II Corinthians 3:11 · Bible study
2 Corinthians 3:11 Commentary: The Permanent Glory of the New Covenant
Greek · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Paul contrasts the temporary glory of the old covenant (through glory) with the permanent glory of the new covenant (in glory), showing the gospel's
Research Summary
- Meaning: The old covenant’s glory was real but transient; the new covenant’s glory is permanent and far greater.
- Key words: Katargoumenon (being abolished, passive process); menon (remaining, abiding); prepositions dia (through) vs. en (in).
- Main debate: Whether the prepositions are deliberately contrasted (transitory vs. permanent) or used interchangeably (see Lange’s note on possibility of equivalence).
- Theological theme: Supersession of the old covenant by the new, not as replacement but as fulfillment; the permanent ministry of the Spirit.
- Best use: A key text for understanding the continuity and discontinuity between the Testaments; comfort for believers whose hope rests in an unshakable covenant.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
For if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which endures!
WEB World English Bible 2000
For if that which passes away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.
KJV King James Version 1769
For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
For if that which passeth away was with glory, much more that which remaineth is in glory.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
for if that which is being made useless is through glory, much more that which is remaining is in glory.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
For if that annulled [was introduced] with glory, much rather that which abides [subsists] in glory.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is in glory.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Porque si lo que perece tuvo gloria|strong="G1223, G1391", mucho más será en gloria|strong="G1223, G1391" lo que permanece.
Porque se o que se extinguiu teve glória, muito mais glória tem o que permanece.
En effet, si ce qui était passager a été glorieux, ce qui est permanent est bien plus glorieux.
Denn so das Klarheit hatte, das da aufhört, wie viel mehr wird das Klarheit haben, das da bleibt.
Want indien hetgeen te niet gedaan wordt, in heerlijkheid was, veel meer is hetgeen blijft, in heerlijkheid.
perché, se ciò che aveva da sparire fu circondato di gloria, molto più ha da esser glorioso ciò che ha da durare.
Bo jeźlić to, co niszczeje, było chwalebne, daleko więcej to, co zostaje, jest chwalebne.
Ибо, если преходящее славно, тем более славно пребывающее.
若 那廢掉的 有榮光，這長存的 就更 有榮光了。
For if the order which was for a time had its glory, much more will the eternal order have its glory.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Koine Greek)
New Testament · Koine Greek · II Corinthians 3:11
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators across traditions agree that this verse draws a sharp contrast between the old and new covenants. The old covenant is described with the present participle katargoumenon, ‘being done away’ (Vincent). This passive verb pictures a process of abolition already underway. The new covenant is to menon, ‘that which remains.’ The central nuance lies in the prepositions. The old covenant came ‘through glory’ (dia doxēs), a glory that accompanied it in passing. The new covenant stands ‘in glory’ (en doxē), a glory that is its permanent possession (Barnes; Cambridge Bible). Lange notes that Neander saw the prepositions as deliberate: dia marks a transition, en denotes abiding state. The cumulative argument is that if the fading covenant had genuine glory, the enduring one possesses glory far beyond it, an encouragement for Paul’s readers to trust the permanence of the gospel.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Deliberate contrast of prepositions: The shift from 'through glory' (dia doxēs) to 'in glory' (en doxē) is not accidental; it underscores the transitory nature of the old covenant (passing through a state) versus the permanent state of the new (abiding in glory). Supported by Vincent, Barnes, and Neander.
- Prepositions used interchangeably: Paul sometimes varies prepositions without a strong distinction (Lange points to 2 Cor 2:4 and 5:7 where dia describes a fixed condition). On this view, the contrast lies mainly in the participles (passing away vs. remaining) rather than the prepositions themselves.
