II Corinthians 3:12-4:2 (NRSV)
II Corinthians 3:12-4:2 is part of a segment, 3:7-4:6, that has a theme that continues Paul’s comments on apostolic service, which is the ministry of the new covenant.
Paul here spells out the apostolic vocation as being the ministry of the new covenant. It has a polemical dimension. Pannenberg notes that Irenaeus integrated the covenant history of God with Israel into his picture of human history as a whole, based on the model Paul provided here.[1] Throughout this segment, we have the apostolic gospel speaking of an event that has already taken place. The past event of the history of Jesus, and especially of his death, is now at work through the apostolic gospel. This is possible only because this past event contains within itself the eschatological future inbreaking of the rule of God. The message of the resurrection of the Crucified is full of the spiritual reality of the risen Lord. Its proclamation involves life-giving power emanating from it. The reason is that the eschatological future of God lays hold of the hearers by means of the content of the message. The saving future is now active even after the death of Jesus through the power of the Spirit, who raised him from the dead and who now glorifies him through the gospel message. In this sense, Jesus Christ, the Lord, speaks and acts through the word of the gospel. The power that fills the gospel has a close connection with the presence of the future of God in the coming of Jesus and the imparting of this presence of eschatological salvation by the Spirit. The gospel leads to knowledge of the Son in the human history of Jesus. Thus, Paul will distinguish the notion of the Word of God in the Old Testament and its ministry of the law from the saving future of God as expressed in the gospel. The gospel is not the correlate of the law, as though we could speak of it only in relation to the law. The antithesis between gospel and law has historical conditions. The gospel could not have initiated a new epoch in salvation history if in content it had not been independent of the validity of the law.[2]
Some believe I Corinthians 3:12-18 is a midrash on Exodus 34 and contrasts Judaism and Christianity. Furnish (Anchor Bible) believes the text is more focused on the previous comments Paul made about new covenant than Exodus. Here, it is because of the splendor of the new covenant that apostles are bold. The text is an elaborate argument suggesting the Corinthians are wearing a veil over their hearts that keeps them from not only appreciating Paul's apostolic credentials, but from seeing Jesus. In 3: 12-13, Paul discusses the boldness of true apostles. 12 Since, then, we have such a hope, we act with great boldness, 13 not like Moses, who put a veil over his face to keep the people of Israel from gazing at the end of the glory that was being set aside. In Exodus 34, the veiling of Moses’ face is a simple fact. Paul interprets it negatively. Some believe there was a now lost midrashic interpretation that viewed the veil as a sign of Moses meekness. However, that is very conjectural. Furnish says the point of Paul is that Moses could not act boldly because his splendor was fading. Again, the law becomes a provisional entity relating to the world that perishes.[3] In 3: 14-15, in order to clarify, Israel, not Moses, was responsible for unbelief. 14 However,their minds were hardened. Indeed, to this very day, when they hear the reading of the old covenant, that same veil is still there, since only in Christ is it set aside. 15 Indeed, to this very day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their minds. This is why Moses’ ministry was destined to pass away. The point is that as one hears Torah read in synagogue, the Jews do not understand that God has set aside the Torah in order to continue the primary mission of bringing salvation to humanity. Though elsewhere he can speak of the positive effects of the law, he does not do that now. In 3: 16-18, Paul discusses the removal of the veil. The point could be that their conversion should have meant the removal of the veil that seems to hinder them from seeing the true meaning of their ministry. 16 However, when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. Does “Lord” refer to God or Christ? Furnish believes the former. For Paul, turning to the Lord means turning to Christ. We should also note that Christology is always subservient theology. Paul is making it clear that God had a single plan all along through which God intended to rescue the world and the human race. This single plan centered upon the call of Israel, which he now sees as coming to fruition in the representative of Israel, the Messiah.[4] 17 Now, the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. Paul raises two important issues in this verse. Theologically, the equation of Christ and Spirit finds direct expression here in saying that the Lord is the Spirit. Such a statement comes at the end of a section in which he has expressed the difference between the ministry of apostolic proclamation as a ministry of the Spirit from the Old Testament ministry of the letter.[5] While Paul can equate the Lord and the Spirit, he immediately relates the Spirit to the Lord as the Spirit of the Lord, thereby ruling out full identity. The Lord is the risen and exalted Jesus who will return as the community waits. The Spirit is the form and power of the divine presence and of the relation of believers to that presence.[6] In the free self-distinction of the Son from the Father, the independent existence of a creation distinct from God has its basis. The basis of its possibility is the free self-distinction of the Son from the Father. Even as the Son moves out of the unity of deity, he remains united with the Father by the Spirit, who is the Spirit of freedom.[7] Schweizer (TDNT, VI, 419) does not even see full personal identify between Christ and the Spirit in this verse.[8] Paul, in referring to the Lord as Spirit, is not referring to God as supreme reason, as will later Christian theology.