Paul’s Thorn

And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And He said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.” (II Cor. 12:7-10).

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 time to read all that God has to say on the subject of healing could ever form such a conclusion.

I am quick to admit that equally devout men may hold contrary views, not only on this point, but on the whole subject of Divine healing. It is merely a matter of study and investigation. Many good men whose teaching has been that the age of miracles is past, etc., while reading the Scriptures, have thoughtlessly passed over the Bible teaching on healing, believing it not applicable for our day. Nearly all who have spoken and written against us have not hesitated to use our name, and “go after us with hammer and tongs;” but they never have attempted to answer the scriptural arguments we have presented in our sermons on the subject. We have carefully, without mentioning their names, read their statements publicly and answered them from the Scriptures. If we were fighting against “flesh and blood” we would name them, and “go after them with a vengeance,” but this would not be Christ-like. We feel disposed to “keep our hands off” God’s servants, and let Him fight our battles for us.

A Clergyman’s Absurd Exposition

Before considering the subject of Paul’s “thorn,” we quote the following from a stenographic report of a sermon preached by a prominent New York clergyman, and which he also revised, printed in great quantities, and distributed in every home in the vicinity of our revival, in order to offset our teaching on healing, of which he had practically no knowledge, having never seen or heard us. Among other things he said:

The fact is—Paul was sick. He was the sickest of men. He had one of the worst and most painful of oriental diseases. He had opthalmia—a disease of the eyes. The proof that he had it is overwhelming. He tells us he had a “thorn in the flesh.” . . . When Paul stood before them his eyes filled with unspeakable pus—unspeakable-looking matter running down over his face ... Why would they have digged out their eyes for him except that his eyes, as he stood before them, were a pitiable and appealing sight to them—-as the eyes of any one with opthalmia are? The particular pain of this disease is that it is like a “stake” in the eyes . . . It is beyond dispute that Paul was a sick man. He says so himself. Paul did not get this disease by infection. How did he get it? Jesus Christ gave it to him. Paul did not want to be sick. He prayed the Lord to heal him from this sickness. He prayed not once, nor twice, but three times. He received no answer to his prayers. In spite of all his praying he got no healing. His thrice-offered prayer brought him no cure, not even the hint of healing. That is not all. The Lord said to Paul a very startling thing. He said, “My grace is sufficient for thee.” . . . He tells Paul it is better for him to be sick than to be well. He tells Paul it is the Divine will he shall not be cured. . . He tells Paul Divine power can and will operate in and through him better with opthalmia and sickness than without it. . . Hear what Paul has to say in response to the Lord concerning his infirmity and the will of the Lord that he shall not be cured of it. These are his words, “Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmity that the Power of Christ may rest upon me.” Here is Paul saying just this, “I will glory in my opthalmia. My eyes may be full of repulsive discharges; I may be the object of pity; no matter, I will glory in it. I will rejoice in my sickness.” . . . In the quivering flesh and painful suffering of His apostle, the Lord has written His Divine protest against this unspeakable doctrine, this brutal transmutation of the cross of Christ into a center of physical healing.

In answering our brother’s arguments on this point, we will state, first, that the expression “thorn in the flesh” is not once used in either the Old or New Testaments except as an illustration. The figure of the thorn in the flesh is not in one single instance used in the Bible as a figure of sickness. Every time the expression is used in the entire Bible, it is specifically stated exactly what the “thorn in the flesh” was, as we shall see. For instance, in Numbers 33:55, Moses told the children of Israel, before they entered the Land of Canaan, “If ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be pricks in your eyes and thorns in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell.”

Here the Scripture itself plainly tells us that the “pricks” in the eyes, and the “thorns in the sides of the Israelites were the inhabitants of Canaan, and not eye trouble or sickness. These teachers contend that Paul’s “thorn” must have been a bodily affliction, because Paul says that the “thorn” was “in the flesh.” I answer that, in the case of these Israelites, the Scripture says, “pricks in your eyes,” and “thorns in your sides,” but this does not mean that God was to stick Canaanites in their eyes and sides, with their heels dangling outside. God was only illustrating, to show that, as a thorn sticking in the flesh is annoying, so the Canaanites would, if left remaining, be a constant annoyance to the children of Israel.

