition of the church, and of the temper and disposition of mind in which the members of it were, and which gave him great satisfaction; upon which he immediately wrote this second epistle, and sent it by the same person to them; see 2Co 2:12, 2Co 7:5. It is very probable it might be written the year after the former; and so it is placed by Dr. Lightfoot in the year 56, as the former is in the year 55; though some place this in the year 60, and the other in 59. The occasion of this epistle was partly to excuse his not coming to them according to promise, and to vindicate himself from the charge of unfaithfulness, levity, and inconstancy on that account; and partly, since what he had wrote about the incestuous person, had had a good effect both upon him and them, to direct them to take off the censure that had been laid upon him, and restore him to their communion, and comfort him; likewise to stir them up to finish the collection for the poor saints they had begun; as also to defend himself against the calumnies of the false teachers, who were very industrious to sink his character and credit in this church; which he does by observing the doctrines of the Gospel he preached, which were far more glorious than, and abundantly preferable to, the ministration of the law of Moses, which those men desired to be teachers of; as likewise the success of his ministry in every place; the many sufferings he had underwent for the sake of Christ, and his Gospel; the high favours and privileges he had received of the Lord, as well as the signs, wonders, and miracles done by him in proof of his apostleship; and in which are interspersed many things useful and instructive.

Gill: 2 Corinthians 3 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 2 CORINTHIANS 3

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

College: 2 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

Studying 2 Corinthians plunges the modern reader back to the real, tumultuous world of early Christianity. The simple ideals of sharing and goodwill described in Acts 2:42-47 seem to have little place among the diverse converts from this boomtown of Corinth where Paul chooses to anchor his Greek mission. Rather, this microcosm of the early church bickers and accuses, revels in disorder and confusion, reeks of unrenounced pagan practices, and uncritically pursues self-promotion and even disloyalty to Paul, its founder.

When we speak of restoring the NT church, the Corinthian church is not what we have in mind. But maybe this is where we should really start: a real community of believers struggling to understand and implement their Christian faith against the helter-skelter backdrop of values and principles they desired to leave behind. As we understand what Paul teaches this troubled church, we will learn badly needed principles to help bring to maturity our own, real churches which inherit the same struggle.

Second Corinthians stands in stark contrast to Paul's other NT writings in a number of ways. Other letters, like 1 Corinthians, Romans, Galatians, and Colossians are carefully ordered, easily outlined, logical, controlled, as Paul confidently responds to carefully gauged concerns. Methodically, he establishes crucial, theological principles as the basis for practical, behavioral appeals.

By contrast, 2 Corinthians is chaotic and disjointed. Digressions lead the reader far afield before returning to the point. So uneven is 2 Corinthians, that many scholars suggest it is a composite of four or five writings, even a number of conservative scholars admitting two. Intensity, emotion, defensiveness, and second-guessing rather than controlled reasoning bind this epistle together. We see Paul at his weakest, basest, most human. Yet seeing him work through the truth of the gospel in the midst of exasperating difficulties is enlightening.

To a certain extent, it is healthy for our lofty ideals of this giant to be punctured and brought down to reality, even as the Corinthian church does so for our view of the early church. Paul's relationship with the Corinthians at this historical juncture is ugly, and readers deserve to be warned about how disconcerting seeing this can be.

These features of 2 Corinthians make studying and understanding the text much more dependent than usual on grasping the historical circumstances behind and leading up to its writing. Without a clear grasp of the historic story, hopeless confusion will engulf efforts to interpret the text at a number of points.

So, study of 2 Corinthians must begin by seeking to understand the Corinth of Paul's day and Paul's relationship to the local church there before preceding to a reliable interpretation of the text.

THE CITY OF CORINTH

Fortunately, Corinth is a NT city we know a great deal about. It has been heavily excavated and was minutely described by classical writers like Strabo and Dio Chrysostom.

The city that Paul entered in A.D. 50 had been resurrected from the ashes of the old city burned to the ground by the Romans in 146 B.C. Having laid in ruins for 100 years, two years before his death in 44 B.C., Julius Caesar decreed that Corinth (and also Carthage) should be rebuilt. Although located just 60 miles from Athens on the narrow isthmus strategically joining the Greek mainland to the Peloponnesus, the new Corinth was built and organized as a Roman city. Its colonists were gleaned from freedmen, former slaves originating from Syria, Egypt, Judea, Greece, and from retiring Roman soldiers.

The city's layout and its buildings were Roman, as was its governmental organization and law. Its official language was Latin, although Greek was the common language for business and conversation. The people prized Roman articles, importing them in great quantities. In addition to the four magistrates elected each year and its city council, it was administrated by a proconsul appointed annually by the Roman senate.

Corinth's dominance over the five-mile wide isthmus insured economic vitality. Ships traveling between Italy and Asia Minor were happy to pay the fee to cross the isthmus rather than sail the extra 200 miles south around treacherous Cape Malae. Besides, Corinth had even constructed a grooved pavement, called the Diolkos, between the ports on either side of the isthmus on which smaller ships could be hauled in wheeled vehicles. For a larger ship, the goods were loaded on transport carts and reloaded onto another ship waiting at the other harbor.

Julius Caesar dreamed of increasing Corinth's stock by constructing a canal across the isthmus. Not until Nero, A.D. 67., was such a project begun. Actual completion, however was not achieved until modern times, in 1893.

With the two ports, Laechaeum, on the Corinthian Gulf, and Cenchraea, on the Saronic Gulf, Corinth thrived as a center for trade. The major land route between the Greek mainland and the Peloponnesus also went through it. Besides shipbuilding and repair, it hosted bronze, tile, and pottery factories, as well as the necessary warehousing for transportable goods. Corinth's market areas boasted hundreds of stalls filled with craftsmen plying their trade, locals selling merchandise and food, as well as visitors from throughout the empire hawking imported items. They even had places which sold drinks cooled by underground water systems. Paul himself, we know, took up a leather-working stall in this area for eighteen months (Acts 18:1-3).

New Corinth was an eclectic, international city from its inception. In Paul's day, it was a bustling, wide open, boomtown, with over 80,000 inhabitants, and growing every day. It had already outstripped Athens politically, replacing it as the capital of Achaia.

Corinth's prestige was further enhanced by its hosting of the Isthmian Games, second only in significance to the Olympics. Held every two years in Corinth since A.D. 3, these games drew thousands of tourists and lots of business. The city's most prestigious political official was the one responsible for administering the games, occupying a prominent year-round governmental office. The games were dedicated to the Greek sea god, Poseidon, and featured oratory, music, and drama, as well as athletic contests. A dramatic theater as well as a 20,000 seat stadium were used for these events.

Corinth's eclecticism revealed itself in an array of religious choices established by its multicultural inhabitants. Egyptians promoted the cults of Isis and Osiris. Isis was worshiped as a god for sailors because the myth tells of her enduring search on the seas for her betrayed and lost husband Osiris. Osiris is a god of afterlife, who after his death was resurrected to become head of the underworld.

Greeks and Romans honored Poseidon, god of the sea; Athena, goddess of war, the sea, cities and the arts; Aphrodite, goddess of love and fertility; Apollo, god of prophecy; Asklepios, god of healing; and emperors beginning with Julius Caesar. Prominent temples and statues are dedicated to all of these. Apollos often features prominently in colonized cities as an ode of good fortune. His famous Delphic oracle is only some 30 miles from Corinth. The much publicized report that Old Corinth's temple to Aphrodite housed over 1,000 sacred prostitutes is regarded as Athenian slander and is not so certain to still be functioning this way in Paul's day, although this does not mean to imply that Corinth was any more sexually pristine than any other seaport.

One of the busiest religious centers in Paul's day was the Asklepium. Comparable to a modern-day health club, people came here to bathe in its fountain, sleep (healing in their dreams), excercise, read, and dine (on sacrificial meat, cf. 1 Cor 8:10; 10:21). Replicas of body parts found in excavations were offered to the Asklepios by thankful beneficiaries of his healing.

Though not a god, Sisyphus, was considered one of the founding kings of ancient Corinth. Noted for his craftiness, in Greek mythology he was banished to Hades with the everlasting task of pushing a rock up a hill only to have it slip back down. For the Corinthian in Paul's day, he stands for successful cunning in business, but behind the temporary luster, perhaps, he signifies the emptiness of life's ambitions that lurked in the background of people's thoughts.

Judaism came with the early Jewish colonists and seems to have thrived. A dynamic synagogue certainly was functioning when Paul arrived, according to Acts 18:4-17. Also, a building inscription reading "Synagogue of the Hebrews" has been found by archaeologists along the Lechaeum road. Although the inscription is somewhat later than Paul's day, its location in the city center suggests the prominence of Judaism from the early days of New Corinth. Significant increases to the Jewish population likely occurred in A.D. 19 and in the late 40s when Tiberius and then Claudius expelled Jews from Rome. According to Acts 18:2, the latter purge is what brought Aquila and Priscilla and their tentmaking business to Corinth for the eighteen months Paul evangelized there. As Acts 18:8,17 indicate, the Jewish community probably had a certain amount of freedom to manage its own affairs and to appoint its own officials.

