The interpretation timeline
2 Corinthians 3:7 Douay-Rheims

Now if the ministration of death, engraven with letters upon stones, was glorious; so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses, for the glory of his countenance, which is made void:

A.D. 220 – 1871 7 witnesses

Patristic

before A.D. 750
220
A.D.
Tertullian Patristic
c. A.D. 150–220
“He alludes to Moses' veil, covered with which "his face could not be stedfastly seen by the children of Israel." Since he did this to maintain the superiority of the glory of the New Testament, which is permanent in its glory, over that of the Old, "which was to be done away," this fact gives support to my belief which exalts the Gospel above the law and you must look well to it that it does not even more than this. Since he did this to maintain the superiority of the glory of the New Testament, which is permanent in its glory, over that of the Old, "which was to be done away," this fact gives support to my belief which exalts the Gospel above the law and you must look well to it that it does not even more than this.”
Source
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“He said that the tables of Moses were of stone, as [also] they were written with letters; and that these were of flesh, I mean the hearts of the Apostles, and had been written on by the Spirit; and that the letter indeed killeth, but the Spirit giveth life. There was yet wanting to this comparison the addition of a further and not trifling particular, that of the glory of Moses; such as in the case of the New Covenant none saw with the eyes of the body. And even for this cause it appeared a great thing in that the glory was perceived by the senses; (for it was seen by the bodily eyes, even though it might not be approached;) but that of the New Covenant is perceived by the understanding. For to the weaker sort the apprehension of such a superiority is not clear; but the other did more take them, and turn them unto itself. Having then fallen upon this comparison and being set upon showing the superiority [in question], which yet was exceedingly difficult because of the dulness of the hearers; see what he does, and with what method he proceeds in it, first by arguments placing the difference before them, and constructing these out of what he had said before. For if that ministration were of death, but this of life, doubtless, saith he, the latter glory is also greater than the former. For since he could not exhibit it to the bodily eyes, by this logical inference he established its superiority, saying, "But if the ministration of death came with glory, how shall not rather the ministration of the Spirit be with glory?" Now by "ministration of death" he means the Law. And mark too how great the caution he uses in the comparison so as to give no handle to the heretics; for he said not, 'which causeth death,' but, "the ministration of death;" for it ministereth unto, but was not the parent of, death; for that which caused death was sin; but [the Law] brought in the punishment, and showed the sin, not caused it. For it more distinctly revealed the evil and punished it: it did not impel unto the evil: and it ministered not to the existence of sin or death, but to the suffering of retribution by the sinner. So that in this way it was even destructive of sin. For that which showeth it to be so fearful, it is obvious, maketh it also to be avoided. As then he that taketh the sword in his hands and cutteth off the condemned, ministers to the judge that passeth sentence, and it is not he that is his destruction, although he cutteth him off; nay, nor yet is it he who passeth sentence and condemneth, but the wickedness of him that is punished; so truly here also it is not that destroyeth, but sin. This did both destroy and condemn, but that by punishing undermined its strength, by the fear of the punishment holding it back. But he was not content with this consideration only in order to establish the superiority [in question]; but he addeth yet another, saying, "written, and engraven on stones." See how he again cuts at the root of the Jewish arrogancy. For the Law was nothing else but letters: a certain succor was not found leaping forth from out the letters and inspiring them that combat, as is the case in Baptism; but pillars and writings bearing death to those who transgress the letters. Seest thou how in correcting the Jewish contentiousness, by his very expressions even he lessens its authority, speaking of stone and letters and a ministration of death, and adding that it was engraven? For hereby he declareth nothing else than this, that the Law was fixed in one place; not, as the Spirit, was present everywhere, breathing great might into all; or that the letters breathe much threatening, and threatening too which can not be effaced but remaineth for ever, as being engraved in stone. Then even whilst seeming to praise the old things, he again mixeth up accusation