03.15. Mirrored Glory and Transformed Life.

Mirrored Glory and Transformed Life.

2 Corinthians 3:18. In 2 Corinthians 3:1-18 the Apostle Paul gives a wonderful contrast between the Old and New Covenants. That which came through Moses was with glory, but was far surpassed by the inure glorious New Covenant which came through Jesus Christ. The former was a ministration of death and condemnation, and passed away. The latter is a ministration of the Spirit and of righteousness, and so remaineth. In extremely interesting fashion the apostle refers to an experience of Moses as an illustration of the transitoriness of the Old Covenant. When Moses went up to Mt. Sinai to receive from God the law which was graven on stones, the exceeding glory of Jehovah was reflected on his face, so that when Aaron and the children of Israel saw the brightness, they were afraid to come nigh him. Moses put a veil on his face, the result being, according to Paul, that "the children of Israel should not look stedfastly on the end of that which was passing away." To some readers this comment of the apostle seems to be inconsistent with the narrative in Exodus; for the common translation of Exodus 34:33 says that "till" Moses bad done speaking with the people he put a veil on his face. The better translation of the Revised Version, however ("when Moses had done speaking with them, he put a veil upon his face"), is quite in harmony with Paul’s comment. The effect of the veil was to conceal the fading of the brightness. The apostle treats the evanescent glory of Moses’ face as symbolical of the transitoriness of the law of which he was the representative.

Considering the hardness of the hearts of his Jewish brethren and their rejection of the Christ, Paul goes on to refer to a veil (not on the face, but on the heart) which kept them from seeing, the glory of Christ--a veil, however, which would at once he taken away if a man turned to the Lord, just as the veil of Moses was removed when he turned from the people and went in before Jehovah to speak to him.

"Beholding" or "reflecting."

It is with one verse in Paul’s great chapter that we now deal. In this the apostle contrasts Christians with Moses:

"But we all, with unveiled face reflecting as a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit" (2 Corinthians 3:18. R.V.). The Common Version has "beholding as in a glass" instead of "reflecting as a mirror," and it is interesting to note that the American Standard Revised Version returns to this view, with a translation as follows:

"But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit."

Here are two different meanings attached to the verb "katoptrizomai," which is used in this place alone in the New Testament. There seems to be no difference of opinion among scholars as to two things, first that the verb in the active voice means "to show in a mirror" or "to cause to be reflected"; secondly, that in the middle voice, (which is used in 2 Corinthians 3:18) the ordinary meaning is "to look at or behold oneself in a mirror." But this meaning of "beholding oneself in a mirror" clearly does not suit the context, and so other meanings have been sought, and there are two possible renderings. One is that which appears in the Common Version, American Standard Revised Version, and margin of the English Revised Version--"beholding as in a mirror." It is contended that "it is in accordance with analogy to say that if the active means ’to show in a mirror’ the middle means ’to get shown in a mirror’ or ’to behold in a mirror."’ Considering the array of scholars on this side, it seems impossible to condemn the rendering. Stanley objects that the context is against it. "’Katoptrizomenoi,"’ he thinks, "cannot be used of ’beholding’ simply, because in that case the apostle must have used the word ’atenizo,’ as already twice before, in 2 Corinthians 3:7, 2 Corinthians 3:13." Stanley strongly argues for the reading "reflecting as in a mirror," and seeks to answer the objection that there is no actual instance of the sense of reflecting, by saying that "the fact that a Greek writer like Chrysostom understood it here in that sense, shows that there was in his time nothing in the usage of the word to make it impossible. And this sense is undoubtedly most agreeable to the context."

We cannot definitely decide between the two translations, and it must be allowed that excellent sense can be obtained from each. We do behold in the mirror of the Gospel the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ, and it is true that as we contemplate him, the beauty of his earthly life, the moral grandeur of his character, and also the glories of his ascension and coronation, we are influenced, changed, transformed into the same image. For Paul Christ was emphatically "the Lord of glory" (1 Corinthians 2:8); they who contemplate him in his "glory" are in a sense transfigured. As one has said, "The contemplation of the image of the Son of God acts upon our moral and spiritual natures as the presence of God did upon the face of Moses. It causes us to shine forth with some of his glory. The humblest Christian who looks constantly to Christ as his Redeemer and Exemplar and Source of spiritual life, reflects in his own life something of the glory of Christ; and if he faithfully continues to do this he reflects it more and more, and goes from strength to strength."