Due to Roman influence, Corinthians banded together into self-governing clubs and societies of 10 to 15 people which met in homes around the city. These clubs were delineated by individual trades or professions. Something like small unions, they provided vital social interaction and shared meals but even underwrote members' burial expenses from their kitty of dues. Although each had its sponsoring god, they were not religious in nature.

Most likely, the Corinthian church of Paul's day took on the pattern of these clubs as they met in various homes throughout the city. This helps explain the household factions decried in 1 Cor 1:10-12 and even the food-related problems of 1 Corinthians 8 and 11:17-34.

Corinth in the time of Paul was a city of wealth and prosperity. The families who had come a generation or two previously had worked hard. They had carved out successful lives by their own sweat and ingenuity. Like American immigrants, they were proud of their accomplishments, which they demonstrated in their proliferation of self-commending inscriptions around the city. But like the grandchildren of immigrants today, the Corinthians of Paul's day were noted for their superficial materialism and moral perversity. Such traits are epitomized by the fact that before the century was over, Corinth would become the first Greek city in the Roman Empire to hold bloodthirsty gladiatorial shows.

PAUL AND THE CORINTHIANS

Paul's rocky, seven-year relationship with the Corinthians begins in the fall of A.D. 50 as he enters Corinth on what becomes the last stop of his second missionary journey. Already on the road for a year, he had established churches in Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, and Athens, despite opposition from Gentiles, Jews, and intellectuals (Acts 16-17). As Acts 18 describes, he enters the din of Corinth alone but is quickly befriended by Aquila and Priscilla, who were probably already Christians when they came to Corinth from Rome. For eighteen months the three of them lived, worked, and spread the gospel together there, eventually joined by Silas and Timothy.

At first, Paul shared the gospel and fielded questions in the Jewish synagogue. It wasn't too long, however, before stiff opposition to his presence arose, and he was ejected. However, he took with him many new Christians from among the God-fearing Gentiles who attended the synagogue, as well as Jews including the head of the synagogue, Crispus. Boldly, they set up shop for the first church right next door in the home of Titius Justus. Presumably, they continued to meet there and in other homes around the city for the next eighteen months, since God had instructed Paul to remain in Corinth despite the risks of conflict.

Sparks did fly, and at one point the Jews pressed charges against Paul for breaking Jewish law before Gallio, the Roman proconsul. Quite rightly, Gallio rebuffed the Jewish accusations as being outside any Roman concern. Although this may seem like a relatively minor incident in the life of Paul, the mention of Gallio in Acts 18:14 emerges as the single most important event enabling us to date Paul's life with accuracy. The reason for this is that archaeologists have discovered a datable inscription about a boundary dispute from Emperor Claudius to Gallio which places Gallio's one-year term between A.D. 51 and 52. Anchored by Paul's encounter with Gallio being A.D. 51, the rest of Paul's life can be dated backward and forward from time periods provided in the Acts and his letters.

Upon leaving Corinth, Paul sailed to Syria, probably Antioch, before quickly setting out over land to revisit the previously established churches in Asia Minor and then settling in Ephesus for three years. While in Ephesus, he sent the Corinthians three letters and slipped across the Aegean Sea in a vessel for a brief, surprise visit.

The first letter, commonly known as the "previous letter," is mentioned in 1 Cor 5:9-11. Given the wild immorality of Corinth, it is not surprising that Paul emphasized separation from such people in this letter. However, it has never been found, although a few scholars believe 2 Cor 6:14-7:1 may have originally been part of it.

Next, Paul received a letter from the Corinthians asking various specific questions about Christian life and practice. He is also informed verbally from members of Chloe's household (1 Cor 1:11) about the factionalism that is hurting the church's witness. He responded with the letter we know of as 1 Corinthians. During this period, Timothy was dispatched to Corinth for a brief time (1 Cor 4:17; 16:10) as Paul's personal ambassador, perhaps to give further voice to Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians or to other issues Paul anticipated. We have no indication as to how long Timothy stayed.

Paul's brief trip to Corinth in A.D. 54 and the letter on its heels upon his return are chief events which underlie Paul's writing of 2 Corinthians in A.D. 56. We don't know why Paul went. Maybe Timothy reported that Paul's personal presence was needed. Possibly, conservative agitators had followed Paul to Corinth as they previously had to Galatia and were stirring up trouble, causing the Corinthians to second-guess Paul's credibility (2 Cor 11:13). What we do know is that this trip, usually described as "the painful visit" (2 Cor 2:1), was a complete disaster. Paul left angry and humiliated. Apparently, he confronted the ringleader of the trouble (perhaps someone in the church who had been influenced by the outsiders) face to face but when the man insulted him, no one in the church came to Paul's defense.

Speculation regarding the accusations hurled at Paul include the illegitimacy of his authority over the Corinthians and his misuse of funds collected for the Jerusalem offering (1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 7:2; 8:11). This was not a theological issue so much as one of personal integrity. Paul speaks of his being hurt emotionally most by the fact that the church did not side with him (2 Cor 2:5-11).

Upon his return, Paul wrote a third letter to the Corinthians, "the severe letter" (2 Cor 2:4; 7:8). Although not existing today, as described in 2 Cor 2:4-11 and 7:5-13, it was undoubtedly the most emotional and strident of any of Paul's letters. Apparently, he unleashed his anger and disappointment, scolding the church for not supporting him and demanding that the majority of the church take charge and discipline the offender as well as apologize to him. The letter is so harsh that Paul seems genuinely afraid ("fears within" - 2 Cor 7:5) that it will drive the church farther away from him and from Christ. But he sees no choice; this situation can't be left like it is.

Titus received the formidable task of delivering this explosive letter into the charged atmosphere of the Corinthian church and carrying out its demands. Paul's anxieties over Titus's success seem to overwhelm him as he waits for news. Apparently, the arrangements with Titus were that they would meet in Troas after a set period of time, maybe as long as six months. Second Corinthians 2:12 tells us that Paul went by land up to Troas, probably in A.D. 55 but was crushed to find Titus was not there. Remaining for some time evangelizing, maybe a month or so, he crossed over to Macedonia, probably Philippi, desperate to find Titus there. Finally, Titus arrived with the great news that the Corinthians - or most of them - were back in the fold. Genuinely remorseful over their hurtful behavior toward Paul, they had, indeed, dealt with the offender and expressed their renewed devotion to him (2 Cor 7:7,11,12).

The letter we call 2 Corinthians historically comes as Paul's fourth letter to Corinth. Buoyed by Titus's positive report, Paul writes this highly emotional letter, sending it back with Titus (2 Cor 7:17), probably A.D. 56. The letter interacts over and over with the events of the Painful Visit and the Severe Letter. Paul gushes with joy over the Corinthians' response (2 Cor 7:7,13-16), even recommending that they lift the punishment on the person who offended him (2 Cor 2:7). However, the tone of the letter is extremely defensive as Paul squirms under pressure from the Corinthians (most likely as advised by Titus) to toot his own horn regarding his own apostolic credentials. Out of his love for them, but against his own convictions against boasting, he is willing to explain the superiority of his apostleship in terms the Corinthians seem to require. These terms - such as providing letters of recommendation (2 Cor 3:1) and lists of accomplishments (2 Cor 6:3-13; 11:16-12:10) - Paul regards as superficial and unnecessary (2 Cor 3:2-3; 10:7) and probably reflect the influence of the conservative agitators upon the Corinthians. Paul seems to know he must respond, however uncomfortable it is for him, in order to block any further inroads from these outsiders and thus reinforce his renewed relationship with the Corinthians.

Titus brought 2 Corinthians to Corinth armed with Paul's commendation within the letter to spur the church to complete its collection of the offering for the Jerusalem Christians (1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8:10-24). Paul followed a few months later (2 Cor 12:14; Acts 20:3) and remained in Corinth three months. During this period, he wrote Romans, but we know nothing of his interaction with the Corinthian church. Presumably, he finalized the Corinthian offering, but he must have worked diligently to solidify this troubled church and contend personally with the outside agitators and their remaining pockets of influence. At any rate, once the various representatives from the Greek and Asian churches arrived in Corinth with their offerings (Acts 20:1-6), he tried to set sail with them to Syria but, discovering treachery from the Jewish community in Corinth, he and the others traveled first to Troas, and, then, set sail from there.

We have no certainty of further communication or visitation between Paul and the Corinthian church after this. Possibly, following release from his first Roman imprisonment, he returned to Corinth and other churches in Greece and Asia Minor, as the Pastoral epistles suggest (1 Tim. 1:3; 2 Tim. 4:20).

THE UNITY OF 2 CORINTHIANS

One may rightly comment that the literary unity of 2 Corinthians "cannot just be presupposed." Analyses which question whether various sections of 2 Corinthians are original to it have come long and hard during the past two centuries of critical scholarship. Second Corinthian's sharp shifts in content and uneven tone make it the most susceptible of all the NT books to patchwork theories despite the fact that none of the Greek manuscripts (dating back to the third century) give the slightest hint that 2 Corinthians was ever anything different than what we read today. Although the ebb and flow of research has sidelined many conjectures, questions still remain regarding some parts of 2 Corinthians. As many as nine sections of 2 Corinthians have been scrutinized. However, just five will be discussed here.

