The Jews’ View Of The Old Testament

By David Murray

In previous articles we have examined Christ’s view of the Old Testament, and then the prophets’ view. Now let us look at the Jews’ view of the Old Testament. Why is this relevant, you might say? Well, we learn not only by looking at what is right but also by looking at what is wrong. For example, we can learn about water by describing what it is not as well as by describing what it is. We can likewise learn about the Old Testament message not only by looking at what it is (Christ’s view and the prophets’ view) but also by looking at what it is not (the Jews’ view). One great benefit of the heresies and misunderstandings in the early New Testament church was that they helped the church clarify the truth. Indeed, throughout her history, the church has made most advances in understanding the truth when confronting falsehood.

In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul contends against a wrong Jewish view of the Old Testament by setting out the true view of it. He does so by contrasting the new covenant with the old covenant, a contrast which is not absolute but relative, a contrast which is not between opposites (law versus works) but between a smaller and larger degree of grace.

Let me illustrate this. Some years ago, Office Administration, an office supplies business, was prospering through selling high quality paper, envelopes, and pens to various local companies. However, with the advent of the personal computer and e-mail, demand for these products began to diminish. The management, however, were unfamiliar with new technology. Moreover, they felt that they had good products which had been much appreciated for many years. So, instead of adapting to the new situation, they decided just to keep selling paper, envelopes, and pens. Sales continued to plummet. Eventually, their warehouses were full but their order books were empty. At this point, the managing director’s son, who had been trying for some time to change the company’s product range, offered to buy out the older management. A deal was soon concluded and the son took over. The warehouses were emptied of old stock, and in came personal computers, printers, and business software. The well-respected company name, Office Administration, was retained, but below the signs and the letterheads was written “Under New Management.” The company soon began to prosper again. The company name and business was the same—Office Administration—but the product range was now suited to a new age and to the new ways that offices were administered.

In a sense, the story of the whole Bible is about Grace Administration. However, what Paul tells us in 2 Corinthians 3:7-16 is that the coming of God’s Son, Jesus Christ, has changed the way grace is administered. The Old Testament administered grace in a way that suited the times and the people then—through prophecies, types, and symbols. It was glorious—for its time. But now, the same grace is to be administered directly and only through Jesus Christ. Grace Administration is “Under New Management.” And, as such, it is even more glorious. “For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious” (2 Cor. 3:11).

Second Corinthians 3:7-16 teaches us that the New Testament is not a new “business” but a new way of administering the same “business” of grace. It is Grace Administration “Under New Management.” Paul, then, is not contrasting old Law-works Administration with new Grace Administration. He is contrasting the old management of Grace Administration with the new management of Grace Administration. It is not then a contrast of absolutes—inglorious law versus glorious grace—but a contrast of relatives—glorious grace versus more glorious grace. The old management of Grace Administration was glorious (the old covenant), but the new management is more glorious (the new covenant). We shall investigate these five ways in which the new management is more glorious than the old:

1. The Spirit is more glorious than the letter
2. Life is more glorious than death
3. Righteousness is more glorious than condemnation
4. Plainness is more glorious than obscurity
5. Permanence is more glorious than transience

1. The Spirit Is More Glorious Than The Letter

Grace Administration “Under New Management” results in more spiritual power to obey God. “[God] also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life” (v. 6). There are two possible interpretations of “the letter.” It may represent the whole Old Testament era, and especially the Mosaic law. Or, it may mean “the mere letter.” In other words, it may stand for the Mosaic law without any power to obey it from without or within. This latter sense is how Calvin understands it. He says, “Christ is the Spirit, who quickens the letter that of itself is death-dealing.” [1]

If we take “the spirit” to mean the Holy Spirit, then Paul is teaching that the Old Testament era was marked more by letters, words, and sentences, whereas the New Testament era is marked more by the power of the Holy Spirit. There are letters, words, and sentences in the New Testament, just as there were influences of the Holy Spirit on the heart in the Old Testament (Ezek. 11:19). However, there were more letters in the Old than the New, and there is more Holy Spirit in the New than the Old. The Old Testament multiplied commands but supplied comparatively little of the Holy Spirit to enable and empower obedience. The New Testament simplified the commands and supplied much of the obedience-empowering Holy Spirit. In this sense, “the letter killeth but the spirit giveth life.”