What is clear: The old covenant is described as fading away, while the new covenant endures; the gospel possesses a glory that surpasses the law's glory, regardless of the precise prepositional meaning.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| The prepositions 'through glory' and 'in glory' | They mark a contrast between the old covenant and the new covenant, with the new possessing a superior glory that is not fading. | Some commentators (e.g., Vincent, Neander via Lange) see a deliberate grammatical distinction: 'through' indicates a passing accompaniment, 'in' indicates a permanent state. Others (Lange notes this view) argue Paul sometimes uses the prepositions as near equivalents, shifting without strong semantic weight. |
| What 'passes away' refers to | The fading away applies to the old covenant as a system of ministry (not necessarily every moral commandment within it). | Gill distinguishes between the ceremonial law and the moral law, arguing that only the ceremonial aspects (and the law as a covenant of works) are 'done away,' while the moral law remains as a rule of life. Most other commentators see the whole Mosaic economy, including the law as a ministry of condemnation, as passing away. |
| What 'that which remains' means | It refers to the gospel and its associated blessings: life, righteousness, the Spirit. | Jamieson-Fausset-Brown specifically identifies it with 'the Spirit, and His accompaniments, life and righteousness.' Others (e.g., Clarke) emphasize the permanent nature of the gospel dispensation for all times and peoples. The debate is about whether the focus is on the ministry, the covenant, or the underlying spiritual reality. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Paul writes 2 Corinthians from Macedonia, likely A.D. 55, 57, addressing a congregation troubled by false teachers who exalted the law of Moses. In chapter 3 he defends his ministry by comparing the two covenants. The immediate background is Exodus 34:29, 35, where Moses’ face shone after meeting God, a glory so intense that Israel could not look at it, and Moses veiled his face to hide its fading. Paul draws on that scene to make a theological point: the old covenant, even with its magnificent inauguration, was designed to be temporary. It was a ‘service of death’ and ‘condemnation’ (vv. 7, 9).
The Corinthians lived in a city known for its transient splendors, Roman architecture, commercial wealth, and shifting political loyalties. Paul anchors their hope in something that cannot fade. The ‘letter’ of the law kills, but the ‘Spirit’ gives life (v. 6). The new covenant is not tied to stone tablets or a single nation; it is written on hearts by the Spirit. Verse 11 functions as the climactic ‘how much more’ argument: what is transitory cannot compare with what is eternal. The cultural pressure to seek prestige in the old law is reversed. True glory belongs to the ministry of the Spirit, which remains.
Textual Notes
The supplied sources note no significant textual variants for this verse. The Greek text is stable across manuscripts, with no alternative readings for the key prepositional phrases or participles.
Reception History
Early church writers such as Chrysostom and Augustine read this verse as confirming the superiority of the new covenant over the old, often using it to explain why the Mosaic law no longer bound Christians. During the Reformation, Luther and Calvin appealed to the passage to argue that the law's glory was temporary and that the gospel alone brings lasting righteousness. In the nineteenth century, commentators like Lange and Neander gave fresh attention to the grammatical nuance of the prepositions, a focus that continues in modern exegesis. The verse has also been sung in hymns celebrating the eternal nature of God's grace and the security of believers in Christ.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- A glory that passes. The old covenant, even with the brightness of Sinai and the face of Moses, was never meant to endure. Paul calls it katargoumenon, ‘being abolished,’ a process set in motion by Christ’s coming.
- A glory that remains. The new covenant stands fixed. It is ‘in glory’ as a permanent attribute. The resurrection guarantees its endurance; the Spirit seals believers for an eternal inheritance.
- Hope that speaks boldly. Because this glory does not fade, Paul (and we) can minister with confidence, without a veil. The permanence of the gospel frees us from fear and performance.
Five-point outline
- Context: Paul defending his ministry against legalists.
- The old covenant's glory: real but fleeting (vv. 7, 10).
- The preposition shift: ‘through glory’ → ‘in glory.’
- The present tense: the law is still in the process of passing away for those who refuse Christ.
- Application: we serve a covenant that cannot be surpassed or replaced.
Illustration hooks
- A fading photograph. A printed photo from decades ago shows vivid colors at first, but over time it yellows and fades. The image is still there, but the brightness is gone. That is the old covenant compared to the gospel.
- A lighthouse lamp. An old oil lantern can cast light for a while, but it sputters and needs constant refilling. A modern LED beacon shines steadily, designed to last for years. One is passing, the other remains.
- A trust fund. A temporary inheritance can be spent and lost. But a perpetual trust, managed by a faithful executor, provides security forever. The gospel is that permanent trust.
Questions your congregation is asking
- If the old covenant is fading, why does the Old Testament still matter for Christians?
- What does it mean that the law was glorious? Isn’t the law bad?
- How can I know the gospel’s glory will last when everything in my life feels temporary?
Leading a Discussion
This verse wraps up Paul’s comparison of two covenants. The old was real and glorious, but it was never intended to be permanent. The new covenant, the gospel of Jesus Christ, stands in glory that will never fade. As you discuss, think about how this changes the way you see both the Old Testament and your own hope.
