Bulletin for Biblical Research (BBR) 2000
Bulletin for Biblical Research 10.1 (2000) 1-15 [© 2000 Institute for Biblical Research]
Did the Glory of Moses' Face Fade?
A Reexamination of katarge/w in
2 Corinthians 3:7-18
WILLIAM R. BAKER
SAINT LOUIS CHRISTIAN COLLEGE
The translation of katarge/w as "fade" in 2 Cor 3:7-18 has little justifica-
tion outside biblical literature or within it. Most scholars have abandoned
this translation as inaccurrate. Yet, it persists in modern Bible versions.
Examination of the lexical evidence finds no support for this translation
nor does reexamination of the Exod 34:19-24 context that the word is in-
tended to describe. Moses' face does not diminish in its glory; it is merely
blocked or "rendered ineffective" by the mask. Finally, examination of 2 Cor
3:7-18 reveals that a translation of "hinder "or "block" best accounts for
Paul's understanding of the Exodus situation within his own purposes.
Further, it is suggested that the use of te/loj by Paul in 2 Cor 3:13 may be
connected to his use of te/leioj in 1 Cor 13:8-12.
Key Words: 2 Cor 3:7-18, katarge/w, fade, Exod 34:19-34
With tongue firmly planted in cheek, Richard Hayes, in a recent article,
captures the frustrations of those who seek to unlock the mysteries of
2 Corinthians 3, saying:
Unfortunately, 2 Corinthians 3, though squeezed and prodded by gen-
erations of interpreters, has remained one of the more inscrutable
reflections of a man who had already gained the reputation among his
near-contemporaries for writing letters that were "hard to understand"
(2 Peter 3:16). It is hard to escape the impression that, to this day, when
2 Corinthians 3 is read a veil lies over our minds.1
Though certainly Hayes as well as others provide analysis and research
which helps lift the veil over this passage,2 this study contends that
1. Richard Hayes, "A Letter from Christ," in Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul
(New Haven: Yale University, 1989) 123.
2. A selection of helpful studies include: Thomas Provence, "'Who Is Sufficient for
These Things?' An Exegesis of 2 Corinthians ii 15-iii 18," NovT 24 (1982) 54-81; W. C.
van Unik," 'With Unveiled Face': An Exegesis of 2 Corinthians iii 12-18, NovT 6 (1964)
153-69; Scott Hafemann, "The Glory and Veil of Moses in 2 Cor 3:7-14: An Example
4 Bulletin for Biblical Research 10.1
something." There is a huge difference here that impacts the sense of
the word in 2 Corinthians and Paul in general.
Such passages as Gal 5:22; Eph 2:15; 2 Thess 2:8; and 2 Tim 1:10,
occasionally rendering katarge/w "destroy" or "abolish" in English
translations, do not demand such drastic meanings. In each case,
the translation "render ineffective" is perfectly satisfactory. Christ has
not extinguished the law; he has buffered in his very flesh its effect
of condemning us (Eph 2:15). Paul is not saying the offense of the
cross has been eliminated, only that it has been shielded from view
if he preaches circumcision (Gal 5:11). Likewise, Paul is not saying
specifically that the lawless one will be annihilated but that the
splendor of Christ's coming will completely overwhelm his impact
(2 Thess 2:8). Has Christ destroyed death, or hasn't he actually
blocked its effect on behalf of believers (2 Tim 1:10)?
The majority of Paul's 21 uses of katarge/w outside of 2 Corinthians
come in Romans (6 times) and 1 Corinthians (9 times). The general
meaning of "render ineffective" holds up in these passages as well. In
Romans, the lack of faith for some does not render ineffective God's
faithfulness with respect to others (3:3); nor does faith in believers
render law ineffective (3:31). On the contrary, the death of a woman's
husband does render the law of adultery ineffective should she choose
to remarry (7:2); just so have the effects of the law and sin been
buffered by a believer's own death through identification with Christ
in baptism (6:6; 7:6). Faith is rendered ineffective, valueless, if those
who live by law can be heirs of God (4:14).