If with the Revision we read "reflecting as a mirror," we put in the forefront the result of our contemplation of the glories of Christ.

Others will see that we have been with Jesus and learnt of him. The influence of our lives will be felt by them; in a sense they will see in our faces, as did the Israelites on the face of Moses, the reflected glory of the Lord.

Attempts have been made to combine the two renderings. Stanley gives one, though he admits it is far-fetched: "It is just possible that both meanings might be combined by an allusion to the bright metal mirrors then in use, so as to render it ’beholding the glory, as we look at a light in a bright mirror of brass or silver, which, as we look, is reflected back on our faces." Rotherham translates: "With unveiled faces receiving and reflecting the glory of tine Lord." It is most unlikely that the two ideas can rightly be combined as a translation, but it is obvious to any one who thinks that both are harmonious with our Christian experience. The careful reader will note the significant contrasts which Paul makes between the experience of Moses and that of Christians. He says "We all with unveiled face." "The contrast is between the one Hebrew leader and the whole body of Christians. Then only one was illuminated, and his illumination was hidden from all the rest; now all are illuminated, and there is no concealment." There is no veil-no need of concealment; "there is no fear, and there is nothing to hide." Much more important, in Christian experience the transformation is not temporary. The fading of the brightness of Moses’ face was symbolical of the transitoriness of the Old Covenant. But, on the contrary, "we all . . . are transformed . . . from glory to glory." There is both a progression and a completeness and permanence in our transformation. It is also "from glory to glory" in that "the change proceeds from the moral splendour reflected in the Gospel, and results in splendour imparted to us."

"Even as from the Lord the Spirit." This last phrase of our text contains one of the most ambiguous of all New Testament constructions. The Greek words are "kathaper apo kuriou pneumatos." Dr. Plummer says: "It is impossible to decide with certainty what the words mean. Every possible translation has been advocated. Are the genitives in apposition? or is one dependent on the other? If the latter, which of the two is dependent? Is the definite or the indefinite article to be supplied in each case? If the definite with one and the indefinite with the other, which is to have which? May the article, whether definite or indefinite, be in either case omitted in English? May ’kuriou’ be an adjective?" Here are the possibilities. Who dare confidently decide between them? The translation of the Common Version, "even as by the spirit of the Lord," is quite possible, but does not commend itself to us. Why in that verse should Spirit once be printed with the capital "S" to show that the Holy Spirit is meant, and once in 2 Corinthians 3:17 and again in 2 Corinthians 3:18 be printed with the small "s"? It seems much better to consider the reference throughout to be to the Holy Spirit. It is the opposite extreme to translate "from a sovereign Spirit" (i. e., "a Spirit who exercises lordship) making ’kuriou’ an adjective." Rotherham comes near to this thought, though he treats "kuriou" as a substantive, when he translates "as from a Spirit that is Lord." This is practically the reading of the R.V. margin, "the Spirit which is the Lord." That Father, Son and Holy Spirit are divine persons is undoubtedly true, and there is nothing curious or difficult about calling the Spirit Lord. Dr. Agar Beet renders: "As from the Lord of the Spirit," which again is quite legitimate, but does not suit the statement of 2 Corinthians 3:17 any more than Rotherham’s translation does. Paul in 2 Corinthians 3:17 says, "The Lord is the Spirit"; and probably the true rendering of 2 Corinthians 3:18 is that of both the English and American Revised Versions, "even as from the Lord the Spirit."

There are those who have stumbled at the apparent practical identity of the "Lord" and the "Spirit" in this chapter, and especially in 2 Corinthians 3:17, where there is little difficulty in translation. As Dr. Beet points out, "To turn to the Lord,’ i. e., to receive Jesus as Lord, is to receive the Holy Spirit as the animating principle of our lives. By receiving the one we receive the other." Receiving the Lord and the Spirit, we are "renewed unto knowledge after the image" of God. "There is no transforming power so effectual as Spirit, and in this case it is the Lord Christ himself who is the transforming power. Spiritual agency is here at its highest. The most wonderful changes are not only possible but natural, when such a cause is operating."