Discussion questions
- Read 2 Corinthians 3:7, 11 aloud. What repeated phrase stands out to you?
- Paul says the old covenant ‘passes away’ or ‘is being abolished’ (v. 11). How does the Exodus story of Moses’ veiled face illustrate that idea (v. 13)?
- The Greek uses two different prepositions: ‘through glory’ for the law, ‘in glory’ for the gospel. Why might Paul choose those words? (Hint: think of something that moves through a room vs. something that stays in a room.)
- Verse 11 is an argument from lesser to greater. If the temporary covenant had glory, how much more does the permanent one have? How does that ‘how much more’ shape your confidence in the gospel?
- What are some ‘fading glories’ in our lives (money, health, reputation) that we sometimes treasure? How does comparing them to the lasting glory of Christ help you?
- In verse 12 Paul says, ‘Having therefore such a hope, we use great boldness of speech.’ How does the permanence of the gospel give you freedom in your relationship with God and with others?
- How can this passage help a Christian who feels discouraged because the excitement of their faith seems to have faded?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Romans 5:20 | The law came in that the trespass might abound; but where sin abounded, grace abounded more exceedingly, |
| Romans 5:21 | that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. |
| II Corinthians 3:6 | who also made us sufficient as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. |
| II Corinthians 3:7 | But if the service of death, written engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the children of Israel could not look steadfastly on the face of Moses for the glory of his face, which was passing away, |
| II Corinthians 4:1 | Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, even as we obtained mercy, we don’t faint. |
| Hebrews 7:21 | (for they indeed have been made priests without an oath), but he with an oath by him that says of him, “The Lord swore and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.’” |
| Hebrews 7:25 | Therefore he is also able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, seeing that he lives forever to make intercession for them. |
| Hebrews 8:13 | In that he says, “A new covenant”, he has made the first obsolete. But that which is becoming obsolete and grows aged is near to vanishing away. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
10 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke highlights that the law was temporary and limited to a specific time, place, and people, while the gospel is universal and permanent. The law was meant to be set aside, but the gospel remains for all times and all people. This difference in scope and duration shows the gospel's far greater value.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes distinguishes the Law from the gospel by their design: the Mosaic system was intentionally temporary and transient, while the gospel is permanent and built to last. The Law's glory, however real, cannot compare because it was always meant to fade before something abiding.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
This commentary highlights a Greek prepositional nuance: the old covenant’s glory was a temporary accompaniment seen through a haze of glory, while the new covenant’s glory is an enduring attribute inherent to it. The commentator notes that some scholars think the Apostle used the prepositions interchangeably
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The note argues from the lesser to the greater: if the old covenant, which was temporary and destined to end, still possessed glory, then the new covenant, which remains forever, possesses far more glory. The contrast highlights the surpassing excellence of what is permanent over what is passing away.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill draws careful distinctions about the law, arguing that not all of it is done away. The ministry of Moses and the law as a covenant of works are abolished, but the moral law remains as a rule for believers. The gospel, by contrast, is what permanently endures, proving its superior glory.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB highlights that the Greek wording distinguishes transient glory from permanent glory: the old covenant was marked by glory that faded, while the new covenant exists in enduring glory. He identifies "that which remains" as the Spirit with its life and righteousness, not the ministry itself. This contrast, he argues, confirms Paul's opponents in Corinth were Judaizers.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange stresses that Paul defends his apostolic authority not by boasting, but by pointing to the Corinthians themselves as a living letter from Christ, written by the Spirit on human hearts. This transformed community, known to everyone, is the only commendation Paul needs, far surpassing any written credentials.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry distinguishes the New Testament ministry from the Old by contrasting the letter, which kills, with the Spirit, which gives life. While the law carved in stone brought death and condemnation, the gospel ministry of the Spirit brings righteousness and a glory that far exceeds the temporary glory of Moses.
Vincent's Word Studies Evangelical 1887
Vincent highlights that the Greek phrase behind "that which is done away" actually means "which is being done away," pointing to a gradual process of abolition through the preaching of the Gospel. He also notes that "was glorious" is literally "through glory," a nuance the English versions fail to capture.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley reads the phrase as pointing to two things at once: the New Covenant age that continues until the world's end, and the spiritual life within it that never ends. For him, what remains is both a lasting divine order and an eternal quality.