[9] The second issue is freedom. Freedom is not a major theme, this being the only place Paul refers to this. Note elsewhere Romans 7:6, Romans 8, Galatians 4:21-5:25. Paul closely related the Spirit and Christian freedom. Boldness has close relationship to freedom. Where there is this freedom of the Spirit, our reconciliation to God has reached its goal.[10] This freedom of the Spirit, in contrast to the letter in verse 7, rests on the fact that the Spirit bears witness that in Jesus Christ the eschatological consummation of the theme of human life has come already, this being the true subject and final meaning even of the letter of the law itself.[11] Christian freedom is the work of the Holy Spirit in believers. However, this is not just one work of the Spirit among others. The freedom of believers expresses the fact that the Spirit of God works in them in such a way that it rests on their participation in the filial relation of Jesus to the Father.[12] The paradox of this freedom is that the first thing in life is to obey. We will find something or Someone to whom we give our final allegiance. Where we bend the knee is the ultimate is the ultimate question. We may obey money, sex, conforming to our tribe, or our desires, but we will obey. Yet, we also desire and need freedom. As analogy, you may want to fly, but you will need to obey the laws of flight on this earth or even into space. One is free to fly as long as one obeys the laws. We gain freedom through adherence to certain laws.[13] When we look upon the writings of Paul as whole, we gain freedom in the Spirit as we learn to walk in faith, hope, and especially love. The more we live into the mission of God in the world, the more we engage the Spirit and allow the Spirit to work in us and through us, the freer we become to realize our true purpose as citizens of the rule of God and people of the new covenant. 18 Further,all of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord as though reflected in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit. Through such statements regarding the image of Christ, Christians will read the Old Testament notion of the divine likeness. The statement by Paul that the Spirit changes believers into the likeness of Christ who is the image of God, must have in view a closeness to God that goes beyond the divine likeness grounded in creation. Thus, the perverting of the glory of God by human sin does not alter the fact that ordination to be in the image of God characterizes human beings as creatures. The participation of the many in the image of the eschatological human being is by the process of change into the likeness of Christ.[14] This transformation comes from the Lord, the Spirit. Note the close connection between “beholding” and “being transformed.” There is a relationship to mystery religions and Hermetica. However, it is also in Jewish apocalyptic literature. Faith for Paul is being conformed to the image of God in Christ. This is not an ecstatic experience but a transformation within this life and history. There is a daily inner renewal as believers place themselves at God’s disposal. In the act of the glorifying of Jesus as the Son, believers share in the fellowship of the Son with the Father and therefore in the glory of God by which their own lives are changed into imperishable fellowship with the eternal God.[15] The divine will to save finds its fulfillment as we move toward the image of Christ.[16] The point here is that the new life imparted to Christ relates to that of a totality, a new humanity.[17] Meister Eckhart made such a saying of Paul a starting point for the history of what we now call culture.[18]
The argument of Paul regarding the greatness of Christ’s glory depends on a genuine glory in the covenant mediated through Moses. As glorious as the first covenant is between God and the Israelites, by comparison with the “greater glory” of the second covenant between God and all humanity mediated by Christ, it is as if “what once had glory has lost its glory” (3:10). Every time Moses entered God’s presence, whether on Mount Sinai or in the inner tent of the tabernacle, the experience physically transformed him. And every time the people asked Moses to veil his face so they didn’t have to be confronted with the change. But according to later Jewish tradition, as time passed Moses’ face returned to normal. Once again, Moses was just like everyone else. He could no longer lay claim to something of God’s glory for himself, and he worried about what that might mean for his own standing among the people. So Moses continued to put on the veil, no longer to hide the transforming glory of God in his life but to hide the fact that that glory had left him. It is at this point that Paul engages the story of Moses’ veil. He draws attention specifically to the tradition that Moses continued to wear the veil even after the radiance had begun to fade so the people couldn’t see “the end of the glory that was being set aside” (v. 13). Then Paul takes a rather unexpected turn. Instead of criticizing Moses for what might seem as an act of deception, Paul suggests the Israelites had in a sense transferred the veil to their own eyes. Consequently, they could not see the even greater glory of Christ (vv. 15-16). Just as they refused to be transformed as Moses had been by God’s glory, so now with the coming of Christ “their minds were hardened” (v. 14) against the message of the gospel that can transform “from one degree of glory to another” (v. 18). Most of us know people who, despite irrefutable evidence and the advice of friends or family members, cling to an irrational and possibly dangerous belief. It is as though there is a veil over their eyes that prevents them from seeing reality. They live in an alternative universe of conspiracy theories, rumors, and ad hominem arguments, vulnerable to the faithless creed of the suspicious and angry. It is a veil that is hard to lift.