First, 2 Cor 2:14-7:4 has been noted as at one time existing separately from 2 Corinthians. Even a casual reader is jolted at the jump between the travelogue commentary in 2:12-13 and the military parade description of the gospel in 2:13-17 which opens a five-chapter philosophy of apostolic ministry. It is all the more noticeable when, beginning at 7:5, the travelogue picks up again and continues on until 7:16. However, upon closer perusal, scholars are increasingly reluctant to name this as part of a separate letter. Despite the abruptness between 2:13 and 2:14, the theme of human weakness and divine power in 2:12-17 connects to 1:8-10, and the theme of divine ownership connects 1:22 and 2:14. Despite the change of subject between 7:4 and 7:5, the verbal links supplied by "encouragement" (7:4,13), "joy" (7:4,7) and "troubles" (7:4,5) supply sturdy connections. Besides, the efforts to postulate yet another letter between 1 and 2 Corinthians or to connect this to the Severe Letter are unwarranted. More recent efforts to anaylze 2 Corinthians 1-7 through the eyes of Roman rhetoric as well as chiastic structure loudly confirm separation of 2:14-7:4 as ill-conceived. Certainly, it is a digression but not without purpose and point to the context as a whole.

Second, perhaps less obvious to the casual reader because it is such a short section is 2 Cor 6:14-7:1. Here, again, though, the careful reader observes an interruption between 6:13 ("Open wide your hearts also") and 7:2 ("Make room for us in your hearts"). Scholarly analysis of these six verses suggests that not only are they out of place, they don't sound like Paul, using six words he never uses elsewhere in his writings nor used by anyone else in the NT ( hapax legomenae ). Is this a snippet of something someone else said or wrote that Paul has adapted into his material, or is it something Paul wrote or spoke at another time and place that he decides to use here?

Despite some of the unusual language, Pauline themes do appear here: the church as the temple of God, the polarization of righteousness and unrighteousness as well as between light and dark. Also, plenty of characteristic Pauline language occurs: "living God" (2 Cor 3:3; 1 Thess 1:9), "unbeliever" (twelve other occurrences in 1 and 2 Cor), and "holiness" (Rom 1:4; 1 Thess 3:13). Although conclusions vary, many today incline toward this section being from Paul.

Eyeing the language of separation from unrighteousness, some have been tempted to conclude that 6:14-7:1 is part of the "previous" letter mentioned in 1 Cor 5:9. However, the point is explicitly different. Paul emphasizes that in the previous letter he urged separation from the immorality of believers not dissociation from unbelievers as emphasized in 6:14-7:1.

Most likely, then, Paul himself has inserted this pre-formed, self-contained unit of material from previous teaching, either oral or written, perhaps influenced by others. Interesting comparisons to Qumran materials as well as writings of Philo have been made. The placement exactly here in 2 Corinthians is so awkward as to be unlikely to come from anyone other than Paul. However, two points should be kept in mind. One is that Paul dictated this letter as he did all his letters. This fact enhances the potential for distraction, interruption, and loose digressions such as this. A second point is that although the section's relationship to the immediately previous verses is not obvious, as one backs up to 6:1 and reads of Paul's concern about receiving "God's grace in vain" or to 5:19 to see Paul's emphasis on people "no longer living for themselves but for him who died for them," Paul's emphasis on separation and holiness in 6:14-7:1 fits well.

Probably inconceivable to the casual reader is the suggestion that 2 Corinthians 8 and 2 Corinthians 9 both were not originally part of 2 Corinthians. Arguments regarding 2 Corinthians 8 - repetition of information about Titus (7:13-15; 8:16-17), presumption of knowledge about the two brothers coming with him (8:18,22), or even evidence that 2 Corinthians 8 as well as 2 Corinthians 9 are formal business letters - do not convince many. Arguments regarding 2 Corinthians 9, first proposed by Semler 200 years ago, that 2 Corinthians 9 was originally a letter sent to Christians outside Corinth, are more formidable, and give scholars more pause.

What pulls them up short is the language Paul uses to refer to the collection ("service") in 9:1, which, in Greek, reads like a first mention of the collection. In addition to that, the regional reference to Achaia in 9:2 and the repetition of information from chapter 8 in chapter 9 regarding the collection give added support to the idea of chapter 9 being originally independent.

On the other side of the question is the fact that Paul's reference to the collection in 9:1 is modified by ( men gar , "and for") which suggests a resumption of a previous subject perhaps after a brief pause in dictation. The repetition of details regarding the collection is probably emphatic, and the regional reference to Achaia seems unlikely to exclude Corinth. Tipping the scale against an independent chapter 9, as noted by Furnish, are two references in chapter 9 which presume information from chapter 8: the mention of the brothers (9:3; 8:18) and the emphasis on their completing the collection (9:4-5; 8:7-15).

Admittedly, this is a close call. However, the evidence does not demand that chapters 8 and 9 are two separate letters about the collection, one to Corinth, and one to Achaia. Rather, these are interdependent chapters in 2 Corinthians, chapter 8 dealing with the details of the collection project and chapter 9 emphasizing motivation for the project, as noted by Danker.

Fourth, without a doubt the most serious challenge to the unity of 2 Corinthians comes from chapters 10-13. As long ago as 1870, Hausrath broadcast his belief that in these chapters, he had discovered the missing "severe" letter to the Corinthians. No doubt, in chapters 10-13 Paul erupts into harsh tones of anger and disappointment which seem to undercut completely the exuberance and joy which he builds up to by chapters 7, 8, and 9.

But Hausrath looked closer and pointed to evidence that chapters 10-13 were written previous to chapters 1-9. Particularly he saw passages in chapters 1-9 written in the past tense which appear to allude to passages from chapters 10-13 written in future tenses, such as 1:23 which says that Paul "did not return" to them in order to spare them, corresponding to 13:2 in which Paul asserts that he "will not return" in order to spare them or when Paul says in 2:3-4 that he "wrote" them out of great distress and in 13:10 when he says "I write" so that I may not have to be harsh. Hausrath also contends that Paul's reference to Rome (west of Corinth) as "regions beyond you" in 2 Cor 10:16 makes much better sense if he is in Ephesus (east of Corinth), where he wrote the Severe Letter, rather than Macedonia (north of Corinth), where he wrote 2 Corinthians.

Criticism against Hausrath's identification of 2 Cor 10-13 with the "severe" letter has withered its persuasiveness among scholars. Primarily, chapters 10-13 do not contain something we know specifically was in the Severe Letter: Paul's demand that an individual who offended him be punished (2:5-6; 7:12). Also, chapters 10-13 promise a visit (12:14; 13:1), but the Severe Letter was sent in place of a Painful Visit (1:23; 2:1). Regarding "regions beyond you," the language need not be taken so literally and the Macedonian region should be recognized as much more culturally distinct from Achaia than it looks like on a map.

More appealing to scholars of all stripes, including many conservatives, is to view 2 Cor 10-13 as a separate, fifth letter, written after Titus returns with new, bad news after delivering 2 Corinthians 1-9. This position still takes into account Hausrath's future tense passages. It helps make sense of 2 Cor 12:18 which refers to Titus's visit in the past tense when it was in the planning stage in 2 Corinthians 7-9. Also, it explains the increased strident tones of chapters 10-13 as Paul's response to new, outside influences claiming some kind of rival apostolic authority to Paul's (11:13; 12:11) rather than to internal problems which seem to be his concern in chapters 1-9.

This way of viewing chapters 10-13 is attractive but is not demanded by the evidence. As Witherington points out, the past (aorist) tenses describing Titus's visit in 12:17-18 need not be real. Especially as Paul reaches the end of the book, they could well be epistolary (spoken from the standpoint of the audience reading the letter). The mention of the unnamed brother traveling with Titus does correspond with 2 Cor 8:18,22. Reading 12:17-18 this way opens up the very real possibility that Paul could have received new information about problems in Corinth before sending 2 Corinthians but after writing chapters 1-9. This could explain the gulf between chapters 10-13 as well as an entirely separate letter.

Other ways which account for the change of tone in chapter 10-13 have to do with how one reads the letter. Perhaps chapters 1-9 are directed to the majority of the church which has fallen into line with Paul after the Painful Visit, the Severe Letter, and Titus's hard work while chapters 10-13 are to the minority who are still under the sway of outside opposition to Paul. After all, 2 Cor 2:6 does speak of "the majority" which imposed discipline upon the offender named in the Severe Letter.

Perhaps, as a growing group of scholars are showing, Paul's heightened criticism of the Corinthians in chapters 10-13 concludes a calculated rhetorical plan employing counterattack ( synkrisis ) or strong emotional appeal ( peroratio ) to win his defense against the charges being leveled at him by the Corinthians. One must admit that Paul never relaxes from a defensive posture in 2 Corinthians from the beginning to the end. While Paul's harsh tones in chapters 10-13 following the lead up in chapters 7, 8, and 9 may seem abrupt, his concerns from early in the letter haven't really changed, just his emotionalism. The issue of his character raised in chapter 1 and of the legitimacy of his apostleship raised in chapter 3 remain the object of his defense in chapters 10-13.

The correspondence of these issues is enough to suggest that even though outside influence of "false apostles" (11:13) is not named earlier, they influence the minority of the Corinthian church and provide the ammunition against Paul observed in the earlier chapters. Who else would have brandished "letters of recommendation" (3:1)? Their earliest influences could even be in the background of Paul's problems associated with the Painful Visit.

