Corpus-Paul

["Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>]

Dear Alexander,
    You write:

In 2 Cor 3, did Paul's midrash on Exodus 34 "have the original context in
mind" when he specified that the purpose of Moses' veil was deception, so
that the people of Israel would not perceive the Torah's glory was
temporal? (note the purpose clause in 3:13). The Exodus 34 passage suggests
no such thing, and more consistently a rabbinic tradition claimed that the
glory remained on Moses' face to the end of his life.

I believe that Paul did have the original context in mind, but he may have
emphasized something that Exodus 34 does not. While rabbinic tradition
could be correct, it seems that Paul also could be correct. The glory that
was on Moses' face after being in the Lord's presence may have faded after
a time. Otherwise Moses would have had to wear a veil for the rest of his
life.

Paul may simply use the idea, apparently understood in his day, that the
glory on Moses' face eventually disappeared (2 Cor 3:7) after each occasion
in the Lord's presence. So the purpose clause in 3:13 might give the exact
reason for wearing the veil: that the sons of Israel might not look on the
glory. But Paul may here add the commonly understood fact that this was a
temporary glory.

Thus 3:13 may fit in with the fact given in 3:7, that the people were
unable to look at Moses' face because of the glory on it. They were unable
to look because of fear (Exod 34:30). Their fear can suggest that the glory
in the Law was a glory relating to condemnation, and indeed 2 Cor 3:9 calls
the Law a ministry of condemnation.

So Paul may relate the fear associated with the glory on Moses' face to the
idea of the condemnation in the Law. In turn, he may relate the transitory
nature of the glory on Moses' face to the transitory nature of the Law.

                                        Sincerely,
                                        Harold Holmyard