December 7

The Thorn in the Flesh

Galatians 4:13-15; 2 Corinthians 12:2-16

The Acts of the Apostles merely states the simple fact, that Paul preached the gospel in Galatia—indeed, even that might not seem certain, as literally, it is only said that he “went through” Galatia.

It is to Paul’s own epistle to the Galatians that we owe all the information we possess on the subject.

It is to be observed, that when this epistle was written, the apostle had been twice among the Galatians. At the time he wrote, a great change had taken place in the feeling of the Galatian churches towards him, their spiritual father. This had been the work of Judaising teachers, who had led this too impulsive and unreflecting people, not only to distrust the soundness of his great doctrine of justification by faith, but to question his apostolic authority. This induces him now to remind them of the feelings with which they at first received him, and to recall the circumstances of their conversion.

He begins by reminding them—“You know how, through infirmity of the flesh, I preached the gospel unto you at first.” The infirmity of the flesh, means bodily illness, severe indisposition; and it would seem to be stated, that it was in or under these disqualifying conditions that he first preached the gospel in Galatia. But it has been lately urged, with great ability, by Continental critics, that the proposition (διὰ) translated through, must in this, and some other places, mean on account of, or because of, meaning therefore that it was by reason of Paul’s illness that the gospel was at first preached to them—leaving open the inference that it was his intention to have merely passed through Galatia (perhaps into Bithynia); but being arrested and detained among them by indisposition, he because the instrument of the introduction of Christianity in Galatia sooner than it might otherwise have been. It is, however, difficult to see, why Paul should have wished to pass through a district in which the gospel had not yet been preached, without attempting to make the glad tidings known—the more so as he had not previously been in any of the provinces that lay beyond; and the sequel agrees better with the simple statement, that he preached under the disqualifying circumstances of bodily illness. For he goes on to say, that notwithstanding the disadvantages under which he appeared, and the necessary imperfection of his labors, he was treated with affectionate respect, and his message received with gladness. This is the meaning of his words: “My temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but ye received me as an angel of God, even as Jesus Christ.” Here, as the same Greek word means “angel” and “messenger,” the term “angel of God” may signify messenger of God. At the same time, as Dr. Brown remarks—“As the apostle’s object is obviously to place in a very strong point of view the high esteem, the warm affection, the Galatians showed to him, I am disposed to acquiesce in the version of our translators, especially as this seems to have been a proverbial expression Note: 2 Samuel 19:27.—‘an angel of God, nay, Jesus Christ himself, could not have been more respectfully, more affectionately received by you, than I was, with all my infirmities.’” Note: Expository Discourses on Galatians, p. 216. The apostle then goes on—the tenderness of his recollection of that happy time, rising even to vehemence of earnestness—“Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me.” Or, as Dr. Brown paraphrases—“Oh, how happy did you think yourselves in having me, though a poor diseased man, for your teacher. So highly did you value me, so much did you prize my labors, that there was nothing you would not have parted with to make me happy!” “This,” he rightly adds, “is obviously the true meaning of the phrase, ‘plucking out the eyes.’”

This expression has, together with other circumstances, suggested to some commentators, that the indisposition from which he suffered, was an affection of the eyes; and that, whether so or not, it was that habitual infirmity to which he often refers in his epistles, and which in one place he emphatically indicates under the expressive metaphor of “a thorn in the flesh,” given to him as a chastening discipline.

One thing seems clear, that he had already, for years, been subject to this habitual infirmity, sometimes probably more severely manifested than at others, as at the date of his visit to the Galatians. In 2 Corinthians 12:7-10, where this particular reference to it occurs, he appears to trace its origin to a period fourteen years anterior to the date of his then writing. Now that epistle is usually supposed to have been written in or about the year 57 A.D.: the visit to the Galatians does not seem to have been more than six years prior to this, and the full fourteen years would take us back to about the close of the period of his labors in Syria and Cilicia, before Barnabas brought him to Antioch. The bodily infirmity, therefore, which the Galatians, as he mentions to their credit, did not permit to influence disadvantageously their reception of him—may well have been his habitual malady—his “thorn in the flesh,” perhaps in its most aggravated intensity.

This therefore may seem the proper place to make some inquiry into the nature of that infirmity.