of the Jews. For having said, "written and engraven in stones, came with glory," he added, "so that the children of Israel could not look steadfastly upon the face of Moses;" which was a mark of their great weakness and grovelling spirit. And again he doth not say, 'for the glory of the tables,' but, "for the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away;" for he showeth that he who beareth them is made glorious, and not they. For he said not, 'because they could not look steadfastly upon the tables,' but, "the face of Moses;" and again, not, 'for the glory of the tables,' but, "for the glory of his face." Then after he had extolled it, see how again he lowers it, saying, "which was passing away." Not however that this is in accusation, but in diminution; for he did not say, 'which was corrupt, which was evil,' but, 'which ceaseth and hath an end.' "How shall not rather the ministration of the Spirit be with glory?" for henceforth with confidence he extolleth the things of the New [Covenant] as indisputable. And observe what he doth. He opposed 'stone' to 'heart,' and 'letter' to 'spirit.' Then having shown the results of each, he doth not set down the results of each; but having set down the work of the latter, namely, death and condemnation, he setteth not down that of the spirit, namely, life and righteousness; but the Spirit Itself; which added greatness to the argument. For the New Covenant not only gave life, but supplied also 'The Spirit' Which giveth the life, a far greater thing than the life. Wherefore he said, "the ministration of the Spirit."”
Source

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1272
A.D.
Thomas Aquinas Catholic
1225–1274
“Having commended the ministry of the new testament, here he consequently commends its ministers. And first he sets down two things which correspond to the words stated before. For he had premised the gift received from God, when he said: our sufficiency, etc.; and the confidence conceived from the gift, when he said: such confidence, etc. First, therefore, he determines those things which pertain to the gift received; second, those which pertain to the confidence conceived, there: having therefore such, etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he shows the gift received from God, namely the ministry of the new testament; second he describes the new testament, there: not of the letter, but of the spirit; third, from the dignity of the new testament he shows the dignity of its ministers, there: if the ministration, etc. He says therefore: I say that our sufficiency is from God, who also made us fit ministers of the new testament, Is. 61:6: ministers of our God, it shall be said to you. And in this we hold the place of the Angels. Ps. 103:4: who makes his Angels, etc. But he not only made us ministers, but fit ones. For God gives to each thing those things by which it can attain the perfection of its nature. Hence, because God appointed the ministers of the new testament, he also gave them fitness for exercising this office, unless there be an impediment on the part of those receiving it. Above 2:16: and for these things who is so fit, namely as the apostles instituted by God? But what this new testament is, he describes, adding: not of the letter, etc. And he describes it as to two things, namely as to that in which it consists, and as to the cause on account of which it was given, there: for the letter kills, etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the apostle speaks profoundly. For it is said Jer. 31:31 ff.: I will make with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new covenant, not according to the pact which I made with your fathers. And afterward: I will give my law in their inward parts, and I will write it upon their heart, etc. The old testament, therefore, is written in a book, and afterward by the sprinkling of blood, as is said Heb. 9:19: he took blood and sprinkled the book, etc., saying: this is the blood, etc. And thus it is clear that the old law is the testament of the letter. But the new testament is the testament of the Holy Spirit, by whom the charity of God is poured forth in our hearts, as is said Rom. 5:5. And thus, while the Holy Spirit works in us charity, which is the fullness of the law, it is the new testament — not of the letter, that is, to be written by the letter, but of the spirit, that is, by the spirit which gives life. Rom. 8:2: the law of the spirit of life, that is, of the life-giving spirit. But the cause why the new testament was given through the spirit is added, because the letter kills occasionally. For the letter of the law gives only the knowledge of sin. Rom. 3:20: but through the law is the knowledge of sin. But from this, that I know sin, only two things follow. For the law, while it is known through it, does not repress concupiscence, but rather occasionally increases it, inasmuch as concupiscence is carried more fervently