Paul's Thorn
By
Phil Scovell
Copyright (C) 1997/2003
By Phil Scovell
All Rights Reserved
Reproduction of the following is granted by the copyright holder,
Phil Scovell, if such reproduction is done in the spirit in which
it was given. It may not be reproduced and sold for financial
gain without written permission of the copyright holder: Phil
Scovell. Electronic formats may be distributed freely but this
copyright notice must remain with each copy and the text cannot
be altered in any way. For convenience, this copyright
notification may be placed at the end of the document if
reproduced electronically.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Phil Scovell
840 South Sheridan Boulevard
Denver, Colorado 80226-8017
Toll Free: 888-936-0001
Voice: 303-936-2188
Fax: 303-936-1841
Email: Phil@RedWhiteAndBlue.ORG
Web: WWW.RedWhiteAndBlue.ORG
PAUL'S THORN
By
Phil Scovell
The word "flesh" used by Paul in II Corinthians 12 in
reference to his "thorn in the flesh" is used some 150 times in
the King James. 146 usages as "flesh," twice as "carnal," once
as "carnally," and once as "all flesh." Of course not all usages
of "flesh" are literal. Obviously referring to something more
than physiology, Jesus said of the marriage that husband and wife
are one flesh (Matt. 19:5-6). "All flesh shall see the salvation
of God" (Luke 3:6) - meaning "flesh" in the sense of all
humanity/mankind I.E. the human race. The Jews were confused
when Jesus said believers would have to eat of his flesh and
drink of His blood (John 4:51-52). Of course this was symbolic;
He wasn't referring to His literal "flesh." Then Paul also
referred to the "flesh" in Romans 8:6: "For to be
(carnally/flesh) minded is death." This is the only time where
"flesh" is rendered "carnally." This is a reference to the
mental and emotional nature and not the literal physical body.
Then, of course, there are many references where "flesh" actually
means the physical body which I won't take the time to list. In
short, "flesh" is often used, and I have only mentioned a
fraction of the verses, in reference to the physical,
occasionally as the spiritual, sometimes the emotional, and
frequently as the psychological aspect of our nature.
It has been mentioned by some, when discussing this topic, that
Paul's infirmity was a messenger of Satan sent to buffet him and
that such was to keep him from being puffed up, that is, proud.
This is exactly what he confessed (I Cor. 12:7. There is
evidence, however, that his "infirmity" was eradicated in
Galatians 4:13-15. "You know how through infirmity of the flesh
I preached the gospel unto you at the first." I am not a Greek
scholar but it would appear that this statement may mean that his
infirmity was absent later in his ministry. The next verse also
sheds light on this subject. "And my temptation which was in my
flesh you desired not, nor rejected." We know that temptation
doesn't come from God but is a result of man's unregenerate soul
according to James 1:13-14. It would appear by this statement
that Paul is not referring to the physical. Why would he call
loss of vision a "temptation?" I've been totally blind since age
eleven and I cannot see in anyway how blindness could be
considered a temptation or, any physical disability, for that
matter. The next verse, on the other hand, would seem to imply
differently. He said the Galatians would have plucked out their
own eyes for him. In short, there seems to be evidence on both
sides of the issue to indicate Paul had a visual impairment or,
at the very least, a physical disability of some kind.
According to II Corinthians 12:8, Paul requested this temptation
[thorn in the flesh] be removed and he did so on at least three
occasions. God, however, only replied that His grace was enough
for Paul. Why, I ask, would God not remove this affliction at
Paul's request? Paul said, as already mentioned, that because of
the abundance of the spiritual revelations he was receiving that
such a thorn would keep him humble. This in itself suggests that
Paul, as would anyone, had a problem with pride of some sort. I
honestly believe this means that such a thorn, even if of Satan,
would remind him of his human nature. In light of the events
recorded in the four gospels and those which followed in the Acts
of the apostles, I think it highly unlikely that Paul's infirmity
was physical I.E. a disability of the physical body. Even the
Galatians's statement that they would pluck out their own eyes
doesn't really prove Paul had vision problems but in my opinion,
it does give insight to what I believe Paul's thorn really might
have been. I'll get to that shortly.
