The Thorn in Paul's Flesh

***TEITZY*** · Sep 16th 2007, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by Gard

Because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, for this reason, to keep me from exalting myself, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me--to keep me from exalting myself!

2 Corinthians 12:7 NASB

I just finished reading The Man In White by Johnny Cash. It's a book about the life of Paul.

All sorts of theories abound about the thorn in Paul's flesh....some say epilepsy, lust, speech impediment, and club foot. This is just speculation, but could the thorn in his flesh have been guilt over his actions towards the church before his conversion? Just simple curiosity on my part.

An old post by me below. I think the context (of the whole Epistle, not just the surrounding verses) make it abundantly clear what Paul's "thorn" was. Surely a "messenger of satan" is synonymous with "Satan's...ministers"?

I think his thorn was a person. Just before this in 2 Cor 11:12-15 Paul said:

But what I do, I will also continue to do, that I may cut off the opportunity from those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the things of which they boast. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

The Greek word translated "thorn" in 1 Cor 12:7 is skolops and is also used in the Sept. OT to describe the enemies of God's people (Num 33:55; Ezek 28:24).

Cheers
Leigh

Serve-N-Protect · Sep 16th 2007, 09:34 AM

I believe God was very careful about word selection using Paul, as he knew people would be reading Paul's writings for a long time.

I know that this scripture has caused many to question what the thorn was, but in context, relevance of what the thorn was I believe does not exist.

I will say however, that whenever I have heard somebody identify it as a particular sin, the sin they identify is typically the sin they are dealing with.

I asked myself, what if through Paul, God made a declaration of what the thorn was? Say it was blindness. Imagine the trouble we would have added to us as believers to think that an ailment like this is of the Devil. How we would boast at our ability to see, and scoff at the blind for example.

Now lets say it was envy, imagine the special attention this sin would receive over the others. Imagine the complacent attitudes that would develop toward other sins.

I don't think this scripture is about what the thorn was but rather why it was there and what it was doing.

**Jesusinmyheart** · Sep 17th 2007, 01:08 AM

I have simply come to the conclusion that Paul's thorn in the flesh was a persistent sin he had to persistently overcome. This would keep him from exalting himself, as a constant reminder of his imperfection.

the flesh is sinfull you know, so the thorn is nothing but a particular sin that kept pricking him from time to time. What that particular sin was who knows.

That's my take on it nowadays.

Shalom to you,
Tanja

***My heart's Desire*** · Sep 17th 2007, 02:09 AM

The more I think on this you know it really could have been any of those mentioned above. I've heard that everywhere he went he did face persecution, and the things in his letters do make it sound as if it may have been something to do with his eyesight. Looking at the persecution part a little more, it would seem likely, perhaps because as a Jewish person, it really hurt when the persecution came from his own race. Remember how he wished if possible for himself to be cut off if it could save his Jewish brothers and sisters (as a race)? Would that be something that would be buffeting to his heart?
Maybe it had something to do with what we think he described as being the one who saw a 3rd heaven vision? Humm.

***SIG*** · Sep 17th 2007, 02:41 AM

I'm big on the idea of consistent symbolism (in some cases) in Scripture. I believe "thorn" is consistently a symbol for sin.

It was a persistent sin, I believe, that Paul dealt with. This would not include a physical infirmity; it is not a sin--or necessarily the result of sin--to have poor eyesight.

I also believe that God gives us information on a "need-to-know" basis--exactly what Paul's sin was, we do not need to know...

**Jesusinmyheart** · Sep 17th 2007, 03:54 AM

"You must spread some reputation before giving it to SIG again." Sigh....

Shalom my friend,
Tanja

***VerticalReality*** · Sep 17th 2007, 03:57 AM

Originally Posted by Jesusinmyheart

I have simply come to the conclusion that Paul's thorn in the flesh was a persistent sin he had to persistently overcome. This would keep him from exalting himself, as a constant reminder of his imperfection.

the flesh is sinfull you know, so the thorn is nothing but a particular sin that kept pricking him from time to time. What that particular sin was who knows.

That's my take on it nowadays.

Shalom to you,
Tanja

I don't believe that passage of Scripture is talking about Paul exalting himself. I believe that passage of Scripture is talking about the people Paul is preaching the gospel to exalting him above measure. Kind of like when Peter and John had to tell the folks in the temple not to worship them after the beggar at the gate was healed. It was not by their power that this man was healed, but the people sure were ready to worship them over it. I believe that Paul, because of the abundance of revelation he had received and the power of God he walked in, would have had people trying to worship him instead of the source of the power. Therefore, the thorn was given to him so that folks could plainly see that he was just a man and not worthy of worship.

***My heart's Desire*** · Sep 17th 2007, 05:02 AM

Well, I guess we do know this much:
it was because of the greatness of the revelations?
The thorn was there to keep him from exalting himself, and it must have been a weakness for he said that the Lord said that His grace was sufficient for him and that power is perfected in weakness....
I wonder how many of us will ask Paul what his thorn was when we meet him? We probably won't even have to ask because it will be gone!

***Equipped_4_Love*** · Sep 17th 2007, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by Brother Mark

Well, we know it was a messenger from Satan. There are hints here and there about the way this messenger manifested itself. But who can know for sure?

Couldn't it be possible that a messenger from Satan could mean a persecuter of Paul?