His own account of its origin is that, at the time to which he refers, he was favored with extraordinary revelations of the divine glory, producing the most exalting spiritual rapture, which might have been injurious to the sobriety of his mind, had he not at the same time been visited with this infirmity, which, by distressingly realizing to him the sense of his human weakness, kept the balance of his mind in due poise. He did not recognize at first this use of his affliction, and he prayed earnestly for its removal. But his supplication was not granted; and the reason for its refusal was graciously given to him, in the ever-memorable words—“My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness.” He might not desire to be freed from that infirmity which, by deepening the sense of human weakness, made him not only more consciously dependent upon that power which was sufficient to sustain him in all trial, and strengthen him in all conflict, but which would, indeed, by the visible weakness of the instrument, magnify the power that wrought mightily through him, by evincing that it was of God.

Was Paul satisfied with this? He was more than satisfied. He rejoiced; he exulted; and, proceeding to report the matter to those who had heard his “bodily presence” described as “weak, and his speech contemptible,” while it was admitted, that “his letters were weighty and powerful”—he goes on to say—“Most gladly, therefore, will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.” And, proceeding with accumulated intensity of emphasis, he adds—“Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities,” etc. “for when I am weak, then am I strong.”

We refrain with difficulty from enforcing the reflections these sublime declarations suggest, to ask what was the nature of this infirmity, which is so frequently brought under our notice?

The best solution can be but the most probable conjecture. Many are the conjectures which have been offered; but all of them agree in this, that whether or not this infliction involved actual physical pain, it detracted from the dignity of his personal appearance, exposed him to humiliations and difficulties, and might seem calculated to impede his usefulness. Answering to these conditions, it does not seem to us, that anything has been suggested, which has so much internal evidence in is favor, as that it was some affection of the eyes, whereby his vision was much impaired—perhaps more so at one time than at another.

Allusions to the value of sight, and the preciousness of the eyes, are too common to allow much stress to be laid upon the text which has given occasion to these remarks. But certainly, the very forcible expression, “Ye would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me,” would acquire deeper emphasis in the mouth of one whose own vision was imperfect; and it would be interesting to be able to read it with this meaning—That such was the intensity of regard with which they received him, that, perceiving his infirmity of vision, they would gladly, if it had been possible, have repaired the defect, by giving their own eyes to him.

Again, towards the close of this epistle, the apostle says to the Galatians—“You see how large a letter I have written with my own hand.” The word rendered letter, is not that which expresses an epistle, but one that denotes handwriting; and it is very generally agreed, that it refers to the size, and perhaps comparative rudeness of the characters in which he (contrary to his usual practice) had written this epistle with his own hand, or at least the closing part of it. Having done this, he would naturally point to the labor he had thus undertaken, as a proof of special interest and regard. The fact of imperfect vision would explain this much better than the usual hypothesis that, being accustomed to write Hebrew, he could not very easily write the Greek, but in large and crude characters—a supposition to which we see very considerable objection. Imperfect vision also explains much more satisfactorily than this, the undoubted fact that Paul almost invariably wrote his epistles by the hand of others. This practice of his was known to all those he addressed, as we should expect in the case of a person laboring under defective vision.

We know that Paul was blind for three days at Damascus; and, as we hinted in considering that event, it may be doubted whether his sight was ever perfectly restored. It is true, that he seems to fix the commencement of his infirmity to a date some years later; but it may be merely, that this affection of his eyes then became more intense than it ever had been before; or, still more probably, that this contrasting disqualification became more burdensome to him in his state of spiritual exaltation, and he was then excited to pray for its removal.

It further appears from the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles, that Paul was almost never alone, and never appears, after the date indicated, to have taken the shortest journey by himself. He seems to have been always in the hands, and always under the inspection (if we may so speak) of his friends and followers; and we find him continually attended from place to place by parties of his hearers and disciples, and he seems always to count upon and wish for such attendance. All this becomes exceeding natural in the case of a person rendered much dependent upon the kind attention of friends, by bodily infirmities of any kind—but especially by partial blindness.

All this, taken separately, does not perhaps amount to much in the way of proof or evidence; but taken together, it is more than can be advanced in favor of any other suggestion which has been offered.