14.11 Paul's Thorn In The Flesh
There is fair evidence that Paul did suffer from a
physical ailment in order to keep him humble. The wonder is that he
only asked three times for it to be removed. He knew it was for his
spiritual good, and he believed this. The two possibilities which seem
most convincing are poor eyesight and (perhaps related) malaria.
Poor Eyesight
Gal. 4:10-13 speaks of an 'infirmity in the flesh' which
would have led many to despise Paul's preaching; and yet the Galatians
overlooked this when they first heard Paul's preaching. Speaking of the
same period of time, Paul reminisces how they would have been willing
to pluck out their own eyes and give them to him (Gal. 4:15). This
would seem to make a fairly firm connection between the " thorn in the
flesh" of 2 Cor. 12:7 and the " infirmity in the flesh" of poor
eyesight. Thus he concludes the Galatian letter with a reference
to the large letter he had written with his own hand (Gal. 6:11); not
"large" in the sense of long, but perhaps referring to his physically
large and unimpressive handwriting. Paul "earnestly beholding the
council" employs a Greek medical term for squinting as a result of poor
eyesight (Acts 23:1). The descriptions of
Paul's physical appearance in 2 Corinthians and Gal. 4:13-15 suggest
that it was at times disgusting to those who saw it. "This description
comports well with an ailment produced by a virus that is activated by
anxiety. The same microbe that produces "chicken pox" in children often
lies dormant, later in life infecting the nervous system and provoking
"shingles" as well as the ballooning, scarring condition of the eye
known as herpes zoster". This visually disgusting condition could've
been what Paul suffered from (1).
Malaria
The description of Paul being with the Corinthians in "
weakness and... trembling" (1 Cor. 2:3) uses a specific medical term
describing the malaria shakes. This would explain why he was " in peril
of waters" (Gk. rivers; 2 Cor. 11:26)- the breeding grounds of
mosquitoes. Poor eyesight could be associated with malaria; although it
us difficult to understand the malaria just beginning in mid-life as
suddenly as the 'thorn in the flesh' passage seems to suggest. Paul may
well have had malaria, as any such traveller was likely to- quite in
addition to any physical 'thorn in the flesh'.
A Spiritual Struggle
However, there are reasons to think that whilst Paul may
have had a physical ailment, the " thorn in the flesh" may have
referred to a a spiritual affliction. One would expect to read about a
thorn in the body if Paul was only speaking of a physical
weakness. But in Paul's thinking, " the flesh" so evidently refers to
the more abstract things of human nature. The context of the " thorn in
the flesh" passage would suggest that it was a spiritual weakness. Paul
says that he will not boast of himself, " except in my infirmities" (2
Cor. 12:5). One of his " infirmities" was therefore his " thorn in the
flesh" . He is saying that he will not boast of his physical sufferings
(which might include his weak eyesight) and achievements, rather he
will exult in the fact that he, a man riddled with spiritual infirmity,
especially one particular thorn in the flesh, had been used by God, and
God's grace was sufficient to overcome all his spiritual weakness. Now
this would fit in with the quintessence of Paul's belief: that by grace
alone, not human achievement, God works through human weakness to bring
about His purpose. Paul isn't adding to his list of physical glorying
by saying 'And you know, on top of all this, I've had to struggle all
my life with physical weakness'. This would only be continuing his
boasting of 2 Cor. 11. But now he changes, and says that he wants to
glory in his spiritual weakness, and how God has worked with him
despite that.
Paul asked for the thorn to be taken away; but the
answer was that God's grace was sufficient. Grace tends to be
associated with forgiveness and justification, rather than with the
ability to keep on living with a physical ailment. Likewise Moses,
Paul's hero and prototype, asked a similar three times for entry to the
land, and was basically given the same answer: that God's gracious
forgiveness was sufficient for him.
Women?
