01 - The Many Viewpoints of Paul’s Thorn
Chapter 1 The Many Viewpoints of Paul’s Thorn For many, the viewpoint of “Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh” is a major stumbling block. Those seeking God for healing or reaching for any of the promises of God will continually be probed by satanic strategies that are designed to cause them confusion.
Let someone begin to hope in Gods will to heal them and often someone will bring up Paul’s thorn. It works almost as an antidote against faith. In other words, many explain Paul’s thorn in a way that weakens ones faith in divine healing. However, it should be explained so as to strengthen your faith, not overthrow it. People, eager to find a reason to believe in the miraculous, commonly have a countering word of doubt fired at their thought processes. Jesus, in the parable of the sower tells us this; “And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts”. (Mark 4:15) It comes in various forms but as Jesus said, the devil attempts to take away the Word of truth. Contentions that God does not heal any more, or that it is not always God’s Will to heal the sick are plentiful. Promise seekers, if infected with reasons to doubt Gods promises, will have their faith in the promise, overwhelmed. Sadly, many Christians are conditioned to think their sickness is like Paul’s Thorn. Accordingly, the effect is the introduction of doubt. The end result is sufficient to keep some from receiving the promise of healing.
It is for this reason that I want to present to you the variety of views about Paul’s thorn. Some are more illogical and worse than others. Others are reasonable but questionable. Listen to this illustration by Smith Wigglesworth, a man of God greatly used in a divine healing ministry back in the 1920’s - 1940’s. He recognized the danger misunderstanding Paul’s thorn.
"Where people are in sickness you find frequently that they are dense about the Bible. They usually know three verses though. They know about Paul’s thorn in the flesh, and that Paul told Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach’s sake, and that Paul left someone sick somewhere; they forgot his name and don’t remember the name of the place and don’t know where the chapter is. Most people think they have a thorn in the flesh. The chief thing in dealing with a person who is sick is to ascertain their exact position. As you are ministering under the Spirit’s power the Lord will let you see just that which will be more helpful and most faith-inspiring to them."
"I visited women who had been suffering for many years. She was all twisted with rheumatism and had been two years in bed. I asked her, what makes you lie here?” She said, "I’ve come to the conclusion that I have a thorn in the flesh." I said, "To what wonderful degree of righteousness have you attained that you have a thorn in the flesh? Have you had such an abundance of divine revelations that there is danger of your being exalted above measure?" She said, "I believe it is the Lord who is causing me to suffer." I said, "You believe it is the Lord’s will for you to suffer, and you are trying to get out of it as quickly as you can. There are doctor’s bottles all over the place. Get out of your hiding place and confess you are a sinner. If you’ll get rid of your self righteousness, God will do something for you. Drop the idea that you are so holy that God has got to afflict you. Sin is the cause of your sickness and not righteousness. Disease is not caused by righteousness, but by sin."
Wigglesworth reasoned there is enough sickness in this world without implementing God as the minister of it. Healing is a promise of scripture. It is Gods will. Let you faith be encouraged in knowing God’s mercy is superior to mans self righteousness. Like Wigglesworth, I want to see people delivered from sickness and disease. Dealing with this issue will make some angry because their viewpoint is challenged. Nevertheless, it will help many innocent people clear their soul of doubts that have ruined many in their quest for diving healing. The Traditional "Opinions"
It seems that with each new Bible version the church is moving toward a weaker translation of the scriptures. Some suggest the problem is based on the attempt to be politically correct or to host a translation that fits a preference of theology. Others see it as a good effort to make the Word of God more understandable to our culture and society. Paraphrases have increased in popularity. However, while it is a commendable effort to put the Bible in simple terms for easier reading, a paraphrased Bible is still a watered down version of the featured truths of scripture. Paraphrases are not translations. Some portions are mere interpretation. However, if the original intent of scripture is ill used by inserting popular opinion over accurate translation, that paraphrase ceases to be a translation. This has happened in the case of Paul’s thorn. Many of the deeper truths in God’s Word are lost as a result. What follows is the loss of effectiveness.
