"Who also has made us able ministers of a renewed covenant, not of the record, unless also of the Spirit: for the record kills, but the Spirit gives life. 7 But when the ministration of death, (having been engraved as records in stones), was glorious— so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses because of the glory of his face; which glory was fading away, why shouldn't the ministration of the Spirit be more glorious?" (2Cor. 3:6-8: torahtimes.org, DLT).

__

renewed : καινος. Liddell and Scott, "anew, afresh "(pg. 858).  In the ancient Hebrew חדשה the ideas of "new" and "renewed" are combined into the same word.  Which sense was meant depended on the context.  The verbal root חדש means "neu machen, erneurn make anew [remake], renew :"  (Lexicon In Veteris Testamenti Libros : Leiden, E.J. Brill.  Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, 1985).  The NET Bible footnotes Jeremiah 31:31 "3 tn Or "a renewed covenant" (New English Translation).   The word καινος underwent change between the three centuries it was first put into the LXX and the late first century.  Like many archaic words in the KJV version it was only really understood by those who used the LXX and were familiar with the Hebrew background to it and the older Greek sense of the word καινος.  If we try to read the KJV "replenish" in Genesis 1:28 and are not familiar with the older English use of this word, then we will misinterpret the text.  "Replenish" only meant to "fill" in 1611.  There was not a sense of to "re" fill.   A similar change happened to the Greek word καινος.  In the older Greek it included the idea of renew more strongly.  In late Greek, it lost this older meaning, although the faithful still regarded the older meaning when using biblical texts.  "Syn.: νεος, 'the new primarily in reference to time, the young, recent; καινος ... the new primarily in reference to quality, the fresh, unworn'. Cf. Tr., Syn., § lx (the distinction, however, is less marked in late Gk.;" (Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, Abbott-Smith, pg. 226).  Thayer repeats the substance of the quote.  So also TDNT.  In concept, a renewed covenant is fresh in terms of quality, but not in terms of time.   It is a fresh instance of bringing Israel under the bond of the covenant (cf. Ezek. 20:27)—a renewed binding.

__

record : γραμμα.  Thayer: "2. any writing, a document or record; a. a note of hand, bill, bond, account, written acknowledgement of debt " (pg. 120). The record  here would be the same as the χειρογραφον in Colossians 2:14.  It stands for a record of sins or transgressions.

__

unless...also : ουκ ... αλλα. αλλα = ει μη =  אלא = unless, except. (cf. BLASS, §448).  The sense is explained in the Greek by Thayer, "ουκ ...αλλα sometimes is logically equivalent to not so much ... as ";  Liddell and Scott, "used adversatively to limit ...clauses".  The word means "unless" or "except": Mt. 20:23, '...is not mine to give, unless for whom it is prepared of my Father"; Mt. 22:32, "Not he is the God of the dead unless of the living".  The conjunction limits the first clause, i.e. "He is not the God of the dead" (which standing alone would be a false statement) to "He is not the God of the dead [only], except [also] of the living".  John 3:13, "no man hath ascended up to heaven, unless he that came down from heaven".  This usage is very important since the Semitic Apologetical Method, likes to introduce a statement with a seeming "untruth" only to qualify it in the next clause to make it true.  It's a rhetorical teaching method that gets the attention of the audience.  It is needed to understand a lot of biblical arguments like the classic "God is not the God of the dead, unless of the living" for proof of the resurrection.  The point is that God is not the God of the persons who are just to be dead unless he plans to raise them.  For why would they have him as God when only to be dead, or why would God be their God for them to be only dead.

__

engraved ... in stones : Paul is giving a drash here, bringing together separate elements to make a point.  Paul is bringing together the glory of Moses face with what was written in the stones.   The common element is the condemnation Israel felt from the glory of YHWH in his face, because the glory revealed what was in their hearts making them look away.  It should not be forgotten that the Torah also includes the ministration of mercy, "And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and
keep my commandments" (Exodus 20:6), plus the blessings that were also written in stone on Mt. Ebal.  The primary reference is not to the ten commandments but to the curses that Moses commanded Israel to write in the stones on Mt. Ebal with the rest of the Torah (Deut. 27:6-8; Josh. 8:32).  The curses were announced from Mt. Ebal and the blessings from Mt. Gerizim.   There is no problem with Paul's usage as long as we realize that the curses were not all that was written in the stone.  The blessings were written there also, which are the ministration of the Spirit.

__

comment: It is the nature of a drash דרש to combine texts that on the literal level have little to do with one another in order to make a point. Paul is not trying to tell us that the ten commandments are the ministry of death.   The common element in his quotations is the ministry of death, or the ministry that makes rebels guilty.  This is what unites the drash.  When the text "engraved ... in stones" comes together with the text about the veil on Moses face, we must not assume that Paul is saying the two tablets of the ten commandments that Moses had at the time.  That's not how one interprets a drash.   You have to find the homiletical theme of the two quotations and not assume that the use of the two texts mean anything other than what they are used for.  The ministry of death in the stones were the curses inscribed upon Mt. Ebal when Israel came into the land.  It's mention next to Moses face is not Paul's intent to confuse the literal facts but to give a homily on the ministry of death" (torahtimes.org, DLC).

Daniel's Literal Translation and Commentary: (http://www.torahtimes.org/translation/2cor0306.html)