When Paul talks about being buffeted by a thorn in the
flesh, he is in fact almost quoting passages from the LXX of Num. 33:55
and Josh. 23:13, where " thorns" which would buffet the eyes
of Israel were the Canaanite tribes (cp. Ez. 28:24); and
especially, in the context, their women. If they intermarried, those
women and what they brought with them would be made by God as thorns in
Israel's flesh. The implication could be that Paul had not driven out
his Canaanites earlier, and therefore God gave them to Him as a thorn
in the flesh, just as He had done to Israel earlier. There is fair
reason to think that Paul had been married; he could not have been a
member of the Sannhedrin and thus had the power to vote for the murder
of the early martyrs unless he had been married and had children (Acts
26:10). His comment that he wished all men to be in his marital
position (1 Cor. 7:8) has another slant in this case: he wished them to
have had the marriage experience, but be in the single state. As a
leading Pharisee, his wife would have been from an appropriate
background. " ...for whom I have suffered the loss of all things" would
then have been written with a sideways glance back at his wife,
children he never saw... all that might have been. In gripping
autobiography, Paul relates the innocent days when (as a child) he
lived without the knowledge of law and therefore sin. But then, the
concept of commandments registered with him; and this " wrought in me
all manner of concupiscence" (Rom. 7:8). " Concupiscence" is a
conveniently archaic word for lust; and in the thinking and writing of
Paul, the Greek epithumia is invariably used in a sexual
context.
As an ardent Pharisee, with all the charisma of the
unashamed extremist and evidently rising leader, it is almost certain
that the inevitable interplay of sexuality and spirituality, of flesh
and spirit, would have played itself out. And after conversion, the
inevitable attraction of the committed missionary would have been
evident; not least in the charismatic preaching of a new and ultimately
true religion which was largely comprised of young / middle aged
females (according to contemporary historians). No wonder Paul's
slanderers made him out to be immoral; it was the easiest slur to cast.
At Thessalonika he was even accused of preaching solely in order to get
the praise and financial support of women (so 1 Thess. 2:3-12 implies).
And as a man, with the commandments of God producing in him all manner
of concupiscence, he would not have lightly shrugged off all these
temptations. If this " thorn in the flesh" became particularly strong
at a certain time, this could be seen as reference to the beginning of
some illicit relationship.
And yet it cannot be overlooked that as outlined above,
there does seem to be an evident link between the thorn in the flesh
and literal blindness (Gal. 4:10-13 = 2 Cor. 12:7). The explanation may
be that because of Paul's wandering eyes and mind, his sight was
severely impaired. He likens his ailment to a man plucking out his eyes
with his own hands (Gal. 4:15), using language unmistakably recalling
the Lord's command to pluck out, with ones' own hands, the eyes that
offend, that we might enter the Kingdom. The command of Mt. 5:28,29 is
in the very context of lustful thinking and looking. In His desire to
save us, God has His way. Paul saw that his weakness for women would
have cost him the Kingdom, and that therefore the Lord had plucked out
his eyes. He had been given a thorn in his flesh spiritually; and so
the Lord had given him a thorn in the flesh physically, that he might
conquer that spiritual weakness. The other reference to plucking out
the offending eye is in Mt. 18:9, in a context regarding the paramount
need not to offend the little ones. Could it be that Paul's limitation
was to protect some of his converts from stumbling? And so with us, the
offending eye or limb must be plucked out or cut off; and if we will
not do it, the Lord will: either now, by grace, or in the final
destruction of condemnation. We either fall on the stone of the Lord
and are broken now, or that stone will fall upon us, and grind us to
powder. We either chose the baptism of fire now, or we will be consumed
anyway by the fire of judgment. The logic of devotion, self-control and
self-sacrifice is powerfully appealing.
Implications
God gave Paul his thorn in the flesh. Whilst
God tempts no man- for temptation is a process internal to human
nature- He may still have a hand in controlling the situations which
lead to temptation. Hence the Lord bid us pray that the Father lead us
not into temptation. Each of us has his own specific human weaknesses.
When the apostle wrote of shedding the sin which doth so
easily beset us (Heb. 12:1), he may have been suggesting that we each
have our own specific weakness to overcome. This is certainly a comfort
to us in our spiritual struggles. We aren't alone in them. They were
given to us. We aren't alone with our nature. The purpose and plan of
God for us is articulated even through the darkest nooks of our very
essential being. Understanding this should make us the more patient
with our brethren, whose evident areas of weakness are not ours.
Notes
(1) Bruce Chilton, Rabbi Paul: An Intellectual
Biography (New York: Random House, 2005) p. 61. Herpes zoster is associated with
intermittent "swelling, disfigurement, pain and blindness"- Lee-Ellen
Copstead and Jacquelyn Banasik, Pathophysiology (Philadelphia:
Saunders, 2000) pp. 1186-1188.
|