As evident from 2 Cor 7:8-13, the offending individual merely became the pretext for the whole church failing to rally behind Paul until after the Severe Letter. Although Paul can be ecstatic that most of the church has recommitted themselves to him and to the gospel by the time he writes 2 Corinthians, nevertheless, pockets of opposition likely remain under the growing influence of the outside agitators. With chapters 10-13 Paul intends to level a decisive blow against this opposition not only to bring the remainder of the church back to the true gospel but also to shore up any lingering doubts from those who have pledged their loyalty.

Paul's transition to chapter 10 indeed is rocky but, as Danker points out, no more so than Phil 3 or Rom 9. In this commentary, therefore, we will treat 2 Corinthians as a unity and will treat chapters 10-13 as primarily aimed at responding to a vocal minority of the church who remain mesmerized by the outsiders' criticisms of Paul.

PAUL'S OPPONENTS

Second Corinthians resounds with the echo of outside voices filling the Corinthians' heads with notions geared to sever their relationship with Paul. Since Paul originally brought the gospel to Corinth and made it possible for people there to be reconciled with God through Christ and begin a vibrant church meeting in homes throughout the city, others have come to Corinth presenting themselves as superior in authority to the apostle Paul himself. Presuming the opponents in 2 Cor 10-13 and 1-9 are the same, they supposedly have letters of authentication from Jerusalem (3:1-3), Paul blasts them as "false apostles" (11:13) and sarcastically as "super apostles" in 12:11. Nevertheless, they have influenced and confused the Corinthians enough to force Paul to write 2 Corinthians and fill it with self-commendation regarding his integrity and his "superior" apostolic credentials over theirs. He does this because he feels he must in order to win the Corinthians back, but he finds doing so personally disturbing and repugnant.

Whereas Paul finds it difficult to boast about himself, self-commendation seems to be the chief characteristic of these outsiders. Clues from 2 Corinthians indicate that they were proud of their Jewish heritage (11:22), their "Christian" service (11:23), their oratorical skill (11:6), their self-confidence (1:15-17), and their charismatic experiences (12:12). They preached a different gospel than Paul's (11:4). They also accepted money from the Corinthians, unlike Paul who refused it (12:16). They may have viewed Paul's effort to collect money from the Corinthians for the Jerusalem Christians as cutting off their own purse strings and threatening their prosperity in Corinth.

Their heated, personalized efforts to undercut Paul sound like Paul's opposition in Galatians, commonly called Judaizers (Gal 4:17). However, no mention of the law or circumcision in 2 Corinthians clouds this identification and requires that, if these are the same people, they have changed their tune considerably since Galatians. The fact that they tout letters of recommendation - where else but from Jerusalem - makes it difficult to lay aside the picture of a band of renegade, conservative Jewish Christians who first followed Paul to Galatia and now to Corinth with the expressed purpose of replacing Paul's gospel and his authority to represent true Christianity (Gal 1:6-7).

It is going too far to say that their credentials were currently legitimate or that they were actual apostles since Acts 15:24 reports that a faction of Jewish Christians had gone out falsely representing the church to new, Gentile congregations. It is possible, though, that they do have apostolic credentials - perhaps even knew Jesus before his crucifixion - but now are misusing these credentials to subvert Paul's successful mission to Gentiles in Galatia and now also in Corinth and other churches as well.

The picture of these Corinthian opponents as ultraconservative Jewish Christians clashes with a considerable amount of the evidence which points to their Greek or even gnostic origins. Their connection to revelations and wonders, rhetorical skills, "worldly" wisdom, and just their overall egotistical posture must be reckoned with. Undermining at least the gnostic element is the positive use of "knowledge" in 2 Corinthians. Nevertheless, a typical result when these ingredients are combined emerges with a conclusion that they were "Hellenistic Jews who were propagating . . . a 'spiritual gnosticism.'"

However, it seems inconceivable that ultraconservative Jewish Christians coming out of Jerusalem could be pushing a gospel so infiltrated with Greek ideas as to be outside the bounds of Paul's own radicalized message which had stripped unnecessary Jewish elements. Could these Jewish agitators be so clever as to be able to manipulate the Corinthians against Paul by successfully incorporating elements from Greek culture into their opposition to Paul which they themselves don't believe? It doesn't seem likely, but then no identification satisfactorily combines the paradoxical elements of these opponents as currently gleaned from the information we have from 2 Corinthians and the first century. As one commentator astutely points out, any final resolution is also hampered considerably by the fact that 2 Corinthians provides no information about the doctrine or theology of these opponents. Most current discussion recognizes the limitations involved in this discussion and offers no more than conjectures as has been done here.

It's best, then, to keep in mind the characteristics of Paul's opponents available from reading 2 Corinthians without any adamant historical identification until better information becomes available. They were Jewish. They were Greek. They considered themselves Christians. They hated Paul. They hurt Paul, and he feared what more they could do. It was up to him to marshal all the strength and the skills he had to prevent them from doing any further damage. They had backed him into a corner, and he responds with ferocity and emotion in 2 Corinthians, compelled out of his deep love for the Corinthians and his commitment to true, saving Christianity and humble, self-sacrificing leadership.

RELEVANCE

Christians treat 2 Corinthians like the ugly twin sister of 1 Corinthians. First Corinthian's poignant theology about challenging issues attracts everyone's constant attention. Meanwhile, 2 Corinthians sits in the corner waiting for someone to ask it to dance. Yet, once we make some effort to get to know 2 Corinthians, we will be pleasantly surprised.

Today, as in the days of the early church, various outside forces threaten to sever people's loyalty to Christ and cut away at the fabric of the church. It might be a cult like Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses. It might be cultural forces like the challenges of postmodernism or the mind-set of the so-called Generation X which questions absolutes like God and salvation in Christ alone. It might just be an obstinate person who envies the authority of the minister, elders, or deacons and questions their integrity and decision-making at every turn and who draws around him or her an anti-faction.

If you are someone who cares deeply about your local church and would do almost anything to maintain its success and its integrity as a body of Christian believers, then 2 Corinthians will speak to your heart and nourish your soul. You will relate to Paul's agony over this church , feel his compassion, and be engulfed by his intense emotion in this letter. You will take in the principles of genuine church leadership and apply them to your life responsibly to enable you to enrich the quality of your local church.

The comments which follow are intended to help you both to understand 2 Corinthians in its own historical context and to apply its key principles to your own personal context in the church today.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aalen, S. "Glory." NIDNTT , 2:44-52.

Alexander, L.C.A. "Chronology of Paul." Dictionary of Paul and His Letters , pp. 115-123. Edited by Gerald Hawthorne, Ralph Martin, and Daniel Reid. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993.

Andrews, Scott. "Too Weak Not to Lead: The Form and Function of 2 Cor __2Cor 11__11:23b-33." NTS 41 (1995): 263-276.

Bahr, Gordon. "The Subscription in the Pauline Letters." JBL 87 (1968): 27-41.

Baird, William. "Letters of Recommendation: A Study of 2 Cor 3:1-3." JBL 80 (1961): 166-172.

Baker, William R. "Did the Glory of Moses' Face Fade? A Re-examination of Katargew in 2 Corinthians 3:7-18." Forthcoming in BBR 10 (2000).

Barnett, Paul. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians . NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Barrett, C.K. A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians . Harper's New Testament Commentaries. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.

________________ . "Paul's Opponents in 2 Corinthians." NTS 17 (1971): 233-254.

________________ . The Second Epistle to the Corinthians . New York: Harper, 1973.

________________ . The Signs of an Apostle . London: Epworth, 1970.

Bartchy, S. Scott. First-Century Slavery and 1 Corinthians 7:21 . SBL Dissertation Series, no. 11. Missoula, Montana: Society of Biblical Teaching, 1973.

Bates, W.A. "The Integrity of II Corinthians." NTS 12 (1965): 56-69.

Batey, Richard. "Paul's Interaction with the Corinthians." JBL 84 (1965): 139-146.

Beale, G.K. "The Old Testament Background of Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5-7 and its Bearing on the Literary Problem of 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1." NTS 35 (1989): 550-581.

Beasley-Murray, George R. Baptism in the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962.

Becher, O. "Faith." NIDNTT , 1: 588-592.

Beck, B.E. "Reflections on 2 Corinthians 5:11-6:2." Epworth Review (1994): 85-92.

Belleville, Linda L. 2 Corinthians . The IVP New Testament Commentary Series. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1996.

________________ . "A Letter of Apologetic Self-Commendation: 2 Cor 1:8-7:16." NovT 31 (1989): 142-163.

________________ . "Imitate Me as I Imitate Christ." In Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament . Edited by Richard Longenecker. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

________________ . "Paul's Polemic and Theology of the Spirit in 2 Corinthians." CBQ 58 (1996): 281-304.

________________ . Reflections of Glory: Paul's Polemical Use of the Moses-Doxa Tradition in 2 Corinthians 3:1-18. JSNT Supplemental Series, no. 52, Sheffield: JSOT, 1991.

Best, Ernest. Second Corinthians . Interpretation Commentary. Louisville: John Knox, 1987.

