Was Moses Being Deceptive?

I grew up in the faith reading my NIV Study Bible, so this was my reading of 2 Corinthians 3:13:

We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. (NIV)

I always read this as if Moses was being a bit deceptive. He knew that the glory of God shining on his face was fading away and so in order to hide this he put a veil over his face so they couldn’t see as the glory diminished. The NIV isn’t alone in translating the passage this way.

Furthermore, I thought Paul was comparing the “cunning practice” of the false teachers with the deceptive actions of Moses. Just like Moses they weren’t able to be bold, they had to hide the fact that they didn’t have all the answers. The new covenant minister, however, is able to be bold. The text at least seems to be reading that way.

Recently I preached through this passage. In order to really understand the text I spent some time in Exodus 32-34. I was quite surprised that in Exodus 34:29-35 there was no mention of Moses being deceptive. For some that might not be a problem. I suppose one could say that Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit and he was drawing things out of the text that weren’t there. As for me, I’m not comfortable with that. I think such a position doesn’t do justice to a faithful biblical hermeneutic.

When preaching through a passage I always try to wrestle with the text a bit before consulting commentaries. But I’m somewhat limited because my handling of the original languages is relatively limited. I’m a pastor…a nerdy pastor…but still a pastor. I’m not able to devote the time I’d perhaps like to devote to deeper scholarship. In other words I’m not able to do lengthy word studies on katargoumenen. So I was thankful for the work Scott Hafemann has done.

Hafemann notes that Paul’s use of this term is “consistently eschatological” and it’s best translated with its rare use in the ancient world as “to render something inoperative, ineffective, powerless”. In other words what Paul is saying isn’t that Moses was being deceptive but that he was actually protecting the Israelites.

Our experience with the glory of God (or the glorious presence of God) ought to be transformative. But when Israel had sinned their experience with God’s glory changed. It’s not a perfect illustration but it’s the difference between daddy coming home when the kids have been good and when they’ve been a terror. Their experience of his presence is different pending on their obedience. If the sinful and rebellious Israelites would have had an unveiled access to the glory of God they would have been consumed. Therefore, Moses put a veil over his face. Yet this was also acting as a sign of judgment against them, because they ought to have a different experience with God’s glory. Hafemann summarizes well:

Moses’s veiled mediation of God’s glory permits his presence to remain in Israel’s midst without destroying her. In this regard, Moses’ veiling himself is an act of mercy. At the same time, the very fact that Moses must veil his face is an act of judgment because of the hardness of Israel’s heart. This veil not only preserves Israel from being destroyed, it also keeps her from being transformed. For as Exodus 20:20 makes clear, the fear of God in response to the revelation of his glory was intended to purify the nation and to keep her from sinning. (Hafemann, 144)

So, Moses veil wasn’t an act of deception. It was an act of mercy, and also an act of judgment against them.

—

Photo source: here