Someone might say, “If you read it in the Bible who can question it.” However, some Bibles are known to take great liberty in there translation. Thus, it is not strange today to pick up a Bible and read that: “Paul had such revelations that God needed to keep him from becoming conceited. Therefore God gave Paul a thorn, a physical illness in his body.” This statement found in the New International Version is not an accurate translation of the manuscripts. It is an opinion of the so called scholars that put that version together. So try to look beyond one interpretation and consider other translations.
Such opinions have evolved slowly into a concept of fact in the mind of some. Still, it is nothing more than one opinion of many. Most commentators acknowledge that there are many “opinions” but no certainty of fact. In truth, the identification of this thorn has troubled scholars for centuries. There is a list of various opinions, which I present here.
Some kind of nervous disorder (including epilepsy),
An unconverted wife
A speech impediment.
Agony over the Jewish rejection of the gospel,
The Roman Catholic writers think that it denotes some form of impiety.
Tertullian believed it was some kind of pain, such as an ear or head infection.
Luther, Calvin, and other early Reformers interpret the expression as a temptation to unbelief.
In the medieval period it was suggested as a sexual temptation, possibly homosexual.
Others suggested a chronic eye disease which God used to keep Paul humble.
Chrysostom argued that it was opposition to Paul’s ministry (based on the meaning of “Satan” as “adversary”).
One thing is certain; scholars acknowledge there are other opinions. The tendency however, is for people to interpret the thorn to fit a problem relative to their times. For instance in Medieval Times sexual temptation was a serious issue that theologians struggled to explain. Thus, the voices of that era’s, reasoned the thorn was that problem. Believers in the past as well as believers now frequently speculate on Paul’s thorn to fit their present need, crisis, doctrine and problem. For instance, one minister confessed to me he had poor study habits and called it “his weakness”. He associated it as a thorn in his flesh like Paul had. Ultimately he concluded that his lack of interest in studying the scriptures was the Will of God. My friend, what we want to avoid, is using Paul’s thorn as an excuse for not persevering toward the promises of God. In respect to the uncertainty of the thorn, Adam Clarke’s Commentary makes some interesting observations:
“Whatever it was, it was (G3588) tee (G4561) sarki , in the flesh, i. e. of an outward kind. It was neither sin nor sinfulness, for this could not be given him to prevent his being exalted above measure; for sin never had and never can have this tendency. What this thorn in the flesh might be has given birth to a multitude of conjectures. . . It is almost impossible to mistake the apostle’s meaning and reference. JESUS CHRIST sent Paul to proclaim his truth, and found a church at Corinth. SATAN, the adversary of God’s truth, sent a man to preach lies at the same place, and turn the church of God into his own synagogue; and by his teaching lies and calumnies the apostle was severely buffeted. We need seek no other sense for these expressions. Many, however, think that the apostle had really some bodily infirmity that rendered him contemptible, and was the means of obstructing the success of his ministry; and that the false apostle availed himself of this to set Paul at nought, and to hold him out to ridicule. I have shown this, elsewhere, to be very unlikely.”
Once again, many modern day translations leave the impression that Paul’s thorn was a sickness. This is not the case with the ancestral history of most church denominations. They were less dogmatic. Some, like the Pentecostal movement, had many opponents to the notion that the thorn was a sickness. The early church held a clear view of divine healing and Paul’s thorn. We will examine their understanding. Based on the context and the whole council of God, I agree with Chrysostom. The thorn was repeated “opposition to Paul’s ministry”.
Remarks of Others Reflecting On Traditional Views The following quotes are from various scholars, theologians, preachers and Christian writers who took issue with what some have taught about Paul’s thorn. These first three points are quotes taken from the Electronic Bible Software, “Quick Book Library” under the book titled "The Hard sayings of the Bible".