Betz, Hans Dieter. "2 Cor 6:14-7:1: An Anti-Pauline Fragment?" JBL (1973): 88-108.

________________ . 2 Corinthians 8 and 9: A Commentary on Two Administrative Letters of the Apostle Paul. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985.

Beyreuther, E. "Like, Equal." NIDNTT , 2:497-500.

Beyreuther, E., and G. Finkenrith. "Joy." NIDNTT , 2:352-361.

Bieringer, B. "Der 2. Korintherbrief in den neuesten Kommentaren." Ephemerides Theologicale Lovanienses 67 (1991): 107-130.

Bientenhard, H., and J.A. Motyer. "Amen." NIDNTT , 1:97-101.

Bientenhard, H., and C. Brown. "Satan." NIDNTT , 3:468-473.

Blomberg, Craig. Interpreting the Parables . Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1990.

________________ . Neither Poverty nor Riches . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.

________________ . "The Structure of 2 Corinthians 1-7." Criswell Theological Revue 4 (1989): 3-20.

Breytenbach, Cilliars. "Paul's Proclamation and God's 'Thriambos' (Notes on 2 Cor 2:14-16b)." Neot 24 (1990): 257-271.

Brown, C. "Satan." NIDNTT , 3:468-473.

Bruce, F.F. Commentary on Galatians . NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1982.

________________ . "Paul and Jerusalem in Paul's Apostolic Strategy." TynBul 19 (1968): 3-25.

Buchanan, George Walter. "Paul and the Jews (II Corinthians 3:4-4:6 and Romans 11:7-10)." In When Jews and Christians Meet , pp. 141-161. Edited by Jacob I. Petuchowski. Albany, NY: State University of New York, 1958.

Bultmann, Rudolph. "DIKAIOSYNE THEOU." JBL 83 (1964): 12-16.

Burton, Ernest DeWitt. The Epistle to the Galatians . ICC. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1921.

Campbell, J.Y. "'KOINWNIA' and its Cognates in the New Testament." JTS 49 (1948).

Cartledge, M.J. "A Model of Hermeneutical Method - An Exegetical Missiological Reflection upon Suffering in 2 Corinthians 4:7-15." Evangelical Review of Theology 17 (1993): 472-483.

Cassidy, Ronald. "Paul's Attitude to Death in II Corinthians 5:1-10." EvQ 43 (1971): 210-217.

Chevallier. "L'argumentation de Paul dans II Corinthiens 10 à 13." Revue d'Histoire et de Philosophie Religieuses 70 (1990): 3-15.

Collins, J.N. "The Mediatorial Aspect of Paul's Role as Diakonus ." AusBR 40 (1992): 34-44.

Conzelmann, Hans. "Paul's Doctrine of Justification: Theology of Anthropology?" In Theology of the Liberating Word , pp. 108-123. Edited by F. Herzog. Nashville: Abingdon, 1972.

Cook, Michael J. "The Tie that Binds: An Exposition of II Corinthians 3:12-4:6 and Romans 11:7-10." In When Jews and Christians Meet , pp. 121-135. Edited by Jacob I. Petuchowski. Albany, NY: State University of New York, 1988.

Cooper, John W. Body, Soul, and Life Everlasting: Biblical Anthropology and the Monism-Dualism Debate . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989.

Cottrell, Jack. Romans . The College Press NIV Commentary. 2 vols. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1996, 1998.

Craig, W.L. "Paul's Dilemma in 2 Corinthians 5:1-10: A 'Catch-22'?" NTS 34 (1988): 145-147.

Cranfield, C.E.B. "Minister and Congregation in the Light of II Corinthians 4:5-7." Int 19 (1965): 163-167.

________________ . "The Grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Corinthians 8:1-9." Communio Viatorum 32 (1989): 105-109.

Dahl, Nils. "A Fragment and Its Context: 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1." In Studies in Paul , pp. 62-69. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1977.

Danker, Frederick W. "Consolation in 2 Cor 5:1-10." Concordia Theological Monthly 39 (1968): 552-556.

________________ . II Corinthians . Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989.

De Lorenz, L., ed. The Diakonia of the Spirit (2 Cor 4:7-7:4). Monographic Series of "Benedicta." Biblical Ecumenical Studies, no. 10. Rome: St. Paul's Abbey, 1989.

De Silva, D.A. "Measuring Penultimate against Ultimate Reality: An Investigation of the Integrity and Argumentation of 2 Corinthians." JSNT 52 (1903): 41-70.

________________ . "Meeting the Exigency of a Complex Rhetorical Situation: Paul's Strategy in 2 Corinthians 1 through 7." AUSS 34 (1996): 5-22.

________________ . "Recasting the Moment of Decision: 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1 in its Literary Context." AUSS 31 (1993): 3-16.

Deirsmann. Bible Studies . Translated by A. Grieve. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1903.

Derrett, J.D.M. "Nai (2 Cor 1:19-20)." Filologia Nestestamentaria 4 (1991): 205-209.

Diessmann, Adolf. Bible Studies . Translated by A. Grieve. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1903.

Dinkler, Erich. "Die Taufterminologie in 2 Kor 1:21f." Neotestamentica et Patristica , pp. 173-191. NovTSupp 6 (Leiden, 1962).

Duff, P.B. "Apostolic Suffering and the Language of Processions in 2 Corinthians 4:7-10." BTB 21 (1991): 158-165.

________________ . "2 Corinthians 1-7: Sidestepping the Division Hypothesis Dilemma." BTB 24 (1994): 16-26.

________________ . "Metaphor, Motif, and Meaning: The Rhetorical Strategy Behind the Image 'Led in Triumph' in 2 Corinthians 2:14." CBQ 53 (1991): 79-92.

________________ . "The Mind of the Redactor: 2 Cor 6:14-7:1 in Its Secondary Context." NovT 35 (1993): 160-180.

Dumbrell, William J. "Paul's Use of Exodus 34 in 2 Corinthians 3." In The God Who Is Rich in Mercy , pp. 179-194. Fest. D.B. Knox. Edited by Peter T. O'Brian and David G. Peterson. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1986.

Egan, R.B. "Lexical Evidence in Two Pauline Passages." NovT 19 (1977): 34-62.

Ellingworth, Paul. "Grammar, Meaning, and Verse Divisions in 2 Cor 11:16-29." BT 43 (1992): 245-246.

Ellis, E.E. "Christ Crucified." In Reconciliation and Hope: New Testament Essays on Atonement and Eschatology . Fest. Leon Morris. Edited by R. Banks. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans (1974): 69-75.

________________ . "Paul and His Co-Workers." NTS 17 (1970): 437-452.

________________ . "II Cor V.1-10 in Pauline Eschatology." NTS 6 (1960): 211-224.

Engels, Donald. Roman Corinth: An Alternative Model for the Classical City . Chicago: University of Chicago, 1990.

Erickson, R.J. "Flesh." DPL , pp. 303-305.

Erlemann, K. "Der Geist als ajrrabwn (2 Kor 5,5) in Kontext der Paulinschen Eschatologie." ZNW 83 (1992): 202-223.

Esser, H.H. "Grace." NIDNTT , 2:115-123.

________________ . "Mercy." NIDNTT , 2:593-298.

Everts, J.M. "Hope." DPL , pp. 414-417.

Fee, Gordon. "II Corinthians VI.14-VII.1 and Food Offered to Idols." NTS 23 (1977): 140-161.

________________ . "CARIS in II Corinthians I.15: Apostle's Parousia and Paul-Corinth Chronology." NTS 24 (1978): 533-538.

Filbeck, David. "Problems in Translating First Person Plural Pronouns in 2 Corinthians." BT 45 (1994): 401-410.

Fitzgerald, John T. Cracks in an Earthen Vessel: An Examination of the Catalogues of Hardships in the Corinthian Correspondence. SBL Dissertation Series, no. 99. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988.

________________ . "Paul, the Ancient Epistolary Theorists, and 2 Corinthians 10-13." In Greeks, Romans, and Christians , pp. 190-200. Edited by D. Balch. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. "Glory Reflected on the Face of Christ (2 Cor 3:7-4:6) and a Palestinian Jewish Motif." TS 42 (1981): 630-644.

________________ . "Qumran and the Interpolated Paragraph in 2 Cor 6:14-7:1." CBQ 23 (1961): 271-278.

Forbes, C. "Comparison, Self-Praise and Irony: Paul's Boasting and the Conventions of Hellenistic Rhetoric." NTS 32 (1986): 1-30.

Fredrickson, D. "Free Speech in Pauline Political Theology." WW 12 (1992): 345-351.

________________ . "Pentecost: Paul the Pastor in 2 Corinthians." WW 11 (1991): 208-214.

Fridrichsen, A. The Apostle and His Message . Uppsala: Lundequistska, 1947.

Furnish, Victor Paul. "Paul and the Corinthians." Int 52 (July, 1998): 229-245.

________________ . II Corinthians . Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1984.

Gallas, S. "Fünfmal vierzig weniger einen . . ." Die an Paulus Vollzogenen Synagogal Strafen Nach 2 Kor 11,24. ZNW 81 (1991): 178-191.

Georgi, D. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians . Translated by N. Attridge. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986.

Gill, David W.J. "In Search of the Social Elite in the Corinthian Church." TynBul 44 (1993): 323-337.