The Canaanites a Thorn to Israel

Again, Joshua, eight years later, says, in the 23rd chapter, concerning the heathen nations in Canaan, “they shall be scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes.” So, we see again that the “scourges in their sides and thorns in their eyes” were Canaanites, and not sore eyes or sore sides. It is here again, as in all other instances, Plainly stated what the “thorn” was.

Among the last words of David we read, “the sons of Belial shall be all of them as thorns.” Without an exception, in all these cases, the “thorns” are personalities. As in each of these instances it definitely states what the “thorn” was; so Paul definitely states what his “thorn” was. He says it was “the messenger (Gr., Angelos) of Satan;” or, as translated by others, “the angel of the devil,” “Satan’s angel,” etc. This Greek word angelos appears 188 times in the Bible, and is translated “angel” 181 times, and “messenger” the other seven times. In all the 188 times in the entire Bible, it is in every case a person and not a thing—without a solitary exception. “Hell was made for the devil and his angels” (or “messengers,”) and an “angel” or a “messenger” is always a person that one person sends to another, and never a disease.

Paul’s Thorn an Angel of Satan

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,” or, as Rotherham translates it, “that he might be buffeting me.” Now the word “buffet” means “blow after blow,” as when the waves buffeted the boat, and as when they “buffeted” Christ! Accordingly, Weymouth translates “Satan’s angel dealing blow after blow.” Since buffeting means repeated blows, if Paul’s buffeting was disease, it would have had to have been many diseases or the same disease many times repeated, to be called buffeting. How could the diseases be repeated many times unless he got well between-times?

In speaking of this messenger, or angel, Rotherham’s translation uses the pronoun “he,” and Weymouth’s translation states, “As for this, three times I besought the Lord to rid me of him.” Both of these translators use personal pronouns; viz., “he” and “him” when speaking of Paul’s thorn ; so these two pronouns, as well as the word “angel,” or “messenger,” prove that Paul’s “thorn” was, as he himself plainly shows, a satanic personality and not a disease. We could not use the personal pronouns “he” or “him” when speaking of ophthalmia, 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?

Paul’s Sufferings

Soon after Paul’s conversion, God said to Ananias, “I will show him how great things he must suffer for My name’s sake,” not by sickness, but by the persecutions which Paul enumerates as his buffetings. Paul had persecuted the Christians from place to place, and now he, himself, was beginning to experience the same and greater persecutions. Specifying the buffetings instigated by Satan’s angel, Paul goes on to say, “Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake ; for when I am weak then am I strong.” Paul first mentions “infirmities,” for he realized, and every christian should realize, his weakness and inability in his own strength to stand up against a satanic messenger, and to pass triumphantly through “reproaches, necessities, persecutions, distresses,” and all the other buffetings he elsewhere catalogues; and this is why he besought the Lord three times to be rid of “him” (the messenger) who was buffeting him so severely and in so many ways. Christ responded to his thrice-repeated prayer, not by removing the satanic messenger, but by saying, “My grace (which is for the “inner” man) is sufficient for thee; for My strength is made perfect in weakness.” When Paul saw that the grace of God was sufficient to strengthen him to bear all these things, he exclaimed, “Therefore will I rather glory in —my infirmities (weaknesses) that the power of Christ may rest upon me... for when I am weak then am I strong.” How could it be true that Christ’s strength was made perfect in Paul’s weakness if he was left weak, or unless Paul was an actual partaker of Christ’s strength, which would remove the weakness, whether it was physical or spiritual? Without God’s strength being imparted to him is a man powerful when he is weak, either physically or spiritually? Paul saw that the grace of God given him made his very buffetings even his imprisonments, to work together for his good and to turn out for the “furtherance of the Gospel.” What servant of God has not learned, and probably more than once, that it is when he is most conscious of his own weakness that the power of Christ rests upon him the most; or, that it is when he is consciously weakest in himself that he is the strongest because of depending, not on his own, but on Divine strength?

Grace for Spiritual, Not Physical, Infirmities

Paul is clear in teaching that it is the “Life of Jesus” which is “made manifest in our mortal flesh,” but it is nowhere stated in the Scriptures that God gives grace to our bodies. The very word “grace” shows that it was the “inner man” that needed help, because the grace of God is imparted only to the “inner man,” which Paul says, in his case, was “renewed day by day.” In other words, “grace” is for spiritual infirmities, and not for physical.