toward the forbidden thing. Hence such knowledge, the cause of concupiscence not yet being destroyed, kills; and from this it also adds transgression. For it is more grave to sin against the written law and the natural law together than against the natural law alone. Rom. 7:8: sin, the occasion being taken, not given, etc. But although it kills occasionally, inasmuch namely as it increases concupiscence and adds transgression, nevertheless the old law is not evil, because at least it forbids evils. It is nevertheless imperfect, inasmuch as it does not remove the cause. The law, therefore, without the spirit interiorly imprinting the law in the heart, is an occasion of death. And therefore it was necessary to give the law of the spirit, which, working charity in the heart, gives life. Jn. 6:64: it is the spirit that gives life. Consequently, from these things he shows the dignity of his ministry. And concerning this he does two things. First he shows that the ministry of the new testament is preferred to the ministry of the old testament; second, that it is not only preferred, but that the ministry of the old testament has, as it were, nothing of glory in comparison to the new, there: for neither was that glorified, etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows that the ministry of the new testament is preferred to the old; second he assigns the reason for this, there: for if the ministration, etc. Concerning the first it must be known that the apostle argues from that which is found in Exodus 24, where our text has it that Moses had a horned face, so that they were not able, etc. Another text has "a shining face," which is better said. For it is not to be understood that he had horns literally, as some paint him; but he is called horned on account of the rays, which seemed to be, as it were, certain horns. He argues from this thus. And first through one similitude, and it is an argument from the lesser. For it is clear that if something which is lesser has something of glory, much more does that which is greater. But the old testament is lesser than the new; since therefore that was in glory, so that they were not able, etc., it seems that much more is the new in glory. But that the old testament is lesser than the new he proves in three ways. First as to the effect, because that is the testament of death, this of life, as has been said. And as to this he says that if the ministration of death, that is, the old, which is the occasion of death. And this corresponds to that where it is said: the letter kills, etc. Second as to the manner of its delivery, because the old was delivered in letters on tablets of stone, but the new was impressed by the spirit on fleshly hearts. And this he hints at, when he says formed in letters, that is, perfectly formed, in stones, that is, in tablets of stone. And this corresponds to that where it is said: not of the letter, but of the spirit, etc. Third as to perfection, because the glory of the old testament is without confidence, because the law brought no one to perfection. But in the new there is glory with hope of a better glory, namely an everlasting one. Is. 51:6: my salvation shall be forever. And this he hints at, when he says which is done away, Gal. 5:2: for if you be circumcised, Christ nothing, etc. The conclusion is set down when he says how shall not rather, which is plain. But he assigns the reason for these things consequently, when he says for if the ministration, etc. And his reason is this: glory is owed more to justice than to damnation, but the ministry of the new testament is a ministry of justice, because it justifies interiorly by giving life. But the ministry of the old testament is, occasionally, a ministry of damnation. Above, in the same place: the letter kills, but the spirit gives life. Since therefore the ministration of damnation, that is, the ministration of the old testament, which is occasionally the cause of damnation, as has been said, is in glory, which appeared in the face of Moses, it is clear that much more does it abound in glory, that is, gives abundant glory to its ministers, the ministry of justice, that is, of the new testament, through which the spirit is given, through whom is justice and the consummation of the virtues. Prov. 3:35: the wise shall possess glory. Questions are wont to be raised in this place about the comparison of Moses and Paul, but, if the words of the apostle are rightly considered, they are not necessary, because here the comparison is not made of person to person, but of ministry to ministry. But because the pseudo-apostles could say that although the ministry of the new testament is greater than the ministry of the old testament, nevertheless it is not much greater, and therefore it is good that we attend to that ministry and to this one — which they also were doing, because they observed the legal precepts together with the Gospel at the same time. Therefore here