The glory of the Mosaic dispensation was derived in large measure from its pompous ritual, its temple, its priesthood, its sacrifice, and, above all, its Shekinah, or visible symbol of the divine presence. But what was all this to the glory of the Gospel? What was a bright cloud overhanging the cherubim, to the light of God’s presence filling the soul? [2]

2. Life Is More Glorious Than Death

Grace Administration “Under New Management” results in more life for dying sinners. “For if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious…how shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?” (vv. 7-8). There is obvious overlap here with the previous letter-killeth/spirit-gives-life contrast—so much so, that “spirit” stands for “life” in the phrase “ministration of the spirit.”

The key phrase here though is “the ministration of death.” What does this mean? Many say that it means the Old Testament only resulted in death. No one was saved. It said, “Do this and live!” But no one “did this,” and so no one lived. For example, Warren Wiersbe writes: “The glory of the Law is really the glory of a ministry of death…. The Law was never given to impart life; it was definitely a ministry of death.... The old covenant was a covenant of works and bondage (Acts 15:10). But the new covenant is a ministry of glorious liberty in Christ.” [3]

There are two objections to this interpretation. First, if this is the meaning, then in what possible sense can the Old Testament be called “glorious”? What is glorious about ensuring death for all? Why did Moses’ face shine so brightly when he was given the “ministration of death” if it only secured his death? Secondly, Moses, and many Old Testament sinners who followed him, were saved (Heb. 11). How were they saved, if all they had was the “ministration of death”? So, if “the ministration of death” did not ensure only death for all, what does it mean? There are four possible interpretations. And, again, the key is to see relative rather than absolute contrasts.

First, “ministration of death” may refer to the amount of death in the Old Testament ceremonies. There was death in the New Testament—the death of Christ. However, there were thousands upon thousands of animal deaths in the Old Testament ceremonial system. Also, none of these animals was restored to life, whereas Christ’s death was followed by a resurrection to life. In this sense, we can say that, relatively speaking, the Old Testament was a “ministration of death,” whereas the New Testament was a “ministration of life.”

Second, “ministration of death” may refer to the relative emphases in the Old and New Testaments. The old covenant had a greater emphasis on the knowledge of sin, guilt, and the deserved judgment of death. The new covenant revealed this too, but there was a greater emphasis on the way to be saved from sin, guilt, and death (John 3:17).

Third, “ministration of death” may refer to the fewness of people saved in the Old Testament. There were unsaved people in the New Testament, but there were proportionately far more who died in trespasses and sins in the Old Testament. The contrast, then, is again relative, and underlines the effectiveness of the New Testament administration compared to the Old. This would fit in with the previous contrast between letter and spirit, and also might explain why, instead of the expected “ministration of life,” we have the equivalent phrase used, “ministration of the spirit.”

Fourth, “ministration of death” may refer to the effect of the law without the Spirit. Paul describes this in Romans where he says that the law increased sin and condemnation (Rom. 5:20). The more the conscience is struck with the awareness of sin, the more the sin grows. As Augustine put it, “If the Spirit of grace is absent, the law is present only to accuse and kill us.” Any one of these four relative contrasts is an acceptable interpretation in the context.

3. Righteousness Is More Glorious Than Condemnation

Grace Administration “Under New Management” results in more sinners made righteous than previously. “For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory” (v. 9).

By now you should be starting to view the contrasts in these verses in a relative rather than an absolute way. It is not a contrast between bad and good. It is a contrast between good and better; or, more accurately, between the good and the best. It is not the difference between total darkness and white light. It is the contrast between candlelight and sunlight: the candle brightens the darkness, but so bright is that sun that it makes the candlelight disappear. The old covenant administration of grace, by the Mosaic law, only lost its glory when the all-surpassing glory of the new covenant administration was begun.