In 1 Corinthians, God has chosen the "things that are not" to
render ineffective "the things that are" (1:28), his own wisdom to stop
the wisdom of the world in its tracks (2:6). Food and stomach no longer
control believers; food's domination over choices is rendered in-
effective (6:13). Prophecies, knowledge, the imperfect, and childish
ways are rendered ineffective when believers are overwhelmed by
the perfect, the full, face-to-face knowledge of God and of them-
selves (13:8, 10, 11). All dominion, authority, power, and even death
are ultimately rendered harmless under Christ's feet even as Christ
subjugates himself under God's authority (15:24, 26).11 What is present
in all these passages involving katarge/w is a reality or a situation
that, apart from the interference or introduction of a new reality or
situation, would persist in its effects. However, something else comes
into the picture that in some fashion blocks out, buffers, or over-
whelms the former force or reality. For Paul, this overpowering new
11. These passages certainly are the closest to speaking about annihilation, but even
these do not demand the sense of such utter destruction, especially when one recognizes
that Christ is also spoken of as being subjugated to God in these contexts.
BAKER: A Reexamination of katarge/w 5
force usually relates to Christ: his flesh, the cross, his splendor, his feet,
and perhaps even the perfect, as well as the believer's faith and
identification with Christ. Outside of Paul, this force can be anything,
unfruitful tree or enemies.
The lexical evidence for katarge/w as "render ineffective," as a
general meaning, is solid, fitting well into all Pauline and NT contexts.
The lexical evidence for "fade" is nonexistent. The idea of a gradual
diminishing of the former reality is never suggested by any context.
THE CONTEXT OF EXODUS 34:29-34
Although other OT passages may be informing Paul's thoughts in 2 Cor
3:7-18,12 no one disputes that Paul's use of katarge/w comments on
what happened to Moses when he came down the mountain the
second time with the Ten Commandments. Since a translation of
"fade" for katarge/w does not come from lexical inquiry, it must be
investigated whether such a translation is suggested by the narration
of this curious event in Exod 34:29-34. The word itself is not in the
LXX on this passage nor is any Hebrew word that might suggest it.
Rather, katarge/w is Paul's interpretation of the events.
Sometime following Moses' discovering the Israelites' creation of
the golden calf, his smashing of the original tablets containing the Ten
Commandments, and God's slaying 3,000 of the people in punishment
(Exodus 33), Exodus 34 narrates that Moses ventured up to the
mountain once again to receive freshly chiselled tablets from God.
This time when he returned, it indicates that he read out the Ten
Commandments with little incident. However, such incidence as it
was, attracts Paul's attention. The text of Exod 34:29-32 says that
upon approaching the people from the mountain, though Moses
himself was unaware of it, his face "shone" or "radiated" so brilliantly
that people "were afraid" to come too close to him and ran away.
After Moses coaxed back Aaron and other leaders and spoke with
them, all the Israelites came close enough to hear the commandments
read out.
Following this focal incident, Exod 34:33-34, says that Moses
put on "a veil" to cover his radiating face. It goes on to relate Moses'
regular routine with the veil.13 He would take it off when consulting
with the Lord in his tent and leave it off until he delivered God's
12. Particularly suggested are Jer 31:31-34; 38:32 and Ezek 11:20; 36:26, which
contain the theme of new covenant so important to Paul in this context. See Hayes, Echoes,
128-29; Stockhausen, Veil, 117; Hafemann, Moses, 119-48; Fitzmyer, "Glory," 635.
13. J. P. Hyatt, Exodus (New Century Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1971) 327; U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus (trans. Israel Abrahams;
Jerusalem: Magnes, 1951) 450.
6 Bulletin for Biblical Research 10.1
further commands to the people. After delivering the commands,
just as the first time, he would don the veil until such time as the
Lord would again visit him in his tent.
