2Co_3:10. A more precise grounding of the previous
πολλῷ
μᾶλλον
περισσεύει
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. by the highest climax of this relation. For even (
καὶ
γάρ
) that which is glorious is without glory in this point by reason of the superabundant glory.
οὐ
δεδόξασται
] The chief element is prefixed, and combined into one idea (Hartung, Partikell. I. p. 122; Baeuml. p. 278): gloria destitutum est. The perfect denotes the continuance of what had taken place; Kühner, II. p. 70.
τὸ
δεδοξασμένον
] is referred to the Mosaic religious economy by Emmerling and Olshausen, following older expositors, quite against the context. Most refer it to the ministry of Moses, which had been made glorious through the radiance on his countenance, 2Co_3:7-9. But see belo.
ἐν
τούτῳ
τῷ
μέρει
] in this respect (2Co_9:3; 1Pe_4:16; Col_2:16; often in Greek authors), is joined with
τὸ
δεδοξασμένον
by Fritzsche, l.c. p. 31 (also de Wette and Ewald): “quod collustratum fuit hac parte h. e. ita, ut per splendorem, qui in Mosis facie conspiciebatur, illustre redderetur.” But on the one hand—supposing that
τὸ
δεδοξασμ
. denotes the ministry of Moses—the
ἐν
τρύτῳ
τῷ
μέρει
so taken would be an utterly superfluous addition, since the reader would already have had full information in accordance with the context through
τὸ
δεδοξασμ
. having the article; on the other hand, we should expect
τούτῳ
to point to something said just before, which, however, is not the case, since we must go back as far as 2Co_3:7. If, again, with Ewald, we take
ἐν
τούτῳ
τῷ
μέρει
as “in all that is Jewish, apart from what is Christian,” and refer it to the then still subsisting state of the temple, synagogue, etc., how enigmatically Paul would have expressed himself, without any hint of his meaning in the context! Following Chrysostom (
κατὰ
τὸν
τῆς
συγκρίσεως
λόγον
) and Theodoret (
ἀποβλέπων
εἰς
τούτους
, namely, to the ministers of the N. T.), most commentators (including Billroth, Olshausen, Osiander, Hofmann) join it with
οὐ
δεδόξ
., so that it would indicate the reference in which the sentence
οὐ
δεδόξ
.
τὸ
δεδοξ
. holds good (see Hofmann), and consequently would have the meaning: “over against the office of Moses.” But how utterly superfluous, and in fact cumbrous, would this
ἐν
τούτῳ
τῷ
μερ
. be if so taken, especially seeing that there still follows
ἕνεκεν
τ
.
ὑπερβ
.
δοξ
., which serves to throw light upon the relation asserted! How surprising would this amplification be at this very point, where the comparison is carried to the highest pitch, and the representation is so forcibly and pithily begun by the oxymoron
οὐ
δεδόξ
.
τὸ
δεδοξ
.! Rückert (following Flatt) connects also with
οὐ
δεδόξασται
, but explains it: in this respect, that is, in so far as the first
διακονία
was the
διακονία
τῆς
κατακρίσεως
. At variance with the connection. For not in so far as the Mosaic
διακονία
ministered to condemnation and death, is its splendour darkened, but in so far as its splendour is outshone by a far greater splendour,—that of the
διακονία
of the N. T. Besides, if the assumed reference of
ἐν
τούτῳ
τῷ
μέρει
were to be held correct, the
κατάκρισις
would necessarily be the principal element (predicate) in what precedes, not merely an attributive definition of the subject. On the whole, the following explanation, against which none but quite irrelevant objections[163] are made, seems to be the right one:
ἐν
τούτῳ
τῷ
μέρει
is certainly to be connected with
οὐ
δεδόξασται
;
τὸ
δεδοξασμένον
, however, is not to be taken as a designation of the Mosaic
διακονία
in concreto, but signifies that which is glorified generally, in abstracto; so that, in addition to the
οὐ
δεδόξασται
said of it, there is also given with
ἐν
τούτῳ
τῷ
μέρει
the reference to the particular concrete thing of which the apostle is speaking, the reference to the ministry of Moses, namely, thus: “for in this respect, i.e. in respect of the relation of glory in which the Mosaic
δισκονία
stands to the Christian (2Co_3:9), it is even the case that what is glorified is unglorified.” Analogously, the
δόξα
of the moon, for instance, is no
δόξα
, when the
δόξα
of the sun beams forth (1Co_15:14).
ἕνεκεν
τῆς
ὑπερβαλλ
.
δόξης
] by reason of (Stallbaum, ad Plat. Rep. p. 329 B) the superabundant glory, which obscures the
δεδοξασμένον
, exhibits its
δόξα
as relatively no
δόξα
. This applies to the future glory of the N. T.
διακονία
, setting in at the
αἰὼν
μέλλων
, but already conceived as present.
[163] The objection made by Osiander is a dilemma logically incorrect. Hofmann urges that
ἐν
τούτῳ
τῷ
μέρει
cannot mean: in this case. But it is not at all alleged to have that meaning, but rather: in this point, i. e. hoc respectu, in the relation under discussion. See on this adverbial usage, C. Fr. Herm. ad Lucian. hist. concer. p. 8.