Gillman, John. "A Thematic Comparison: 1 Cor 15:50-57 and 2 Cor 5:1-5." JBL 107 (1988): 439-454.

Glasson, T.F. "2 Corinthians V.1-10 Versus Platonism." SJT 43 (1990): 145-155.

Gleason, Randall. "Paul's Covenantal Contrasts in 2 Cor 3:1-11." BSac 154 (1997): 61-79.

Gräbe, P.J. "The All-Surpassing Power of God through the Holy Spirit in the Midst of our Broken Earthly Existence: Perspectives on Paul's Use of DUNAMIS in 2 Corinthians." Neot 28 (1994): 147-156.

Grech, Prosper. "2 Corinthians 3,17 and the Pauline Doctrine of Conversion to the Holy Spirit." CBQ 17 (1955): 420-437.

Greenlee, J. Harold. Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Guhrt, J. "Time." NIDNTT , 3:831.

Gundry, Robert. A Survey of the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994.

Gundry-Volf, J.M. "Conscience." DPL , 153-156.

Haarbeck, H., and H.G. Link. "lupevw." NIDNTT , 2:419-421.

Hafemann, S.J. "The Glory and Veil of Moses in 2 Cor 3:7-14: An Example of Paul's Contextual Exegesis of the OT - A Proposal." HBT 14 (1992): 31-49.

________________ . Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel . Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996.

________________ . "Paul's Use of the Old Testament in 2 Corinthians." Int 52 (July, 1998): 246-257.

________________ . "Self-Commendation and Apostolic Legitimacy in 2 Corinthians: A Pauline Dialectic?" NTS 36 (1990): 66-88.

________________ . Suffering and Ministry in the Spirit: Paul's Defense of His Ministry in 2 Corinthians 2:14-3:3. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990. 21-95.

Hagge, H. "Die beiden überlieferen sendschreibendes Apostels Paulus an die Gemeinde zu Korinth." Jahrbucher für protestantische Theologie 2 (1876): 481-531.

Hahn, H.C., and Colin Brown. "Conscience." NIDNTT , 1:348-353.

________________ . "Openness, Frankness, Boldness." NIDNTT , 2:734-737.

Harder, G. "upovstasi"." NIDNTT , 1:710-713.

Harris, Murray J. "2 Corinthians 5:1-10: Watershed in Paul's Eschatology!" TynBul 22 (1971): 32-57.

________________ . "2 Corinthians." In Expositor's Bible Commentary, Vol. 10. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976.

Harvey, A.E. Renewal through Suffering . Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996.

Hausrath, Adolf. Der Vier-Capitalbrief des Paulus an die Korinther. Heidelberg: Bassermann, 1870.

Hayes, J.W. "Roman Pottery from the South Stoa at Corinth." Hesperia 42 (1973): 465-476.

Heckel, V. "Der Dorn im Fleisch. Die Krankheit des Paulus in 2 Kor 12,7 und Gal 4,13f 2:238." ZNW (1993): 65-92.

Heiny, Stephen. "2 Corinthians 2:14-4:6: The Motive for Metaphor." In SBL 1987 Sermon Papers , 1-21. Edited by Kent Harold Richards. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987.

Hemer, Colin. "A Note on 2 Corinthians 1:9." TynBul 23 (1972): 103-107.

________________ . "Alexandrian Troas." TynBul 26 (1975): 82-94.

Hengel, Martin. The Son of God . Translated by John Bowden. London: SCM Press, 1976.

Hennecke, Edgar, ed. New Testament Apocrypha . 2 vols. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1963-1964.

Hess, K. "Serve." NIDNTT , 3:544-549.

Hickling, C.J.A. "The Sequence of Thought in II Corinthians, Chapter Three." NTS 21 (1975): 380-395.

Hock, Ronald F. "The Workshop as a Social Setting for Paul's Missionary Preaching." CBQ 41 (1979): 438-450.

________________ . "Paul's Tentmaking and the Problem of his Social Class." JBL 97 (1978): 555-564.

Hodgson, Robert. "Paul the Apostle and First Century Tribulation Lists." ZNW 74 (1983): 59-80.

Hoffman, E. "Hope, Expectation." NIDNTT , 2:238-244.

Howe, E.M. "Interpretations of Paul in the Acts of Paul and Thecla." Pauline Studies . Fest. F.F. Bruce. Edited by D.A. Hagner and M.J. Aawis. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Hubbard, Moyer. "Was Paul Out of His Mind? Re-reading 2 Corinthians 5.13." JSNT 70 (1998): 39-64.

Hughes, Philip E. Paul's Second Epistle to the Corinthians . NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962.

Hurd, John. The Origin of I Corinthians . New York: Seabury, 1965.

Joubert, S.J. "Behind the Mask of Rhetoric: 2 Corinthians 8 and the Intra-textual Relation Between Paul and the Corinthians." Neot 26 (1992): 101-112.

Judge. E.A. "The Conflict of Educational Aims in NT Thought." Journal of Christian Education 9 (1966): 32-45.

________________ . "Paul's Boasting in Relation to Contemporary Professional Practice." AusBR 16 (1968): 37-50.

________________ . "The Social Identity of the First Christians: A Question of Method in Religious History." JRH 11 (1980): 214.

Käsemann, Ernst. "'The Righteousness of God' in Paul." In New Testament Questions of Today , pp. 168-193. Translated by W.J. Montague. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969.

Kee, Doyle. "Who Were the 'Super-Apostles' of 2 Corinthians 10-13?" ResQ 23 (1980): 65-76.

Kerr, Alastair. "ajrrabw'n." JTS 39 (1988): 92-97.

Keyes, C.W. "The Greek Letter of Introduction." AJP 56 (1935): 28-44.

Kim, C.H. Forum and Structure of Greek Letters of Recommendation . Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series, no. 4. Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1972.

Kim, Seyoon. The Origin of Paul's Gospel . Tübingen: Muhr, 1981. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.

Kistemaker, Simon J. II Corinthians . New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997.

Klassen, William. "The Sacred Kiss in the NT: An Example of Social Boundary Lines." NTS 39 (1993): 122-135.

Koester, Helmut. "upostasi"." TDNT 8: 572-589.

Kramer, Werner. "Christ, Lord, Son of God." In Studies in Biblical Theology , no. 50. Translated by B. Hardy. London: SCM Press, 1966.

Kruse, Colin. "The Offender and the Offence in 2 Corinthians 2:5 and 7:12." EvQ 60 (1998): 129-139.

________________ . "The Relationship Between the Opposition to Paul Reflected in 2 Corinthians 1-7 and 10-13." EvQ 61 (1989): 195-202.

________________ . 2 Corinthians . Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, 2nd ser . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Kurz, William. "2 Corinthians" Implied Readers and Canonical Implications." JSNT 62 (1996): 443-63.

Lambrecht, Jan. "'Reconcile Yourselves . . .': A Reading of 2 Cor 5.11-21." In The Diakonia of the Spirit. Edited by Lorenzo Lonenzi. Monograph Series of Benediction, vol. 10. Rome: St. Paul's Abbey, 1989.

________________ . Second Corinthians . Sacra Pagina. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1999.

________________ . "Strength in Weakness: A Reply to Scott B. Andrews' Exegesis of 2 Cor 11:23b-33." NTS 43 (1997): 285-290.

Lampe, G.W.H. "Church Discipline and the Interpretation of the Epistles to the Corinthians." In Church History and Interpretation , pp. 337-361. Edited by W.R. Farmer. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1967.

Leary, T.J. "A Thorn in the Flesh - 2 Corinthians 12:7." JTS 43 (1992): 520-522.

Leivestad, Ragnar. "The Meekness and Gentleness of Christ: II Cor X.1." NTS 13 (1966): 156-164.

Lewis, J.P., ed. Interpreting 2 Corinthians 5:14-21. An Exercise in Hermeneutic Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity 17 . Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 1989.

Lincoln, Andrew. "Paul the Visionary: The Setting and Significance of the Rapture to Paradise in II Corinthians XII.1-10." NTS 25 (1979): 204-220.

Lofthouse, W. F. "'I' and 'We' in the Pauline Epistles." BT 6 (1955): 72-80.

Lorenzi, Lorenzo, ed. The Diakonia of the Spirit . Monograph Series of Benedictina, vol. 10. Rome: St. Paul's Abbey, 1989.

Loubser, J.A. "A New Look at Paradox and Irony in 2 Corinthans 10-13." Neot 26 (1992): 507-521.

Manson, T.W. "2 Cor 2:14-17: Suggestions Toward an Exegesis." In Studia Pauline . Fest. de Zwann. Haarlem: Bohm, 1953.

Marmorstein, A. The Old Rabbinic Doctrine of God. New York: KTAV, 1968.

Marshal, Peter. "A Metaphor of Shame: QRIABEUEIN in 2 Cor 2:14." NovT 25 (1983): 302-317.

________________ . "Invective: Paul and His Enemies in Corinth." In Perspectives on Languages and Test: Essays and Poems in Honor of Francis Anderson , pp. 358-373. Edited by Edgar W. Conrad and Edward G. Newry. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1987.

