「字句是叫人死，精意是叫人活」（林後三6）是釋經學的著名標語。有學者說，哥林多後書是註釋家的樂園，也是絕望的園地。1因為此節經文是了解保羅思想的重要經文，卻又極易產生誤導作用。釋經史中，對此節有兩極化的解釋。將「精意」解釋為「寓意解經」（allegorical interpretation）者，俄利根乃始作俑者；相對地，「字句」被解釋為「字面解經」（literal interpretation）。此對比模式成為初代與中世紀教會的主流解釋，幾位大師級的教父包括耶柔米、早期的奧古斯丁都是如此解釋。2期間雖然有少數有真知灼見者力挽狂瀾，如初代的安提阿學派，卻仍抵不過時代的潮流，直到宗教改革時才見趨勢的扭轉。

This article is to trace the history of the exegetical and theological meaning of theletter/Spirit contrast in 2 Corinthian 3: 6, from the early Church Fathers to Scott J.Hafemann, currently New Testament Professor at Wheaton College, and also offer anargument against the New Perspectives. The letter/Spirit contrast provides a keyplank in attempt to understand Paul’s view of the Law. Though scholarship on Pauland the Law in the last two decades has witnessed a “paradigm shift”, the writerinsists that the Law/Gospel antithesis inherited form the Reformation is not out of dateand the core value of reformation theology has not yet been replaced.