consequently the apostle disproves this, when he says for neither was that glorified, etc. And concerning this he does two things. For first he shows that the ministry of the new testament exceeds the ministry of the old without any comparison; second he assigns the cause of this, there: for if that which is done away, etc. He says therefore: I said that the ministry of justice abounds in glory, and to such an extent that the glory of the old ministry is not to be called glory, because neither was that glorified, etc.: which is explained in two ways. In the first way thus: for neither, etc., that is, that glory is nothing in comparison to this one of the new testament, because that glory was not conferred on all the ministers, but on Moses alone, and it did not shine forth in the whole Moses, but in part, that is, in the face only, particularly. And therefore neither was it glorified, that is, nor ought it to be glorified, on account of the excelling glory, that is, in comparison with the excelling glory of the new testament, which abounds in grace, so that men, purified through it, might be able to see not the glory of man, but of God. In the second way, so that it be punctuated thus: neither was that glorified which shone forth; as if he were to say: for in this part, that is, in respect of this particular nature, we who are servants — it was not glorified, that is, that which shone forth in the old testament was not glorious; and this on account of the excelling glory which is in the new, because that is the glory of God the Father. But he assigns the cause of this consequently, when he says for if that which is done away, etc. And his reason is this: that which is given so that it may pass away is nothing in respect to that which is given so that it may always remain. If therefore the old testament, which is done away, is taken away — 1 Cor. 13:10: when that which is perfect has come, that which is in part shall be done away, etc. For through the glory of Moses it was ministered, at least through a particular glory. It is clear that the new testament remains, because it is begun here, and is perfected in the homeland. Lk. 21:33: heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. It will be much more in eternal glory, in which it will be perfected. It will be, I say, for us, who are its ministers.”

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“But if the ministration of death,.... The apostle having observed the difference between the law and the Gospel, the one being a killing letter, the other a quickening spirit, enlarges upon it, and more, fully explains it; and proceeds to take notice of other things in which they differ; and to show the superior glory and excellency of the one to the other; for that by "the ministration of death", he means the law, as delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai, is clear from its being said to be written and engraven in stones; as that was by the finger of God himself: rightly does the apostle say, that it was both "written" and "engraven"; for the two tables of the law are expressly said to be written with the finger of God, Exo 31:18 meaning either the Spirit of God, who is sometimes so called, Luk 11:20 compared with Mat 12:28 or the power of God, which at once caused this writing to exist; and it is in so many words affirmed, that "the writing" was "the writing of God"; and not of man, nor of any creature, no not of an angel, Exo 32:16 yea, even the two tables which were hewn out by Moses, after the first were broken, were written upon by the Lord himself, and not Moses, Exo 34:1. So that as the work of the tables was the work of God, and wonderfully made, the form of the letters, as Abarbinel (x) observes, were miraculously made by him; for this law was, , "in letters", as the apostle here says; and as it was written in the Hebrew language, very likely it was in the same form of letters now in use with the Jews; though some have thought that the Samaritan letters are the original ones: moreover, the law was not only written, but "engraved"; for so it is said, that the writing was graven upon the tables, Exo 32:16 and though the word so rendered is no where else used but there, it is rightly rendered graven, as appears by the apostle in this place; and which may lie confirmed by the Targumist on that, who renders it by "engraven"; and by the Septuagint which signifies the same; and so in the book of Zohar (y), the letters are said to be "engraven" on the tables: and that the tables were tables of stone, it is certain; they are often so called, Exo 24:12 wherefore the apostle very properly says, that the law was engraven "in stones"; but what stones these tables were made of cannot be said; the Jews, who affect to know everything, will have them to be precious stones, but what they were they are not agreed in; for though they generally say (z) they were made of the sapphire stone, and sometimes say (a) they were hewed out of the sapphire of the glorious throne of God; yet at other times they call them marble tables (b); and Aben Ezra (c) was of opinion, that the tables which Moses hewed were not of any precious stone, for he asks where should a precious stone of such size be found? though others pretend to say (d), that Moses in a miraculous manner was shown a sapphire quarry in the midst of his tent, out of which he cut and hewed the stones; but very likely they were common ones; however, certain it is, that the tables of stone, as written and engraven by the Lord himself, were made, as the apostle here says, "in glory", ; and so Jarchi on Exo 32:16 "and the tables were the work of God", says, this is to be understood literally "and in" or "for his glory"; or by his glorious power he made them: now this law, though thus written and engraven, and glorious, it was "the ministration of death"; and is so called, because it threatened and punished the transgressors of it with a corporeal death; they that sinned against it died without mercy upon proper evidence and witnesses; every precept of it had this penalty annexed to it, in ease of disobedience; as the having any other goals but one, making of graven images, taking the name of God in vain, the violation of the sabbath, dishonouring of parents, murder, adultery, theft, and covetousness; instances there are of each of these being punishable by this law with a bodily death: and besides, it is the ministration of eternal death, the wages of sin the transgression of the law; which is that wrath of God, a sense of which it is said to work; the curse it threatens with and the second death or lake of fire it casts into: and may be said to be the "ministration" of it; as it shows persons they are deserving of it, pronounces the sentence of it on them, and will execute it upon them, if grace prevent not; now though it was the ministration of death, yet it was glorious. There were many things which made it so; but what the apostle here particularly takes notice of is the glory that was upon the face of Moses, when he received it and brought it from the Lord, which was very great; so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses, for the glory of his countenance, which glory was to be done away. The history of this may be read in Exo 34:29 it was a real visible glory that was upon the skin of his face, so that it shone again; it is said, "the skin of his face shone"; and this shining of his face the apostle very properly calls "the glory of his countenance": agreeably to the Septuagint version, which renders it, "the appearance of the skin, or colour of his face, was glorified"; and still nearer to the paraphrase of Onkelos, which is, "the splendour of the glory of his countenance was great"; and to the Targum of Jonathan, which also assigns the reason of it, and which seems to be the true one, "the splendour of the form of his countenance was glorious, because of the splendour of the glory of the majesty of God, at the time he talked with him". The Vulgate Latin version has led many wrong, to paint Moses with two horns, rendering it, "his face was horned", the Hebrew word having the signification of an horn in its derivative; because glory darted from him like horns, as rays of light do from the sun; see Hab 3:4 and this brightness and glory were so very great, and so dazzling, that Aaron and the people of Israel were afraid to come nigh; which Jarchi, a Jewish writer, imputed to their sin, and shame, and fear, having worshipped the calf; but our apostle ascribes it to the lustre of his countenance, which was such that they could not steadfastly look upon it; they saw it indeed, as it is said in Exo 34:35 yet they could not look wistly at it, nor bear the splendour of it; though this was only a glory, which was to continue but a while; according to the opinion of Ambrose (e), this glory continued on Moses's countenance as long as he lived; but be it so, it at last was done away: now this glory was put there to bear a testimony to the divine authority of the law, that it came from God, and was to be received at the hands of Moses, with awful reverence as from God, and to make them afraid of violating a law which came with such majesty and glory; and also to command awe and respect from the Israelites to Moses, whom they were inclined at every turn to treat with contempt, and to let them see that he had communion with God, which this was the effect of: now this was a circumstance which rendered the law glorious, and was expressive of a real glory in it; which, though as this on Moses's face, "was to be done away"; wherefore the apostle argues; (x) In loc. (y) In Exod. fol. 35. 1. (z) Zohar ib. Targum Jon. in Dent. xxxiv. 12. (a) Targum in Cant. 1. 11. Targum Jon. in Exod. xxxi. 18. (b) Targum Jon. in Deut. ix. 9, 10. (c) In Exod. xxxii. 15. (d) Jarchi in Exod. xxxiv. 1. Pirke Eliezer, c. 46. (e) Comment. in Psal. cxix. 135.”