Marshall, I.H. "The Meaning of Reconciliation." In Unity and Diversity in New Testament Theology . Fest. George E. Ladd. Edited by R. A. Guelich. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians . Word Biblical Commentary. Waco, TX: Word, 1986.

________________ . "The Opponents of Paul in 2 Corinthians: An Old Issue Revisited." In Tradition and Interpretation in the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Maxfield, Valerie. The Military Decoration of the Roman Army . Los Angeles: University of California , 1981.

McCant, Jerry. "Paul's Thorn of Rejected Apostleship." NTS 34 (1988): 550-572.

Metzger, Bruce, ed. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament . New York: United Bible Societies, 1971.

Morray-Jones, C.R.A. "Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12:1-12): The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul's Apostolate. Part 1: The Jewish Sources." HTR 86 (2, 1993): 177-217.

________________ . "Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12:1-12): The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul's Apostolate. Part 2: Paul's Heavenly Ascent and Its Significance." HTR 86 (3, 1993): 265-292.

Morris, Leon. The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955.

________________ . The Epistle to the Romans . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

Moule, C.F.D. "St. Paul and Dualism: The Pauline Conception of Resurrection." NTS 13 (1965): 106-123.

Mullins, Terence. "Formulas in New Testament Epistles." JBL 91 (1972): 380-390.

Mundel, W. "uJpakouw." NIDNTT , 2:179-180.

Murphy-O'Conner, Jerome "Another Jesus (2 Cor 11:4)." RB 97 (1990): 238-251.

________________ . "'Being at Home in the Body We Are in Exile from the Lord' (2 Cor 5:6b)." RB 93 (1986): 214-221.

________________ . "The Corinth that Paul Saw." BA (Sept, 1984): 147-159.

________________ . "The Date of 2 Corinthians 10-13." RB 39 (1991): 31-43.

________________ . "Faith and Resurrection in 2 Cor 4:13-14." RB 95 (1988): 543-550.

________________ . "Paul and Gallio." JBL 112 (1993): 315-317.

________________ . Paul's Corinth: Texts and Archaeology. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1983.

________________ . "Philo and 2 Cor 6:14-7:1." RB 95 (1988): 55-69.

________________ . "PNEUMATIKOI and Judaizers in 2 Cor 2:14-4:6." AusBR 34 (1986): 42-58.

________________ . "Relating 2 Corinthians 6.14-7.1 to its Context." NTS 33 (1987): 272-275.

________________ . The Theology of the Second Letter to the Corinthians . New Testament Theology. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Nickle, Keith. The Collection . Studies in Biblical Theology, no. 48. London: SCM Press, 1966.

Newmann, Matthias. "Ministry, Weakness, and Spirit in II Corinthians." Clergy Review 59 (1974): 647-660.

O'Collins, Gerald. "Power Made Perfect in Weakness: 2 Cor 12:9-10." CBQ 33 (1971): 528-537.

Olley, John. "A Precursor of the NRSV? 'Sons and Daughters' in 2 Cor 6.18." NTS 44 (1998): 204-212.

Olson, Stanley. "Epistolary Uses of Expressions of Self-Confidence." JBL 104 (1984): 585-597.

Osborne, Robert. "St. Paul's Silent Years." JBL 84 (1963): 59-65.

Osei-Bonsu. "Does 2 Cor 5.1-10 Teach the Reception of the Resurrection in Body at the Moment of Death?" JSNT 28 (1986): 81-101.

Oster, R.E. "Use, Misuse, and Neglect of Archaeological Evidence in Some Modern Works on 1 Corinthians." ZNW 83 (1992): 52-73.

Packer, J.I. "Abolish, Nullify, Reject." NIDNTT , 1:73-74.

Pate, C.M. Adam Christology as the Exegetical and Theological Substructure of 2 Corinthians 4:7-5:21. University Press of America, 1991.

Patte, Daniel. "A Structural Exegesis of 2 Corinthians 2:14-7:4 with Special Attention on 2:14-3:6 and 6:11-7:4." In SBL 1987 Seminar Papers , pp. 23-45. Edited by Kent Harold Richards. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987.

Perriman, A.C. "Between Troas and Macedonia: 2 Cor 2:13-14." ExpTim 101 (1989): 39-41.

________________ . "Paul and the Parousia: 1 Corinthians 15.50-57 and 2 Corinthians 5:1-5." NTS 35 (1989): 512-521.

Peterson, Brian. "Conquest, Control, and the Cross: Paul's Self-Portrayal in 2 Corinthians 10-13." Int 52 (1998): 258-270.

Pierre, C.A. Conscience in the New Testament . SBJ 15. London: SCM, 1958.

Plummer, Alfred. A Critical & Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians . ICC, 1st ser. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1915.

Quast, Kevin. Reading the Corinthian Correspondence: An Introduction . New York: Paulist, 1994.

Rensberger, David. "2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1 - A Fresh Examination." Studia Biblical Et Theologica 8 (1978): 25-49.

Roetzel, C.J. "'As Dying, and Behold We Live.' Death and Resurrection in Paul's Theology." Int 46 (1992): 5-18.

Schippers, R. "qliyi"." NIDNTT , 2:807-809.

________________ . "Seal." NIDNTT , 3:497-500.

Schlier, Heinrich. "ajmhn." TDNT , 1:335-338.

Schmithals, Walther. Gnosticism in Corinth: An Investigation of the Letters to the Corinthians . Translated by J.E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1971.

Scott, James M. 2 Corinthians . New International Biblical Commentary. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998.

________________ . "The Triumph of God in 2 Cor 2.14: Additional Evidence of Merkabah Mysticism in Paul." NTS 42 (1996): 260-281.

________________ . "Use of Scripture in 2 Corinthians 6:16c-18 and Paul's Restoration Theology." JSNT 561 (1994): 73-99.

Segal, Alan. "Paul and Ecstasy." In SBL 1986 Seminar Papers , pp. 555-580. Altanta: Scholars Press, 1986.

Semler, Johann. Paraphrasis II epistolae ad Corinthios . Halle, 1776.

Singer, S. Authorised Daily Prayer Book. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1925.

Spencer, Aida Besançon, and William David Spencer. 2 Corinthians . Bible Study Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989.

Stählin, Gustav. "filew." TDNT , 9:113-171.

Stephenson, A.M.G. "A Defense of the Integrity of 2 Corinthians." In The Authorship and Intergirty of the New Testament , pp. 82-97. SPCK Theological Collections , 4. London: SPCK, 1965.

Stowers, S.K. "' Peri men gar ' and the Integrity of 2 Cor 8 and 9." NovT 32 (1990): 340-348.

Stuhlmacher, Peter. Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus . FRLANT 87. Goettingen: Vandenhoock and Ruprecht, 1966.

Sumney, Jerry L. Identifying Paul's Opponents: The Question of Method in 2 Corinthians . JSNTSupp , no. 40. Sheffield: JSOT, 1990.

Tasker, R.V.G. The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians . Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958.

Taylor, Justin. "The Ethnarch of King Aretus at Damascus: A Note on 2 Cor 11, 32-33." RB 99 (1992): 719-728.

Taylor, N.H. "The Composition and Chronology of Second Corinthians." JSNT 48 (1991): 67-87.

Thacker, Anthony. "Paul's Thorn in the Flesh." Epworth Revue 18 (1991): 67-69.

Theissen, G. "The Unity of the Church." Theology Digest 42 (1995): 117-126.

Thiselton, Anthony. "Flesh." NIDNTT , 3:671-682.

Thrall, Margaret. A Critical & Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians . ICC, 2nd ser. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994.

________________ . "2 Corinthians 1:12: aJgiovqhti or aJplovqhti." In Studies in New Testament Language and Text. NovTSupp 44. Edited by J.K. Elliott. Leiden: Brill (1976): 366-372.

________________ . "The Offender and the Offense: A Problem of Detection in 2 Corinthians." In Scripture: Meaning and Method , pp. 65-78. Edited by B. Thompson. Hull: Hull University Press, 1987.

________________ . "The Pauline Use of SUNEIDHSIS." NTS 14 (1967): 118-125.

________________ . "The Problem of II Cor VI.14-VII.1 in Some Recent Discussions." NTS 24 (1977): 132-148.

________________ . "Salvation Proclaimed in V. 2 Corinthians 5:18-21: Reconciliation with God." ExpTim 93 (1982): 226-230.

________________ . "A Second Thanksgiving Period in 2 Corinthians." JSNT 16 (1982): 101-124.

________________ . "Super-Apostles, Servants of Christ, and Servants of Satan." JSNT 6 (1980): 42-57.

Thurston, Bonnie Bowman. "2 Corinthians 2:14-16a: Christ's Incense." ResQ 29 (1987): 65-70.

Trocmé, E. "Le rempart de Damas: un faux pas de Paul?" Revue d'Histoire et de Philosophie Religieuses. Strasbourg, 69 (1989): 475-479.

Unnik, W.C. Van. "'With Unveiled Face' An Exegesis of 2 Corinthians III.12-15." NovT 2 (1963): 153-169.

________________ . "Tarsus or Jerusalem." Sparsa Collecta . NovTSupp 29 (1953): 259-327.

Vassiliades, P. "The Collection Revisited." Deltion Biblicokon Meleton 21 (1992): 42-48.