The mystery of what lay behind Moses' mask has spurred the
imagination and the investigation of scholars incessantly. Triggered
by the fact that the verb in the text, qrn, "shine," is a denominative
of the noun for "horn" (qeren) and in its Hiphil form is rendered "bring
forth horns" in Ps 69:32,14 it has been suggested that Moses actually
had horns coming out of his forehead.15 Mistranslation of this pas-
sage in the Latin Vulgate led to Michelangelo's portrayal of Moses
with horns.16 Another suggestion is that Moses had developed a
skin condition called keratosis which creates a rough layer of skin
or that he had developed blisters or callouses from his overexposure
to God.17 The idea of horns has also suggested to some that behind the
text description lies the more common reality in the ancient world of
a horned mask which Moses wore when he performed his priestly
function of reading out the law on God's behalf.18 The last of these
suggestions can be readily dismissed because the text does not say
anything about a mask. This winds up with Moses donning his face
covering precisely at the opposite times described in the text.19 It is
in fact when he is doing his priestly duty of meeting with God and
reading out the law to the people that he does not wear the covering.
The other suggestions involving Moses' horned face run counter to the
insistence in the text that Moses was not aware of his condition.
That Moses' face "shone" or "radiated" in some fashion seems
most conducive to the word used and the context. However, the
fact that the most common word for shine (’wr) was not used has
led to further speculation. One suggestion is that the language, at
least at the level of the text, though meaning "shine" but implicat-
ing "horned," would trigger a connection to the calf of Exodus 32,
14. R. W. L. Moberly, At the Mountain of God (JSOTSup 22; Sheffield: JSOT Press,
1983) 107, 210; Hyatt, Exodus, 326-27; NIDOTTE 4:957.
15. NIDOTTE 4.957.
16. Hyatt, Exodus, 326-27.
17. William Propp, "The Skin of Moses' Face: Transfigured or Disfigured?" CBQ 49
(1987) 375-86.
18. Martin Noth, Exodus (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962) 267; H. Gressmann,
Mose und seine Zeit (FRLANT 18; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1913) 246- 47;
Gerhard von Rad, Die Priesterschrift im Hexateuch (BWANT 13; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer,
1934).
19. Brevard Childs, The Book of Exodus (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1974)
609-10; Moberly, Mountain, 107; Menahem Haran, "The Shining of Moses' Face: A Case
Study in Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Iconography," in The Shelter of Elyon: Essays
on Ancient Palestinian Life and Literature (Fest. G. W. Ahlström; ed. W. Boyd Barrick and
John R. Spencer; JSOTSup 31; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984) 159-79, esp. 162-64.
BAKER: A Reexamination of katarge/w 7
symbol of Israelites' most dastardly sin.20 Yet, it must be noted that
nowhere in that passage is it ever said or implied that the calf they
built was horned.21 Another fairly common suggestion is that the
actual radiation coming from Moses' glow was spiked or at least
perceived as spiked in some way.22 This would seem the most likely
suggestion for the use of qrn in this text. Even at that, one wonders
how the veil would prevent the rays of light from his face from being
seen unless his veil was more like a hood covering his entire head.
This is possible since the meaning of masweh ("veil") is left fairly
open-ended.
It seems right to observe that whatever occurred to Moses' face it
had nothing to do with Moses himself but with his regular, personal
contact with God. Exod 33:11 actually says that even between the two
receptions of the Ten Commandments they met "face to face." Of
course, this cannot be taken literally, and the whole section this is in
seems out of place with its context.23 However, the very next section,
Exod 33:12-23, narrates the episode in which Moses requests to see
God's glory but is only allowed to see his "goodness" because no one
can see God's face and live. The idea that Moses will carry in his person
the effect of being in God's presence which the people of Israel will be
able to observe as a legitimation of Moses' credentials is very much on
the surface of this incident. Could it not be that what the people ob-
served in Moses' face when he comes down the mountain in Exodus
34 is this very effect?