We know what a veil is, and there are times when a veil might be appropriate to wear. One might wear a veil at a wedding, but only if you happen to be the bride. Moreover, you might wear a veil at a funeral, but only if you are the widow. Men do not wear veils so much. A woman might also wear a veil in a Muslim culture. There might be other examples of appropriate uses of veils, but this probably covers most. Veils vary. You have your blusher veil, flyaway, elbow, fingertip, ballerina, chapel, cathedral, three-piece, bouffant and mantilla veils. All bridal veils. Brides, to hide their "glory" or beauty, wear veils until the revealing at the altar and the groom has said, "I do." Widows wear a veil to hide their sorrow. Paul suggests that the Corinthian church members were wearing veils over their hearts that obstructed their spiritual perception. When we turn to Jesus, Paul says, the Lord removes the veil. With unveiled faces, we are able to reflect -- like Moses -- the glory of God. I invite you to ponder the veils we are wearing over hearts even now that keep us from experiencing the freedom of the Spirit (v. 17) and from reflecting the glory of God.
The theme of II Corinthians 4:1-2, part of a segment that ends at verse 6, is further remarks on apostolic boldness, resumed from 3:12-13.
This passage is both the conclusion to the opening stage (3:7–4:6) of a quite extensive defense of Paul’s ministry (3:1–7:1) and the transition to the second stage of that defense (4:7–5:10). Paul starts with a rather caustic reference to a need for “letters of recommendation” that leads to a contrast between what is written “on tablets of stone [and] on tablets of human hearts” (3:1-3). Paul begins his defense by contrasting the covenant that God had made with Israel through Moses with the covenant that God has made with all people through Christ. He then transitions from the distorting effects veils have on accurate perception to an argument based on outward appearances concealing the true reality of a thing (see his discussion of “treasure in clay jars” beginning at 4:7). 4:1 Therefore, since it is by God’s mercy that we are engaged in this ministry, we do not lose heart. 2 We have renounced the shameful things that one hides. The preaching of Paul has no veil. We refuse to practice cunning or to falsify God’s word. Granted, the opponents of Paul who reside in Corinth may use such deceptive tactics, but Paul has not. However, by the open statement (φανερώσει or manifestation) of the truth (ἀληθείας) we commend ourselves to the conscience (συνείδησιν) of everyone in the sight of God. Paul shows deep concern throughout his letters that his readers understand his concern for the truth. He also had confidence that among the non-Jewish world he could still appeal to conscience, that sense all human beings have of right and wrong. People who do not have the Torah, in other words, still have a conscience to which they can appeal. Thus, as Paul viewed it, in the light of its historical effects, the revelation of God is open to anyone who eyes to see and does not need any supplementary inspired interpretations. The word of apostolic proclamation to which this verse refers does not supplement an event that is dumb and dull. It does not give radiance to the saving event. It simply spreads abroad the radiance that shines from the glory of Christ. It thus imparts the life-giving Spirit of God who consummates the event of the resurrection of the Crucified that is the content of the kerygma. The word of the apostolic message is Spirit-filled in virtue of its content and for this reason can impart the Spirit.[19] We now see the point of referring to the passage in Exodus. Whereas Paul’s opponents may be guilty of “practic[ing] cunning or … falsify[ing]” the truth as Moses continued to wear the veil even after the glory had faded, whereas some among his readers may be guilty of hiding from view “shameful things” by placing a veil over their own eyes, Paul has instead offered an “open statement of the truth” and placed himself not only before them but also clearly “in the sight of God.” His purpose in doing these things is not because he believes he has any glory in himself but because it is the only way that both he himself and his readers can be transformed by the presence of Christ’s glory (cf. 4:5-6).
[1] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 2, 298.
[2] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 2, 459-60.
[3] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 95.
[4] Wright, N.T. Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision. Downer’s Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2009.
[5] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 2, 451.
[6] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 1, 269.
[7] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 2, 30.
[8] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 2, 453.
[9] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 1, 371.
[10] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 2, 437.
[11] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 20.
[12] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 129.
[13] E. Stanley Jones, the great missionary to India in the first third of the 20th century, and author of The Christ of the Indian Road, inspired some of these reflections.
[14] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 2, 208, 215, 304.
[15] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 11.
[16] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 522.
[17] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 627-8.
[18] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 436.
[19] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 1, 249-50; Revelation as History (p. 135ff)
No comments:
Post a Comment