So, when we come to the third contrast between the “ministration of condemnation” and the “ministration of righteousness,” we are looking at relatives, not absolutes. We know this because what looks and seems like an absolute condemnation is again described as “glorious.”

Some might say that the “ministration of condemnation” was glorious in the sense that it showed the awesomeness of God’s holy justice and pure wrath. In other words, it is a contrast between two kinds of glory—the glory of justice and the glory of grace. However, the next verse dashes this interpretation by confirming that it is a contrast between two levels of one kind of glory, rather than a contrast of two different kinds of glory. It talks about the same glory, but at two different levels of display. “For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth” (v. 10).

Righteousness was provided and given to sinners in the Old Testament as well as the New (Gen. 15:6), just as condemnation was announced in the New Testament as well as the Old. However, in terms of effects, there was more condemnation in the Old than the New, and more righteousness in the New than the Old. There were more brought to know and feel they were condemned in the Old, and more to whom righteousness was revealed in the New. As such, the Old looks dull compared with the New.

4. Plainness Is More Glorious Than Obscurity

Grace Administration “Under New Management” results in a clearer and brighter message of grace. “Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: and not as Moses which put a veil over his face…which veil is done away in Christ” (vv. 12-14).

As we have seen, grace was gloriously displayed in the old covenant. However, it was displayed through relatively complex means such as sacrifices and ceremonies. This is underlined by the need for Moses to cover the glory that shone in his face when he received the old covenant revelation of grace. He “put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look...” (v. 13). This summarized the old management of the covenant of grace. Grace shone, but it shone through a veil of obscurity and shadows—the types and the ceremonial system. Charles Hodge says, “As the brightness of Moses’ face was covered, so spiritual or evangelical truth was of old covered under the types and shadows of the Mosaic economy…. The people saw the light but only occasionally and imperfectly.” [4]

In contrast, the new management used “great plainness of speech” (v. 12). It was the same message of grace but the veil was “done away in Christ.” Christ fulfilled the law—the types, the symbols, the shadows—and so removed the need for these interim measures which, though revealing grace, at times also obscured it through people’s attachment to the symbols themselves.

5. Permanence Is More Glorious Than Transience

Grace Administration “Under New Management” will never fade or diminish in its glorious message or its glorious effects, while this earth remains: “…which glory was to be done away” (v. 7). “For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious” (v. 11). The glory that shone through Moses’ face was to be “done away” (vv. 7, 11). The gradual fading of the shining from Moses’ face reflected the temporary and transient nature of the Mosaic administration of grace. Charles Hodge remarked: “It was in its own nature a mere transient brightness, analogous to the temporary splendor of the service committed to him.” [5] The old management of grace was “to be done away” but the new management “remaineth.” Matthew Henry says:

The law is done away, but the gospel does and shall remain, v. 11. Not only did the glory of Moses’ face go away, but the glory of Moses’ law is done away also.… 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. [6]

The fading nature of Moses’ glory is referred to again in verse 13. There Paul tells us that Moses “put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.” “That which is abolished” is the brightness of Moses’ face, and the “end” is the termination of that brightness. In other words, in addition to shielding the people’s eyes from the initial dazzling brightness of his face (Ex. 34:30), Moses also used the veil to prevent the Israelites seeing how soon its brightness faded. As Wiersbe notes:

Moses knew that this glory would fade, so he wore a veil over his face whenever talking to the people, lest they see the glory fade and lose confidence in his ministry. “And not as Moses did, who put a veil over his face so no one could see the glory fade away” (TLB). [7]

This is contrasted not only with the permanence of the New Testament administration of grace but also the effect of it upon those who see it. They are changed “from glory to glory” (v. 18).

6. Conclusions

There is a veil on the Old Testament (v. 14)

The Jews’ over-attachment to the “Old Management” of Grace Administration—the types and symbols of the ceremonial system—in effect threw a veil over the Old Testament. Hodge concludes: “The Israelites of Paul’s day understood their Scriptures as little as their fathers did. They remained satisfied with the external, ritual, and ceremonial without penetrating to what was beneath, or asking the real import of the types and shadows of the old economy.” [8]

The veil on the Old Testament is taken away in Christ (v. 14)

This veil is only removed by seeing Christ as the meaning of the Old Testament (v. 14). Hodge writes: “The Old Testament Scriptures are intelligible only when understood as predicting and prefiguring Christ…. The knowledge of Christ, as a matter of fact and as a matter of course, removes the veil from the Old Testament.” [9]

There is a veil on the Jews’ hearts (v. 15)

Paul adds that not only is a veil upon the Old Testament but a veil is also over the Jews’ hearts (v. 15). In essence these are two sides of the one veil. The darkness of the Scriptures was because of the darkness of their hearts. The revelation of Christ in the Old Testament, though partly obscured, was clear enough if they had been in the right state of mind.

The veil on the heart is taken away by turning to Christ (v. 16)

In verse 16, reference is made to Moses turning away from the people to the Lord. When he did so, he removed the veil from his face. So, Paul says, as long as the people were turned from the Lord, the veil of misunderstanding was on their heart. But as soon as they would turn to the Lord, the veil would be removed and all would be bright and intelligible.

Turning to Christ opens everything up (v. 17)

Paul goes on to teach that turning to the Lord removes the veil because the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit is, there is liberty, freedom from the law and its bondage and obscurities. As Hodge puts it:

The main idea of the whole context is, that the recognition of Jesus Christ as Lord, or Jehovah, is the key to the Old Testament. It opens all its mysteries, or, to use the figure of the apostle, it removes the veil which hid from the Jews the true meaning of their own Scriptures. As soon as they turn to the Lord, i.e. as soon as they recognize Jesus Christ as their Jehovah, then everything becomes bright and clear. [10]

Christ transforms us from glory into glory (v. 18)

In contrast to only Moses seeing the Lord’s glory, Paul says “we all” behold His glory in Christ. In contrast to the fading glory of Moses, those who behold Christ now are permanently and increasingly changed into His own image. “From glory to glory” means either our apprehension of Christ’s glory results in ours, or else we progress from one stage of glory to another. The word here for changed is “transfigured,” meaning a change on the outside that comes from the inside.

Principle of Interpretation

Paul contrasted the Old and New Covenant in two different ways.

1. An Absolute Contrast

Let us take the number 1,000. Compared with zero, 1,000 is a large even number.

Sometimes Paul compares the Old Covenant and the New Covenant using such an absolute contrast. The Old Covenant, as warped and perverted by Judaistic legalists, represented zero. In contrast, the New Covenant represented 1,000 (see Gal. 4:21ff).

2. A Relative Contrast

Let us take the number 1,000 again. However, compare it with 1,000,000 this time. Both are large even numbers compared to zero. However, compared with each other, 1,000 is a small even number and 1,000,000 is a large even number.

Sometimes Paul compares the Old Covenant and the New Covenant using such a relative contrast. The Old Covenant, as properly understood as a revelation of grace through the types and symbols of the law, represents 1,000. In contrast, the New Covenant with its much fuller and clearer revelation of grace, represents 1,000,000. Just as both 1,000 and 1,000,000 are large even numbers, so both Old and New Covenants reveal grace. However, just as 1,000,000 greatly exceeds 1,000, so the New Covenant greatly exceeds the Old in its clarity, fullness, and efficacy. Just as 1,000,000 makes 1,000 look relatively small, so the New Covenant makes the Old Covenant look relatively ineffectual.

In this latter sense are we to understand 2 Corinthians 3:6ff. and also, “For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (John 1:17).

Great care must be taken to establish the difference between a relative or an absolute contrast when the Old Covenant is being compared with the New.

Notes

1. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960), 351.
2. Charles Hodge, Commentary on 2 Corinthians (London: J Nisbet & Co, 1872), 60.
3. W. W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary (Logos Library System, Electronic Edition).
4. Hodge, Commentary on 2 Corinthians, 64-65.
5. Ibid., 60.
6. Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible (Iowa: Word Bible Publishers).
7. W. W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary (Logos Library System, Electronic Edition).
8. Hodge, Commentary on 2 Corinthians, 69.
9. Ibid., 70-71.
10. Ibid., 73.