What is God like that might cause such an effect on someone
who is exposed to him in the way Moses was? Besides Exod 33:12-23,
other OT passages depict God in association with brilliant light. Hab
3:4 compares his "splendor" to "sunrise," "rays" flashing from his
hand. Ezek 1:27-28 describes the glory of the Lord as "radiance,"
"brilliant light," "rainbow," "full of fire," "glowing metal," and his
throne as "sapphire." Ps 104:2 pictures him as wrapped up in a gar-
ment of light.24 Given this, it is not so surprising that Moses' over-
exposure to God's brilliance in Exodus 33 as well as his regular
communion with him described in Exodus 34 would leave a kind of
glowing imprint that distinguished him forever from all others.25
Neither should it be surprising that just as Moses could not look
20. Moberly, Mountain, 108.
21. J. I. Durham, Exodus (WBC; Dallas: Word, 1987) 467.
22. Ibid.; Cassuto, Exodus, 449.
23. Childs, Exodus, 590; Julias Morgenstern, "Moses with the Shining Face,"
HUCA 2 (1925) 10.
24. Haran, "Shining," 159.
25. Ibid.; Cassuto, Exodus, 449; C. E Keil and F. Delitzch, The Pentateuch, Trans.
James Martin (Grand Rapids: Eardmans, 1971) 2:245.
8 Bulletin for Biblical Research 10.1
directly upon the face of God without harm, so, in turn, Moses, who
bears in his countenance to a lesser extent that same quality, cannot
be looked upon by the Israelites for extended amounts of time with-
out damage.26
The abiding presence of God in his countenance no doubt pro-
vides Moses the kind of authority to speak for God that he needs
to maintain the people's respect, obedience, and attention, espe-
cially after the incident of the golden calf.27 From now on, in order
to avoid blindness the people would be physically forced to lower
their eyes and perhaps bend their heads as they submissively receive
God's laws, both the Ten Commandments for the second time and also
the other laws that God gradually imparted to them through Moses.
Unlike messengers for other gods, Moses not only speaks for God
but in his countenance people are brought into a measure of God's
presence.28
The uniqueness of Moses in this respect understandably fuels a
connection between Moses and Messianic expectations. Jews as well
as Samaritans viewed the prophecy of Deut 18:15-18 messianically.29
Jews continued in extrabiblical literature to treat Moses as God-like.30
In putting on the veil for his day-to-day activity, Moses also presents
a particularly conducive Christ-like figure for Christian typology
since Christ himself dons the veil of humanity over the glory of his
divinity.31 It is going too far, however, to say, as one interpreter does,
that behind Moses' veil lay the very face of Christ, which God did not
want the Israelites to see prematurely.32
What is behind the mask for Paul is no mystery. It is the glory
of the Lord on the face of Moses. While this same glory can be seen
in the face of Christ, as he says in 2 Cor 4:6, in 2 Cor 3:7-18 Paul con-
sistently and repeatedly uses the word "glory" (do/ca) to encompass
what he believes Moses' hooded face blocks with the word katarge/w.
Like all Jewish scholars of his day, he believed this glory of God on
Moses' face remained with him into death and beyond.33 How, indeed,
26. Moberly, Mountain, 108.
27. Durham, Exodus, 468; Childs, Exodus, 623; Dumbrell, "Exodus," 181; Moberly,
Mountain, 108; NIDOTTE 4.957; W. H. Grispen, Exodus (Bible Student's Commentary;
trans. Ed van der Maas; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982) 317.
28. Moberly, Mountain, 108; Terence Freitheim, Exodus (Interpretation; Louisville:
John Knox, 1991) 311.
29. J. Jeremias, "Moses," TDNT 4.859-61.
30. Wayne Meeks, The Prophet-King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology
(NovTSup 14; Leiden: Brill, 1967) 193-94; Morgenstern, "Moses," 24-27.
31. Childs, Exodus, 623.
32. Anthony Hanson, Jesus Christ in the Old Testament (London: SPCK, 1968) 25-34.
33. Hafemann, "Veil," 31-32; Furnish, 2 Corinthians, 227; Thrall, II Corinthians,
243-44; Martin, 2 Corinthians, 64.
BAKER: A Reexamination of katarge/w 9
could he or any Jew conceive of such a thing as the glory of God "fad-
ing"? As is so typical of Romans, he would have to say "mh/ ge/noito!"
It would be totally inconsistent with his understanding of God.