1) “There are some things that we can definitely say about the thorn. First, it was evil. It is described as a "messenger of Satan", not as an angel of God. This means that it comes from the Evil One with evil intent. Whether adversaries or disease, the thorn was evil.”
2) “The thorn caused some type of weakness. Paul says, "That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong" (2 Corinthians 12:10).
3) “In 2 Corinthians 10-13 the basic topic is Paul’s opponents. The whole section refers to the interlopers who are oppressing his beloved Corinthian church and at the same time criticizing Paul for not having had the courage to be equally oppressive.”
Here are several other points of observations from the “Hard Sayings of the Bible”. A review of these views will prepare you to follow my line of thought. a) “Paul parallels this thorn with a "weakness" in which he will glory. While the term "weakness" (Greek astheneia) can refer to illness (Galatians 4:13; 1 Timothy 5:23), in its seven occurrences in the Corinthian letters (and in both its occurrences in Romans) it refers to moral, spiritual or social weakness.” b) “In 2 Corinthians 12:10 he lists weakness in a list which includes "insults, hardships, persecutions, difficulties”, but no terms for illness”. c) “Thus, I conclude that the evidence from both the Old Testament background and the actual use of the term in Paul points to the thorn as being the opponents who dogged Paul’s tracks throughout his mission, confusing churches every time he left one church to plant another.” d) “If Paul was tempted to feel proud, how proud would he feel when even his strongest churches and best converts proved to be subvertable by newcomers?”
Consider this classic book was written by a Rev F. F. Bosworth titled; “Christ The Healer”. Rev. Bosworth was a respected Bible teacher to his generation. His diligence and faithful service to uphold divine healing as a chief gospel truth is worth mentioning. God rewarded him with an endowment of the Holy Spirit and Gifts of Healings. His evangelistic meetings attracted gatherings of standing room in some of the largest auditoriums of his times. More than 12,000 people in single alter calls came seeking salvation. Mr. Bosworth’s message was a full gospel message of the power and demonstration of the Holy Spirit. His compassion for the sick was tremendous. Bosworth saw thousands wonderfully and miraculously healed as faith entered their heart through his teachings. In his book, Bosworth designated a whole chapter to “Paul’s Thorn”. He was not afraid to speak against traditional strongholds. I quote here from a collection of his sermons, printed first in 1924. Key phrases were emboldened by me. Please read mindfully.
From; "Christ The Healer", by F. F. Bosworth.
"One of the most prevalent objections raised today against the ministry of healing is Paul’s ’thorn in the flesh." One traditional idea has led to another. The widespread teaching that God is the Author of disease, and that some of the most devout of His children He has desired shall remain sick, and glorify Him by exhibiting fortitude and patience, no doubt has led to the idea that Paul had a sickness that God refused to heal. We do not believe that any one who would take the time to read that God has to say on the subject of healing could ever form such an opinion...it is merely a matter of study and investigation."
Here is another excerpt from F. F. Bosworth’s book.
"Paul’s Thorn an Angel of Satan"
F. F. Bosworth
"Paul not only tells us that his thorn was an angel of Satan, but he also tells us what the angel came to do: "to buffet me". Now the word buffet means "blow after blow," as when the waves buffeted the boat, and as when they "buffeted" Christ! Since buffeting means repeated blows, if Paul’s buffeting was a disease, it would have had to have been many diseases or the same disease many times repeated, to be called buffeting."…We could not use the personal pronouns "he" and "him" when speaking of ophthalmis, or any other disease, because there is no sex to ophthalmia. Suppose I should ask a man how his cancer was, what would you think if you heard him reply, "Him is lots worse, and I am suffering terribly". Now since Paul distinctly states that his thorn was the angel of Satan sent to buffet him - a demon spirit sent from Satan to make trouble for him wherever he went - why should we say it was something else?"