In Numbers, this phrase is used when referring to the Canaanites in relation to Israel:

Num. 33:55 But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you,, then it shall be that those whom you let remain shall be irritants in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and they shall harass you in the land where you dwell

***Brother Mark*** · Sep 17th 2007, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by cloudburst

Couldn't it be possible that a messenger from Satan could mean a persecuter of Paul?

In Numbers, this phrase is used when referring to the Canaanites in relation to Israel:

Num. 33:55 But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you,, then it shall be that those whom you let remain shall be irritants in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and they shall harass you in the land where you dwell

Maybe. Except the thought in Numbers was said to be the case IF Israel did not kick them out. It's worth examining. It is definitely worth looking into because of what Paul says about persecutions in the verses after speaking of his thorn. But again, the thorn in Numbers is about a thorn of persecution for not following God by killing them. But the point is interesting.

***Brother Mark*** · Sep 17th 2007, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by SIG

I'm big on the idea of consistent symbolism (in some cases) in Scripture. I believe "thorn" is consistently a symbol for sin.

It was a persistent sin. i believe, that Paul dealt with. This would not include a physical infirmity; it is not a sin--or necessarily the result of sin--to have poor eyesight.

I also believe that God gives us information on a "need-to-know" basis--exactly what Paul's sin was, we do not need to know...

I use to believe this as well. But several things cause me pause about it being a sin. 1. Paul wrote many passages on overcoming sin. Romans was about this concept. If the sin was a besetting sin, then how can we then believe 2 Cor 10 and the overcoming of strongholds?

Finally, this settled it for me.

2 Cor 12:6-10
7 And because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, for this reason, to keep me from exalting myself, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me — to keep me from exalting myself! 8 Concerning this I entreated the Lord three times that it might depart from me. 9 And He has said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness." Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may dwell in me. 10 Therefore I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties, for Christ's sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong.
NASB

Is God's grace power? How is this power perfected in weakness? It is perfected in that God gives grace to the humble but resist the proud. Is grace power to overcome sin? Yes, this is what Romans 5-8 is all about. Is God telling him here "You have a sin but it is my will that you NEVER conquer this sin".

Then we are saying that God desires for none of us to ever be able to walk a sinless life.

Finally, when Paul speaks of weaknesses, he does not mention sin. He mentions a messenger of Satan then goes on to describe how this messenger manifest in some ways "insults, distresses, persecutions, difficulties, for Christ sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong." It was his weakness in dealing with such things in the flesh that made him strong in spirit.

This was a weakness that kept Paul humble. But Paul was rarely gentle when it came to sin problems.

***VerticalReality*** · Sep 17th 2007, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by My heart's Desire

Well, I guess we do know this much:
it was because of the greatness of the revelations?
The thorn was there to keep him from exalting himself, and it must have been a weakness for he said that the Lord said that His grace was sufficient for him and that power is perfected in weakness....
I wonder how many of us will ask Paul what his thorn was when we meet him? We probably won't even have to ask because it will be gone!

Actually, again, we don't know this. Was it because of great revelation? Yes. Was it because he would have exalted himself? I don't believe so.

As far as the statement that the Lord said His grace was sufficient. The reason I believe His grace is sufficient for Paul here is because God never gives us freedom from persecution under His grace. In fact, He warns us repeatedly throughout Scripture that we are going to be persecuted.

This is just another reason why I believe Paul's thorn was persecution. If you ask for something that's not covered under God's grace, then you can expect to get the answer, "My grace is sufficient."

***Steve M*** · Sep 17th 2007, 02:53 PM

Actually, again, we don't know this.

And lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of the revelations, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be exalted above measure. 8 Concerning this thing I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me. 9 And He said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness."

Was it because of great revelation? Yes. Was it because he would have exalted himself? I don't believe so.

I like your turn of phrase, here, VR. We DON'T know what we AREN'T told. We DO know what we ARE told.

So either Paul said HE would exalt himself too much, OR he said that otherwise WE would exalt him too much. One way or the other. I like the passage you posted about the gate beautiful; it certainly lays the stage. However, there is another clue directly in Paul's words.

"My strength is made perfect in weakness."

Care to speculate as to just what that means?

***VerticalReality*** · Sep 17th 2007, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by Steve M

"My strength is made perfect in weakness."

Care to speculate as to just what that means?

My personal opinion . . .

I believe it was a mighty testimony and demonstration of the power of God working through Paul when he decided to waltz right back to the place he was just stoned and continue preaching the gospel in power and boldness. Here was a man that was continously broken in the flesh that would continue passionately preaching the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ regardless of the frailty of his flesh. He didn't care what they did to his body. He only cared about delivering the truth.

Therefore, I believe his brokenness and weakness of flesh demonstrated that power of God through him.

***Steve M*** · Sep 17th 2007, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by VerticalReality

My personal opinion . . .

I believe it was a mighty testimony and demonstration of the power of God working through Paul when he decided to waltz right back to the place he was just stoned and continue preaching the gospel in power and boldness. Here was a man that was continously broken in the flesh that would continue passionately preaching the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ regardless of the frailty of his flesh. He didn't care what they did to his body. He only cared about delivering the truth.

Therefore, I believe his brokenness and weakness of flesh demonstrated that power of God through him.

That certainly is a powerful witness, isn't it?