Despite assumptions by many who have been influenced by the
poor translation of 2 Corinthians 3, nothing in the Exodus context
even hints at the diminishing of the condition on Moses' face that
required covering.34 Nothing suggests that his face somehow renews
itself upon regular meetings with the Lord in his tent. Nothing sug-
gests that he was sinisterly keeping a secret from them.35 Rather, the
mask protected them from overexposure to the presence of the glory
of God, which was on his face continuously from his personal contact
with the presence of God in Exodus 33.
THE CONTEXT OF 2 CORINTHIANS 3:7-18
Despite our necessary preoccupation with the significance of Moses'
uncovered face in the previous section, it is important to recognize
that Paul spends no time whatever pondering that aspect of Exodus
34 in 2 Corinthians 3. His attention is drawn to the fact that Moses'
face was covered. That it was sometimes uncovered and that this
might be significant doesn't occupy his mind at all. In fact, if one
didn't know the Exodus passage well, he or she would likely conclude
from Paul's exegesis that Moses' face was covered all the time.
It is the veil, nothing else, that he believes shows the inferiority of
the ministry of Moses to his own, which is what he is trying to
defend. In his ministry of the new covenant, the glory of God is no
longer blocked off by something like a veil. Complete and utter ex-
posure to God is possible through the person of Jesus Christ.
In the context of 2 Cor 3:7-18, Paul wrestles with a seismic par-
adox, whether brought on by those who champion Moses over Paul
or by Paul's own quandary regarding the old and new covenant.36
How can what he represents in his ministry originate from the same
God as what devout Jews represent as coming from God through
Moses? How can God's giving of the "letter," the law, through Moses
be reconciled with his giving of the Spirit through Paul's ministry
34. Grispen, Exodus, 317.
35. Van Unnik, "Unveiled Face," 162; William J. Dalton, "Covenant" 91; and Hick-
ling ("Sequence," 390) deny the point as well.
36. Those who consider Paul's argument polemical include: Jerome Murphy -
O'Connor, "PNEUMATIKOI and Judaizers in 2 Cor 2:14-4:6," AusBR 34 (1986) 42-58;
Linda Belleville, "Paul's Polemic and Theology of the Spirit in Second Corinthians," CBQ
58 (1996) 281-304; D. Georgi, "The Opponents of Paul in 2 Corinthians" (trans. H. At-
tridge; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986) 258-82. Among those who question the validity
of drawing too much polemic from passages such as this is Hickling, "Sequence," 380-95.
10 Bulletin for Biblical Research 10.1
in Christ? How can Moses be an administrator of death while Paul
is a administrator of life (3:6) and freedom (3:17)? Moreover, how can
Paul reconcile the true quality of Moses' ministry shown by God's
apparent approval of it with God's greater approval of his own? How
can he defend the superiority of his ministry for God without defacing
and in effect destroying the high quality of Moses' ministry, thereby
undercutting his own?
Without much argumentation, he believes the veil over Moses'
face and its ultimate significance resolve this paradox. The mention
of the veil in Exod 34:29-34 allows Paul at one and the same time to
declare that nothing was or is defective about Moses himself or what
he represented in his relationship with God and also to declare his
own ministry—and thereby true Christian ministry in general—to
represent God properly yet be superior to Moses. When he introduces
the word katarge/w into his discussion, the only significance he draws
on is that it covers over the evidence of Moses' intimate relationship
with God himself ("glory"- do/ca). Paul consistently in his first three
uses of katarge/w constructs it in the passive voice (actually as a par-
ticiple). This indicates his recognition that, although it was the veil
that blocked the Israelites from viewing this reality, this was God's
doing. It evidenced God's will not to allow the Israelites, nor any
human after Moses, to have intimate, personal fellowship with him
until the full development of his plans were realized. When this took
place in Christ, the temporary blockade of his glory, initiated symbol-
ically with the veil over Moses' face, could be removed for those who
believe in him.