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“The ministration of death - Here the apostle evidently intends the law. It was a ministration, διακονια or service of death. It was the province of the law to ascertain the duty of man; to assign his duties; to fix penalties for transgressions, etc.; and by it is the knowledge of sin. As man is prone to sin, and is continually committing it, this law was to him a continual ministration of death. Its letter killed; and it was only the Gospel to which it referred that could give life, because that Gospel held out the only available atonement. Yet this ministration of death (the ten commandments, written on stones; a part of the Mosaic institutions being put for the whole) was glorious - was full of splendor; for the apostle refers to the thunderings, and lightnings, and luminous appearances, which took place in the giving of the law; so that the very body of Moses partook of the effulgence in such a manner that the children of Israel could not look upon his face; and he, to hide it, was obliged to use a veil. All this was intended to show the excellency of that law, as an institution coming immediately from God: and the apostle gives it all its heightenings, that he may compare it to the Gospel, and thereby prove that, glorious as it was, it had no glory that could be compared with that of the Gospel; and that even the glory it had was a glory that was to be done away - to be absorbed, as the light of the stars, planets, and moon, is absorbed in the splendor of the sun. See the notes on Romans 7 (note); and see those on Exodus 19 (note), Exodus 20 (note), and Exo 34:29 (note), etc., where this subject is treated in all its details.”
Source
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“Now if the ministration of death: he meaneth the former[1] law, which by giving them a greater knowledge, and not giving graces of itself to fulfil those precepts, occasioned death, was notwithstanding glorious, accompanied with miracles on Mount Sinai, and so that the Israelites, when Moses came down from the mountain, could not bear the glory of his countenance, which he was forced to cover with a veil, when he spoke to them. Shall not the ministration of the Spirit in the new law, which worketh our sanctification and salvation, abound with much greater glory? especially since the old law was to be made void, and pass away. — Neither was that glorified, or to be esteemed glorious, in comparison of the new law, the blessings of the new so far surpassing those of the old law. (Witham) — If the law of Moses, written on tables of stone, which was only able to cause death, inasmuch as it gave us light sufficient to know what was right, though it did not give us strength or graces to comply with the obligations imposed by it; if this law, nevertheless, was accompanied with so much glory, that Moses was obliged to put a veil over his face, what must we think of the ministry of the Spirit, and of the glorious duties of the apostleship? How ought our glory to be manifest, and who is fit for such an undertaking. If I thus extol the excellency of my ministry, do not imagine that I attribute any thing to myself. I am unworthy of this office, which so far surpasseth that of Moses, that his glory (ver. 10.) could not be truly called glory, when compared with this of ours, which so far excelleth his. (Calmet) — The letter of the New Testament also, not truly taken or expounded by the Spirit of God, which is in his Church, must in the same manner be said to kill. See St. Augustine, serm. 70. & 100. de tempore. & l. de spirt. & lit. chap. 5. 6. & dein.”
Source
1871
A.D.
1871
“the ministration of death--the legal dispensation, summed up in the Decalogue, which denounces death against man for transgression. written and engraven in stones--There is no "and" in the Greek. The literal translation is, "The ministration of death in letters," of which "engraven on stones" is an explanation. The preponderance of oldest manuscripts is for the English Version reading. But one (perhaps the oldest existing manuscript) has "in the letter," which refers to the preceding words (Co2 3:6), "the letter killeth," and this seems the probable reading. Even if we read as English Version, "The ministration of death (written) in letters," alludes to the literal precepts of the law as only bringing us the knowledge of sin and "death," in contrast to "the Spirit" in the Gospel bringing us "life" (Co2 3:6). The opposition between "the letters" and "the Spirit" (Co2 3:8) confirms this. This explains why the phrase in Greek should be "in letters," instead of the ordinary one which English Version has substituted, "written and." was glorious--literally, "was made (invested) in glory," glory was the atmosphere with which it was encompassed. could not steadfastly behold--literally, "fix their eyes on." Exo 34:30, "The skin of his face shone; and they were AFRAID to come nigh him." "Could not," therefore means here, "for FEAR." The "glory of Moses' countenance" on Sinai passed away when the occasion was over: a type of the transitory character of the dispensation which he represented (Co2 3:11), as contrasted with the permanency of the Christian dispensation (Co2 3:11).”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.