Let me first suggest, however, that God cannot honor all
requests which come before Him. God the Father did not answer
Paul's prayer that he be freed from this temptation in the flesh.
That is what he, Paul, called it in Galatians 4:14. God can, of
course, do anything so why wouldn't He, if it were physical,
free Paul from bondage? I believe God couldn't. Not because He
was powerless but because Paul was asking the impossible.
There are some prayers that God won't answer. Not because He
can't but because He won't. For example, I have been dieting for
just under four months and have lost more than forty pounds. Do
you think God would honor my request if I begged Him to remove
my desire for food in order that I might loose weight? Such
would be physically unnatural and it is unlikely God would honor
my prayer. If a teenager was trying to gain victory over
listening to heavy metal rock music and ask the Lord to make him
deaf, would God consider such a request? Of course not. What if
a person had trouble going to the wrong places as a Christian so
he begged God to remove his feet in order that he might not have
the ability to walk to those sinful places? Absurd. Try this
one. One of my first counseling experiences years ago was with a
Christian man who was homosexual and was trying to get free.
What, if in his desire to be free, he requested that God give him
a hatred for men in order that he might have victory. Would God
answer that prayer? Unlikely. I have likewise counselled with
those women who have had abortions. If in their grief and guilt
they asked God to bring back their aborted child, would God?
Could He? Sure! He's God and can do anything; He can raise the
dead. I had a man call me once and wake me from sleep at 1:00 in
the morning to pray. His father had died suddenly and wasn't a
Christian. My friend on the phone asked me to pray that his
father would revive in order that he might be born again before
he past away. Would God answer that prayer? Remember the rich
man in Hell made such a request in order that Lazarus might go
and witness to he, the rich man's, family. In short, I can name
many prayers which God will not answer; not because He can't but
because He won't. Why? There are natural laws.
Let me suggest two possibilities concerning Paul's thorn.
Remember that Paul was a murderer. Many Christians had perished
at his hand as he tried to rid the land of all Christians. Try
and tell me that Paul's conscience didn't bother him. Sure he
was forgiven as are we. Do past sins ever return to haunt you?
They do me. Are we forgiven? Yes! Emotional guilt, though,
often invades our relationship with Christ. The price for sin
was once paid by our Lord Christ but the emotions have not yet
been sanctified and must be governed by the Word according to
James 1:21. Such is the nature of God's perpetual and eternal
grace. I believe it is possible Paul suffered from depression
over his past life as he warred against the Church. If you think
that a Godly man such as Paul would never succumb to such
emotions, I would caution you of ever putting a man, even a Godly
man, on a pedestal. Those who do are always disappointed.
There is one other possibility which I personally think is
credible. If, and I am saying if, Paul's thorn in the flesh was
relating to the psychological rather than the physical, I believe
Paul's thorn could have been sexual in nature. Some believe Paul
had been married but was a widower during his ministry has an
apostle. He was certainly young in his early ministry and
probably died, according to some, in his early sixties. Since he
confessed his thorn was a "temptation" which was in his flesh,
(Gal. 4:14), and since the "lust of the eyes" is certainly
temptation, and because Paul admonished us so much on the lust of
the flesh throughout his writings, is it not possible that Paul
was asking God to remove natural sexual desires from him in order
that he might more fully serve the Lord? It's only a guess of
course but it is certainly possible. In this case, or in that of
the former, God would not answer his prayers concerning the
removal of the natural tendencies of remorse and sexuality.
As you read this, I'm sure some are thinking differently about
such a possibility while others are laughing at the suggestion.
I personally believe that there is Scriptural evidence to support
my view and evidence to support those who believe Paul's thorn
was physical. Those who believe it was physical often do so
because then it can be used as an example that God strikes some
with physical infirmities in order to keep them in line. If this
is true, it is the only such record I can think of where God
employed physical punishment with one of his own children in
order to maintain submission and humility. Such is the result of
God's judgement of sin. I don't personally subscribe to such an
interpretation which reduces God to an ogre but others apparently
do.
End Of Document
Go To HOME: The Zeneith Tube Website: RedWhiteAndBlue.org