Hafemann has done more than anyone to remove the viability
of "fade" for katarge/w in 2 Cor 3:7-18 and to substantiate "render
ineffective" as superior. Within his research, he provides strong ar-
gumentation for the fact that Paul believed God did not just block
God's glory from Israel with the veil. He did more. He shielded Israel
from the intended result of God's glory, their judgment.37 Because
of Israel's sin, especially evidenced in the making of the golden calf,
being exposed to God's glory, even in its diminished residue on
Moses' face, would result in the annihilation of Israelites as they
stood. This inference is drawn from the apparent connection between
Paul's use of a)teni/zw ("fixate," "stare") in 2 Cor 3:7 and the reference
to the people's fear in Exod 34:30. The people could not fix their gaze
on Moses' face for fear of being destroyed. There is much to commend
this view. Moses does call them "stiff-necked" in Exod 32:9; 33:3, 5,
just as Paul describes them as "dense" (pwro/w) in 2 Cor 3:14. Yet, Exod
33:27-30 and 33:34-35 seem to indicate that the Israelites had already
37. Hafemann, "Glory," 40; idem, Paul, 280.
BAKER: A Reexamination of katarge/w 11
been punished for their sin with the calf by the judgment sword of
Moses and by a plague by the time the narration gets to Exodus 34.
Added to this is the fact that Exod 34:29-34 narrates that they did
look on Moses' face initially and regularly without condemnation and
without mention of condemnation.
If Hafemann's interpretation is correct, why are the Israelites
not destroyed at these times? In the explanation presented here, the
Israelites can look at Moses but they cannot gain intimate, personal
access to God in their looking because it is so brief and submissive
in its nature. They cannot see God face to face, as Christians in the
new covenant now can in Christ. There is not the freedom to enjoy
God's presence. True, the law that Moses brings does condemn man-
kind for sin. However, that is not what Paul talks about in relationship
to Moses' face being covered. Rather, it is God's glory, repeatedly men-
tion in 3:7 and 3:11.
In one of the most novel approaches to the dilemma posed by
katarge/w in 2 Cor 3:7-18, Stockhausen, depending on the work of
others,38 asserts that Paul indeed uses it in the sense of "abolish" or
"come to an end." However, she believes that because Paul consis-
tently uses katarge/w in the present tense, he is thinking of his own
day when the old covenant as represented in the person of Moses
has ceased to exist. However, to take this word in its 2 Corinthians
context as hermeneutically intended, as she says, rather than rooted
in the historical narration of Exodus 34, is to turn 3:7-18 inside out
with grammatically twisted justification.
To insist that the first participial use of katarge/w in 2 Cor 3:7
is adjectival in relation to th_n do/can tou= prosw/pou ("the glory of his
face") hardly bucks the tide of exegesis as she seems to imply; it is
basic Greek grammar. However, to suggest that a present tense
participle (which she insists is not adverbial in the first place) in
relationship to an aorist verb such as e)ntetupwme/nh ("brought death")
in 3:7 implies a "future reality" according to standard grammatical
authorities (citing Blass, Debrunner, Funk), is totally groundless.39 A
present tense participle only implies action coterminus with the time
period of the main verb, in this case aorist, or past.40 Grammatically,
despite her insistence, Paul must be using the present participles of
katarge/w to refer to the period of Moses.
Stockhausen's recommendation of "come to an end" for katarge/w
is also at odds with evidence presented earlier which questions
38. Stockhausen, Moses' Veil, 87, 119.
39. Hafemann (Paul, 299-300) does a thorough job of taking Stockhausen to task
for this grammatical error, upon which her entire exegesis rests.
40. Furnish (II Corinthians, 203) makes the same point.
12 Bulletin for Biblical Research 10.1
whether katarge/w can be justifiably associated with extinction or
annihilation of something. Her quick dismissal of Paul's use of te/loj
in 2 Cor 3:13 as "ambiguious" and therefore pointless to pursue also
leads to suspicion regarding her view.41 Nearly all other interpreters,
on the contrary, recognize te/loj as the key on which all else hinges
in understanding the significance of katarge/w and what Paul is try-
ing to get at in the passage as a whole.
While Belleville stands as one of the few scholars left who go out
on the limb to defend "fade" as the best translation for katarge/w in
2 Cor 3:7-18, at least she recognizes the significance of te/loj in 3:13
for defending her point of view.42 From her perspective, the word
te/loj, "end," which Paul can mean in terms of either termination or
goal, must be taken literally as "end." This implies that Moses' mask
was to prevent the Israelites from watching the glory on Moses' face
gradually fade out. She asserts that the ei0j to_ te/loj phrase of 3:13 is
matched by the a)po_ do/chj ei)j do/can phrase in 3:18, the first declaring
a decrease in glory and the second an increase in glory. She also ar-
gues that a translation of "abolish" for katarge/w in 3:13 pushes the
meaning of the word beyond its boundaries and that the passive
form of the participle in 3:13 unnecessarily introduces an outside
agent that does not fit with light as well as the idea of fading.
While not necessarily disagreeing that te/loj means "end" in 3:13,
Belleville's case for katarge/w meaning "fade" in connection with this
does not necessarily follow. First, "from glory to glory" in 3:18 need
not at all dictate a gradual increase in glory. It could just as easily
refer to a lesser glory or a "reflected glory," instantaneously becoming
a greater glory, or even the same glory being transferred from one
situation to another. Second, I agree about the inappropriateness of
"abolish" for katarge/w in 3:13, but the passive form simply maintains
consistency with Paul's two previous uses of the word in 3:7 and 3:10.
As in those cases, the passive conveys the result of Moses' placing the
mask over his face, obscuring what was on the other side. The mask
is hardly an "outside agent" to this context, as she says. It is central to
Paul's entire discussion. Introducing "light" into the picture, as she
does, seems more of an intrusion, since Paul does not introduce this
element into his discussion until 4:6 and then he does not talk about
Moses' face but human hearts.
Those who argue for te/loj as indicating "goal" in 2 Cor 3:13 do so
for some understandable reasons.43 First and foremost involves con-
sistency with Rom 10:4 in which Paul, using te/loj, states that Christ
41. Stockhausen, Moses' Veil, 127.
42. Belleville, Reflections, 200. Nearly all others focus their attention on this word
as well.
43. Hayes, Echoes, 137; Provence, "Sufficient," 75; Dumbrell, "Exodus," 187.
BAKER: A Reexamination of katarge/w 13
is the "goal" of the law, which is commonly understood to mean that
Christ does not terminate the law but rather fulfills its design. Second,
the face of Moses then stands for the old covenant, the letters carved
in stone, which God intends to be superceded by the new covenant
from its very beginning.
However, Furnish is right when he criticizes those who hold this
view of te/loj for not being able to explain adequately why God would
want the purpose of the old covenant kept from the Israelites or, for
that matter, why he would have desired to stop them from seeing in
some fashion Christ in the face of Moses.44 And Belleville is right when
she suggests that a)teni/zw does not lend itself well to the idea of un-
derstanding or comprehending a goal. Rather, it relates to fixing
one's stare on someone or something.45 Finally, Hafemann is right
when he insists that in 3:13 Paul's focus is still on Moses, his face,
and the veil and not on its significance for Paul and his Corinthian
audience.46 That shift does not occur until 3:14 when he replaces the
past tenses of his verbs with the present tense beginning with me/nei
("remains"). It is signalled also when he uses katarge/w as an indicative
verb after having used it as a participle all three other times.
In essence, Hafernann seems to strike at a more satisfactory read-
ing of te/loj when he first observes that it is intended to sum up "in
one word" what Paul described at length in 3:7, that it essentially
stands in for tou= prosw/pou au)tou= ("his face").47 He also perceives cor-
rectly that neither of the two extremes for interpreting te/loj accu-
rately reflects this text. As he says, "Moses is not keeping Israel from
seeing that the glory is fading, nor is he keeping Israel from seeing
that the Law really points to Christ as its goal."48 However, it does not
seem best to go along with Hafeman when he says that te/loj refers
to "'the outcome or result' of that which was being rendered inop-
erative, i.e., the death-dealing judgment of the glory of God upon his
'stiff-necked' people as manifested in the old covenant."49 This
seems to put an enormous amount of interpretive baggage on one
word. It also does not avoid the pitfalls of those who take te/loj as
"aim" which he criticized as moving prematurely into the old cov-
enant issues which do not begin until 3:14.
It seems to me that by introducing te/loj where previously he
had "the glory of Moses' face," Paul simply intends to give a slightly
different twist to what he had said earlier. His reference point is the
glory of God that was radiating from Moses' face. The "end" simply
44. Furnish, II Corinthians, 207.
45. Belleville, Reflections, 202.
46. Hafemann, "Glory," 41.
47. Ibid.
48. Ibid.
49. Ibid., 42.
14 Bulletin for Biblical Research 10.1
refers to what was on the other side of the mask, no more, no less.
It is the glory of God that remains on Moses' face as a result of his di-
rect contact with him. To this the Israelites and all others are denied
access until Christ appears.
Why Paul chooses this particular word teloj to augment his in-
terpretation may not be easily explained, but perhaps some benefit
can come from looking at 1 Corinthians 13. The highest concentrated
incidence of katarge/w other than 2 Corinthians 3 occurs in 1 Cor
13:8-12, where it appears four times. Also in that context is the key
use of a word related to te/loj, this being te/lioj, meaning "perfect"
or "complete." There, Paul tells the Corinthians the radical differences
for Christians between being in the state of perfection, most likely
referring to abiding in a complete relationship to God in eternity, and
being in their current, finite situation. Now, there is only partial
knowledge demonstrated in activities like speaking in tongues and
prophecies.50 This imperfect situation will one day be "rendered
ineffective" and believers will no longer see only a poor reflection but
rather "face to face."
In terms of 2 Corinthians 3, could it be that Paul believes what
believers will see is God and what they will reflect is his glory, even
as Moses did? Indeed, in 3:18 he speaks directly of the effect of the
removed veil for Christians being to "reflect the Lord's glory." This is
possible, as he says in 3:16-17, because in knowing Christ, the veil of
Moses symbolically blocking the Lord's glory from humanity has been
set aside. That which had rendered the glow of Moses' face ineffective
has now been rendered ineffective itself (3:14). Christ is the Spirit and
the Spirit is the Lord. Therefore, knowing Christ means basking in the
unhindered, full glory of God and to be in transition from exposure to
his glory in this life and in eternity, "from glory to glory," as he says
in 3:18.51 He will go on in 4:6 to speak of "the knowledge of the glory
of God" which believers have direct access to "in the face of Christ."
Paul also speaks of "freedom" (e)leuqeri/a) which results from re-
ceiving the Spirit of the Lord in 3:17. Couldn't he be viewing this free-
dom, not in the political or moral sense, so common in Greek literature,
but in the spiritual sense, freedom to come close to God, to live in his
50. Paul uses te/loj in the sense of "full" knowledge as opposed to partial knowl-
edge also in 2 Cor 1:14, albeit not in an eschatological sense but in terms of his hopes
for this letter.
51. A brush with eschatological implications, although clearer for te/leioj, is not
far-fetched for te/loj. Paul uses it eschatologically in 1 Cor 15:24 and 1 Thess 2:16. It
is also used eschatologically in Luke 21:4; Heb 6:8. It refers eschatologically to Christ
in Rev 21:6 and 22:13. An eschatological sense for te/loj is explored in Ekkehard
Stegemann, "Der Neue Bund im Alten: Zum Schriftvertaendnis des Paulus in II Kor
3," ThZ 42 (1986) 112.
BAKER: A Reexamination of katarge/w 15
glory without harm?52 Even Jews, Paul says, who have been shut off
from the full glory of the Lord since Moses donned the veil, will find
the freedom to gain full access to God when they come to belief in
Christ.
This, Paul says in 3:12, is the message he preaches "freely," or
"boldly" (parrhsi/a), since he is not encumbered by a veil as was
Moses. He preaches this message across the board which makes his
ministry, though based on the same glory of God as Moses', superior
to his. What was denied Israel by Moses' veil in Christ has been
opened wide to all people. A personal relationship with God himself
is now available to all. This is Paul's gospel.
CONCLUSION
This study has shown that the current English translation of "fade"
for katarge/w should be abandoned. It is not supported by lexical or
contextual evidence nor is it substantiated by argument. This study
has also shown that a general translation of "render ineffective" bears