Ward, Roy Bower. "The Opponents of Paul." ResQ 10 (1967): 185-195.

Watson, Francis. "2 Cor x-xiii and Paul's Painful Letter to the Corinthians." JTS 35 (1984): 324-346.

Webb, W.J. Returning Home: New Covenant and Second Exodus as the Context for 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1. JSNT Supplement Series 85. Sheffield, UK: JSOT Press, 1993.

________________ . "Unequally Yoked Together with Unbelievers. Part 1 (of 2): Who are the Unbelievers (ajpistoi) in 2 Corinthians 6:14?" BSac 149 (1992): 27-44.

________________ . "What is the Unequal Yoke in 2 Corinthians 6:14?" BSac 149 (1992): 162-179.

Weiss, Johannes. Earliest Christianity . 2 vols. Translated by F.C. Grant. New York: Harper, 1959.

Wenham, David. The Parables of Jesus . Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1989.

Wenham, John. "Being 'Found' on the Last Day: New Light on 2 Peter 3.10 and 2 Cor 5.3." NTS 33 (1987): 477-429.

White, John L. "Introductory Formulae in the Body of Pauline Letters." JBL 96 (1971): 91-97.

Williamson, Lamar. "Led in Triumph." Int 22 (1968): 317-322.

Windisch, Hans. "Kaphleuw." TDNT , 3:603-605.

Wiseman, James, R. "Corinth and Rome I: 228 B.C.-A.D. 267." ANRW II, 7/1, 438-548.

________________ . The Land of the Ancient Corinthians . Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, no. 50. Göteborg: Astrom, 1978.

Witherington, Ben III. Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Wong, Kasper. "'Lord' in 2 Corinthians 10:17." Louvain Studies 17 (1992): 243-253.

Wood, John. "Death at Work in Paul." EvQ 54 (1982): 151-155.

Woods, L. "Opposition to a Man and His Message: Paul's 'Thorn in the Flesh' (2 Cor 12:7)." AusBR 39 (1991): 44-53.

Wright, N.T. "On Becoming the Righteousness of God." In Pauline Theology 2:200-208. Edited by M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993.

Young, Brad. "The Ascension Motif of 2 Corinthians 12 in Jewish, Christian, and Gnostic Texts." Grace Theological Journal 9 (1988): 73-103.

Young, Francis, and David Ford. Meaning and Truth in 2 Corinthians . Edited by D. Balch. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990.

Zeilinger, F. "Die Echtheit von 2 Cor 6:14-7:1." JBL 112 (1993): 71-80.

Zorn, Walter D. "The Messianic Use of Habakkuk 2:4a in Romans." Stone-Campbell Journal 1 (Fall, 1998): 213-231.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

1 Clem 1 Clement

1QH The Thanksgiving Hymns (Dead Sea Scroll)

1QM The War Scroll (Dead Sea Scroll)

1QS Rule of the Community (Dead Sea Scroll)

2 Clem 2 Clement

AJP American Journal of Philology

ANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der römishen Welt, ed. Temporini and Haase

AusBR Australian Biblical Review

AUSS Andrews University Seminary Studies

BA Biblical Archaeologist

BBR Bulletin for Biblical Research

BSac Bibliotheca Sacra

BT Bible Translator

BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin

CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly

CD The Damascus Document (Dead Sea Scroll)

DPL Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, ed. Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid

Ebr. De Ebrietate (Philo)

EvQ Evangelical Quarterly

ExpTim Expository Times

HBT Horizons in Biblical Theology

Heres Qui Rerum Divinarum Heres sit (Philo)

HTR Harvard Theological Review

ICC International Critical Commentary

Int Interpretation

JB Jerusalem Bible

JBL Journal of Biblical Literature

JRH Journal of Religious History

JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament

JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

JTS Journal of Theological Studies

LB Living Bible

NAB New American Bible

NASB New American Standard Bible

NEB New English Bible

Neot Neotestamentica

NICNT New International Commentary on the New Testament

NIDNTT New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, ed. Brown

NIV New International Version

NLT New Living Translation

NovT Novum Testamentum

NovTSupp Novum Testamentum Supplements

NRSV New Revised Standard Version

NTS New Testament Studies

RB Revue Biblique

ResQ Restoration Quarterly

RSV Revised Standard Version

SCJ Stone-Campbell Journal

SJT Scottish Journal of Theology

Spec.Leg. Philo, De Specialibus Legibus

TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Kittel and Friedrich

TEV Today's English Version

T.Jos Testament of Joseph

T.Levi Testament of Levi

T.Naph Testament of Naphtali

TS Theological Studies

TynBul Tyndale Bulletin

WW Word and World

ZNW Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenshaft

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: 2 Corinthians (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. OPENING - 1:1-2

II. THANKSGIVING - 1:3-11

A. GOD COMFORTS - 1:3-7

B. GOD DELIVERS - 1:8-11

III. DEFENSE OF INTEGRITY - 1:12-2:13

A. CLARITY SOUGHT - 1:12-14

B. SECOND TRAVEL ITINERARY EXPLAINED - 1:15-17

C. CANDOR DEMANDED - 1:18-22

D. THIRD TRAVEL ITINERARY DEFENDED - 1:23-2:4

E. THE OFFENDER FORGIVEN - 2:5-11

F. ACTUAL TRAVEL DESCRIBED - 2:12-13

IV. DEFENSE OF APOSTOLIC MINISTRY IN PRINCIPLE - 2:14-7:4

A. SUFFICIENT FOR MINISTRY - 2:14-3:6

1. The Aroma of Christ Spread - 2:14-17

2. A Living Letter of Recommendation Sent - 3:1-3

3. A Personal Reference Provided - 3:4-6

B. SUPERIOR TO THE OLD COVENANT - 3:7-18

1. Glory Unsurpassed 3:7-11

2. Glory Unobstructed 3:12-18

C. TENACIOUS DESPITE SHORTCOMINGS - 4:1-5:10

1. Christ Preached Plainly - 4:1-6

2. Hardships Overcome because of Jesus' Death - 4:7-12

3. Increasing Multitudes Brought to Life - 4:13-15

4. Driven by Unseen, Eternal Reward - 4:16-18

5. Confident in Eternal Home - 5:1-10

a) Permanent Home Guaranteed - 5:1-5

b) Pleasing the Lord Prioritizes Life - 5:6-10

D. PREACHING RECONCILIATION THROUGH CHRIST - 5:11-6:2

1. Motivated by Christ's Love - 5:11-15

2. Christ's Message of Reconciliation Delivered - 5:16-6:2

E. HARDSHIPS IN MINISTRY - 6:3-10

F. AN APPEAL FOR OPENNESS AND RECONCILIATION - 6:11-7:4

1. Paul's Heart Opened - 6:11-13

2. Holiness Demanded - 6:14-7:1

3. Paul's Trust Expressed - 7:2-4

V. ENCOURAGING NEWS: RELATIONSHIP FULLY RESTORED - 7:5-16

A. TITUS REPORTS LOVE FOR PAUL - 7:5-7

B. TRUE REPENTANCE DEMONSTRATES INNOCENCE - 7:8-13a

C. TITUS EXPRESSED DEEP AFFECTION - 7:13b-16

VI. PREPARATION FOR THE COLLECTION - 8:1-9:15

A. INCENTIVES TOWARD GENEROSITY - 8:1-15

1. Excel Like the Macedonians - 8:1-7

2. Give Like Christ - 8:8-9

3. Complete Your Offering - 8:10-12

4. Achieve Equity - 8:13-15

B. TITUS PLUS TWO OTHERS SENT TO CORINTH TO HELP - 8:16-9:5

1. Criticism to Be Thwarted - 8:16-21

2. Measure Up to Expectations - 8:22-24

3. Follow Through on What Was Begun - 9:1-5

C. MORE INCENTIVE TO BE GENEROUS - 9:6-15

1. God Will Be Generous - 9:6-11

2. God Will Be Praised - 9:12-15

VII. FINAL DEFENSE OF MINISTRY - 10:1-13:10

A. LAUNCH OF A MASSIVE COUNTERATTACK - 10:1-18

1. Powerful Weapons Employed - 10:1-6

2. Forceful Personal Presence Warned - 10:7-10

3. God's Expansion of the Gospel Boasted - 10:12-18

B. COMPARISON TO FALSE APOSTLES MADE - 11:1-15

1. True Message of Jesus Preached - 11:1-6

2. No Money Accepted - 11:7-12

3. The False Apostles Serve Satan - 11:13-15

C. BOASTING AS A "FOOL" - 11:16-33

1. Rationale Provided - 11:16-21a

2. Ancestry and Hardships Listed - 11:21b-29

3. Weakness Boasted - 11:30-33

D. MORE BOASTING - 12:1-10

1. A Vision Divulged - 12:1-6

2. An Irremovable Thorn Remains - 12:7-10

E. "BOASTING" RETROSPECTIVE - 12:11-13

F. PREPARATION FOR THE THIRD VISIT - 12:14-13:10

1. No Exploitation Tactics Employed - 12:14-18

2. More Trouble Feared - 12:19-21

3. Harsh Treatment for Sinners Warned - 13:1-4

4. Faith-testing Evidences Paul's Strength - 13:5-10

VIII. CLOSING REMARKS - 13:11-14

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV