Albert Barnes Commentary 2 Corinthians 3

Introduction to Second Corinthians Chapter 3

This chapter is closely connected in its design with the previous one. Paul had said in that chapter (2 Corinthians 2:14) that he always had occasion to triumph in the success he had, and that God always blessed his labours. He had especially spoken, in the close of the previous chapter (2 Corinthians 2:17), of his sincerity as contrasted with the conduct of some who corrupted the word of God.

This might appear to some as if he designed to commend himself to them, or that he had said this for the purpose of securing their favour. It is probable, also, that the false teachers at Corinth had been introduced there by letters of recommendation, perhaps from Judea.

In reply to this, Paul intimates (2 Corinthians 3:1) that this was not his design. He further states (2 Corinthians 3:2) that he had no need of letters of recommendation to them, since (2 Corinthians 3:2–3) they were his commendatory epistle; they were themselves the best evidence of his zeal, fidelity, and success in his labours.

He could appeal to them as the best proof that he was qualified for the apostolic office. His success among them, he says (2 Corinthians 3:4), was a ground of his trusting in God, an evidence of his acceptance.

Yet, as if he should seem to rely on his own strength and to boast of what he had done, he says (2 Corinthians 3:5) that his success was not owing to any strength he had, or to any skill of his own, but entirely to the aid he had received from God. It was God, he says (2 Corinthians 3:6), who had qualified him to preach and had given him grace to be an able minister of the New Testament.

It is not improbable that the false teachers in Corinth, being of Jewish origin, had commended the laws and institutions of Moses as being of superior clearness, and even as excelling the gospel of Christ. Paul therefore takes occasion (2 Corinthians 3:7–11) to show that the laws and institutions of Moses were far inferior, in this respect, to the gospel.

Moses' ministration was one of death (2 Corinthians 3:7); though glorious, it was to be done away (2 Corinthians 3:7). The ministration of the Spirit was therefore to be presumed to be far more glorious (2 Corinthians 3:8). The one was a ministration to condemnation, the other of righteousness (2 Corinthians 3:9). The one had comparatively no glory, being so much surpassed by the other (2 Corinthians 3:10). The former was to be done away, while the latter was to remain, and was therefore far more glorious (2 Corinthians 3:11).

This statement of the important difference between the laws of Moses and the gospel is further illustrated by showing the effect that the institutions of Moses had on the Jews themselves (2 Corinthians 3:12–15). That effect was to blind them. Moses had put a veil over his face (2 Corinthians 3:13), and the effect had been that the nation was blinded in reading the Old Testament and had no just views of the true meaning of their own Scriptures (2 Corinthians 3:14–15).

Yet, Paul says that this veil should be taken away (2 Corinthians 3:16–18). It was the intention of God that it should be removed. When that people turns to the Lord, it will be taken away (2 Corinthians 3:16).

This was done where the Spirit of the Lord was (2 Corinthians 3:17). It was done, in fact, in regard to all true Christians (2 Corinthians 3:18). They were permitted to behold the glory of the Lord as in a mirror, and they were changed into the same manner. The same subject is continued in 2 Corinthians 4, where Paul illustrates the effect of this clear revelation of the gospel, as compared with the institutions of Moses, on the Christian ministry.

Do we begin again. (2 Corinthians 3:1). This is evidently designed to meet an objection. He had been speaking of his triumph in the ministry (2 Corinthians 2:14) and of his sincerity and honesty as contrasted with the conduct of many who corrupted the word of God (2 Corinthians 2:17). It might be objected that he was magnifying himself in these statements and designed to commend himself in this manner to the Corinthians. To this he replies in the following verses.

To commend ourselves? (2 Corinthians 3:1). To recommend ourselves; do we speak this in our own praise, in order to obtain your favour?

Or need we, as some others (2 Corinthians 3:1). This probably refers to some who had brought letters of recommendation to them from Judea. The false teachers at Corinth had been originally introduced there by commendatory letters from abroad. These were letters of introduction and were common among the Greeks, the Romans, and the Jews, as they are now. They were usually given to persons who were about to travel, as there were no inns, and as travellers were dependent on the hospitality of those among whom they travelled.

Of commendation from you? (2 Corinthians 3:1). To other churches. It is implied here by Paul that he sought no such letters, that he travelled without them, and that he depended on his zeal, self-denial, and success to make him known and to give him the affections of those to whom he ministered—a much better recommendation than mere introductory letters.

Such letters were, however, sometimes given by Christians and are by no means improper (Acts 18:27). Yet they do not appear to have been sought or used by the apostles generally. They depended on their miraculous endowments and on the attending grace of God to make them known,

You are our epistle. (Compare to 1 Corinthians 9:2). This is a most beautiful and happy turn given to the whole subject. The meaning is plain. It is that the conversion of the Corinthians, under the faithful labors of the apostle, was a better testimonial of his character and fidelity than any letters could be. To see the force of this, it must be remembered:

1. that Corinth was an exceedingly dissolute and abandoned place (see the Introduction to the first epistle);
2. that a large number of them had been converted, and a church organized;
3. that their conversion, and the organization of a church in such a city, were events that would be known abroad; and
4. that it had been accomplished entirely under the labor of Paul and his companions.

To their knowledge of him, therefore, and to his success there, he could confidently appeal as a testimonial of his character. The characteristics of this commendatory epistle he proceeds immediately to state. The general meaning is that they were the letter of recommendation which God had given to him, and that their conversion under his ministry was the public testimonial of his character, which all might see and read.

Written in our hearts. A few manuscripts and versions read thus: "your hearts;" and Doddridge has adopted this reading, and supposes that it means that the change produced not only in their external conduct, but in their inward temper, was so great, that all must see that it was an unanswerable attestation to his ministry.

But there is not sufficient authority for changing the text, nor is it necessary. The meaning is, probably, that this letter was, as it were, written on his heart. It was not merely that Paul had a tender affection for them, as Clarke supposes; nor was it that he regarded them as "a copy of the letter of recommendation from Christ written in his heart," according to the fanciful conceit of Macknight. Paul's idea seems to have been this: he is speaking of the testimonial which he had from God.

That testimonial consisted in the conversion of the Corinthians. This, he says, was written on his heart. It was not a cold letter of introduction, but it was such that, while it left him no room to doubt that God had sent him, it also affected his feelings and was engraved on his soul.

It was to him, therefore, far more valuable than any mere letter of commendation or of introduction could be. It was a direct testimonial from God to his own heart of his approbation, and of his having appointed him to the apostolic office. All the difficulty, therefore, which has been felt by commentators on this passage, may be obviated by supposing that Paul here speaks of this testimonial or epistle as addressed to himself, and as satisfactory to him. In the other characteristics which he enumerates, he speaks of it as fitted to be a letter commendatory of himself to others.

Known and read of all men. Corinth was a large, splendid, and dissipated city. Their conversion, therefore, would be widely known. Everyone would hear of it; and their reformation, their subsequent life under the instruction of Paul, and the attestation which God had given among them to his labors, was a sufficient testimonial to the world at large, that God had called him to the apostolic office.

Forasmuch as you are manifestly declared. You are made manifest as the epistle of Christ; or you, being made manifest, are the epistle. They had been made manifest to be such by their conversion. The meaning is, it is plain, or evident, that you are the epistle of Christ.

To be the epistle of Christ. That which Christ has sent to be our testimonial, he has given this letter of recommendation. He has converted you by our ministry, and that is the best evidence we can have that we have been sent by him, and that our labor is accepted by him. Your conversion is his work, and it is his public attestation to our fidelity in his cause.

Ministered by us. The idea here is that Christ had employed their ministry in accomplishing this. They were Christ's letter, but it had been prepared by the instrumentality of the apostles. It had not been prepared by him independently of their labors, but in connection with, and as the result of, those labors. Christ, in writing this epistle, so to speak, has used our aid, or employed us as scribes.

Written not with ink. Paul continues and varies the image concerning this "epistle." To make the testimony to his fidelity and success more striking and emphatic, he therefore says that it was not written as letters of introduction are, with ink—by traces drawn on a lifeless substance, and in lines that easily fade, or that may become easily illegible, or that can be read only by a few, or that may be soon destroyed.

But with the Spirit of the living God. This stands in strong contrast to letters written with ink. It is written by the Spirit of God moving on the heart and producing that variety of graces which constitute so striking and so beautiful an evidence of your conversion. If written by the Spirit of the living God, it was far more valuable, precious, and permanent than any record that could be made with ink. Every trace of the Spirit's influences on the heart was an undoubted proof that God had sent the apostles, and it was a proof which they would much more keenly and tenderly feel than they could any letter of recommendation written in ink.

Not in tablets of stone. It is generally admitted that Paul here refers to the evidences of the divine mission of Moses, which were given by the law engraved on tablets of stone (Compare 2 Corinthians 3:7). Probably those who were false teachers among the Corinthians were Jews and had insisted much on the divine origin and permanence of the Mosaic institutions.

The law had been engraved on stone by the hand of God himself and thus had the strongest proofs of divine origin and the divine attestation to its pure and holy nature. To this fact the friends of the law, and the advocates for the permanence of the Jewish institutions, would appeal.

Paul says, on the other hand, that the testimonials of divine favor through him were not on tablets of stone. They were frail and easily broken. There was no life in them (compare 2 Corinthians 3:6–7); and valuable and important as they were, yet they could not be compared with the testimonials which God had given to those who successfully preached the gospel.

But in fleshy tables of the heart. In truths engraved on the heart. This testimonial was of more value than an inscription on stone, because:

1. No hand but that of God could reach the heart and inscribe these truths there.
2. It would be attended with a life-giving and living influence. It was not a mere dead letter.
3. It would be permanent. Stones, even where laws were engraved by the finger of God, would crumble and decay, and the inscription made there would be destroyed. But not so with that which was made on the heart. It would live forever. It would abide in other worlds. It would send its influence into all the relations of life, into all future scenes in this world; and that influence would be seen and felt in the world that will never end.

By all these considerations, therefore, the testimonials which Paul had of divine approbation were more valuable than any mere letters of introduction or human commendation could have been, and more valuable even than the attestation which was given to the divine mission of Moses himself.

And such trust have we. We have such confidence that we are appointed by God, and that he accepts our work. We have such evidence in the success of our labors—such indisputable proof that God blesses us—that we have trust, or confidence, that we are sent by God and are acknowledged by him in our ministry. His confidence did not rest on letters of introduction from men, but on the evidence of the Divine Presence and the Divine acceptance of his work.

Through Christ. By the agency of Christ. Paul had no success which he did not trace to him; he had no joy of which he was not the source; he had no confidence, or trust in God, of which Christ was not the author; he had no hope of success in his ministry which did not depend on him.

To Godward. Toward God; in regard to God. pros ton Theon. Our confidence relates to God. It is confidence that he has appointed us and sent us out; and confidence that he will still continue to acknowledge and to bless us.

Not that we are sufficient of ourselves. This is evidently designed to guard against the appearance of boasting or self-confidence. He had spoken of his confidence, his triumph, his success, and his undoubted evidence that God had sent him. He says here that he did not mean to be understood as affirming that any of his success came from himself, or that he was able by his own strength to accomplish the great things that had been effected by his ministry. He well knew that he had no such self-sufficiency, and he would not insinuate in the slightest manner that he believed himself to be invested with any such power. See John 15:5.

To think any thing. Logisasthai ti. The word used here properly means to reason, think, or consider; and then to reckon, count to, or impute to anyone. It is the word commonly rendered "impute." See Romans 4:1 for a fuller explanation.

Robinson (Lexicon) renders it in this place, "To reason out, to think out, to find out by thinking." Doddridge renders it, "To reckon upon anything as from ourselves." Whitby renders it, "To reason;" as if the apostle had said, We are unable by any reasoning of our own to bring men to conversion.

Macknight gives a similar sense. Locke renders it, "Not as if I were sufficient of myself, to reckon upon anything as from myself;" and explains it to mean that Paul was not sufficient of himself, by any strength of natural parts, to attain the knowledge of the gospel truths which he preached.

The word may be rendered here to reckon, reason, think, etc.; but it should be confined to the immediate subject under consideration. It does not refer to thinking in general, or to the power of thought on any and all subjects—however true that may be in itself—but to preaching the gospel. The expression may be regarded as referring to the following points, which are immediately under discussion:

1. Paul did not feel that he was sufficient of himself to have reasoned or thought out the truths of the gospel. They were communicated by God.
2. He had no power by reasoning to convince or convert sinners. That was all of God.
3. He had no right to reckon on success by any strength of his own. All success was to be traced to God. It is, however, also true that all our powers of thinking and reasoning are from God, and that we have no ability to think clearly, to reason calmly, closely, and correctly, unless He presides over our minds and gives us clearness of thought.

How easy it is for God to disarrange all our faculties and produce insanity! How easy to allow our minds to become unsettled, bewildered, and distracted with a multitude of thoughts! How easy to cause everything to appear cloudy, dark, and misty! How easy to affect our bodies with weakness, languor, disease, and through them to destroy all power of close and consecutive thought!

No one who considers how many things the power of close thinking depends on can doubt that all our sufficiency in this is from God, and that we owe to Him every clear idea on subjects of common life and on scientific subjects, no less certainly than we do in the truths of religion. Compare the case of Bezalel and Aholiab in common arts (Exodus 31:1–6; Job 32:8).