While the terms in the Old Testament “pricks in your eyes and thorns in your sides,” were used, the Canaanites were not an annoyance to the Israelites in the sense of inflicting any physical disease or infirmities upon their bodies. As the annoying Canaanites were outside the bodies of the Israelites, so Satan’s angel was outside of Paul’s body; for surely the Apostle had no demon inhabiting his body. God’s grace and mercy have always been given to enable us to bear our persecutions and temptations; but not to bear our sins and sicknesses, which He bore for us. God has never promised to take away from christians their external buffetings, afflictions and temptations; he gives us grace to bear them. But throughout history He has ever been ready to take away the internal, or bodily, oppressions of the devil, as well as our sins.

For God Was with Him

Jesus “went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil, for God was with Him.” God tells us, “They that will live godly in this present world shall suffer persecution,” but He has never said, “They shall remain sick,” according to unscriptural views held by many today. This view denies all scriptural precedent. No doubt Paul got the expression “thorn in the flesh” from reading the Old Testament Scriptures, and because the term illustrated their external and not their bodily annoyances, he used the same expression to illustrate his own buffetings.

If the infirmities (weaknesses) of which Paul here speaks), were physical, and, according to the above-quoted writer Paul was “the sickest of men,” and God would not remove the “thorn” by giving him strength, how could he labor “more abundantly than they all?” If “the sickest of men” can accomplish more work than a well man, then let us all pray for sickness in order that we also may do more work for God. After realizing that God’s strength was “made perfect in (his) weakness,” then Paul could take pleasure, not only in his infirmities, but also in the buffetings which he mentions, reproaches, necessities, persecutions, distresses, etc. Note, here, among other things, that Paul mentions necessities, meaning his financial buffetings, which he also refers to in his first letter to the Corinthians written a year before. He says, “Even unto this present hour, we both hunger and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwelling place” (I Cor. 4:11), showing that Paul’s idea of buffetings was not a permanent sickness.

Paul Enumerates His Buffetings

If Paul’s “thorn” was ophthalmia, or sore eyes, which he does not mention, instead of these reproaches, etc., which he does mention why does he not say he takes pleasure in the former instead of in the latter? Not only here, but elsewhere in his letter to the Corinthians, Paul enumerates in detail his buffetings instigated by Satan’s angel. In addition to the reproaches, necessities, persecutions and distresses mentioned in our text, in the sixth chapter of this same letter he mentions stripes, imprisonments, tumults, labors, watchings, fastings, dishonor, evil report, deceivers, “as dying and behold we live,” “as chastened and not killed,” “as sorrowful yet always rejoicing,” “as poor yet making many rich,” “as having nothing yet possessing all things ;” and in the 11th chapter, “stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one; thrice was I beaten with rods; once was I stoned; thrice I suffered shipwreck ...a day and a night in the deep; in journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst: in fastings often, in cold and nakedness.” “Reviled . . . persecuted ... defamed ... made as the filth of the world... the offscouring of all things unto this day.”

Questions Worth Considering

Who but Satan’s angel could be responsible for all these sufferings? In enumerating them we see that Paul mentions almost everything that one could think of except sickness, or ophthalmia. The one thing which he does not mention, and which is conspicuous for its absence, tradition seizes upon and says this was his “thorn.” Why do these opposers substitute “sore eyes” or “sickness,” neither of which Paul mentions, for all of these buffetings which he does mention :

Although it is believed by many good men, one writer remarks that this widespread perversion of the Scriptures dealing with Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” is certainly inspired by Satan, because it gives him the privilege of carrying on his evil work of afflicting and tormenting the bodies of humanity.

Since healing is an essential element of the Gospel, how could Paul enjoy “the fulness of the blessing of the Gospel” as he did, and remain sick? Is not healing a part of the blessing of the Gospel? Even such conservative scholars as those constituting the Episcopalian Commission on Healing agree that “bodily healing is an essential element of the Gospel.”

Suppose our brother is correct in stating that Paul was the “sickest of men,” suffering with ophthalmia, is it not strange that when the Ephesians saw the pus running from Paul’s eyes and found that God would not heal him, this sight gave them faith for “special miracles” to be wrought in their behalf? for it is stated here that “God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul, so that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out.” (Acts 19:11, 12). The Scriptures never speak of special miracles in -connection with any but this “sickest” Apostle. Today, if handkerchiefs were brought from one suffering with ophthalmia, rather than laying them on the sick for healing, we would burn them to keep from spreading the infection.

The Case of the Cripple at Lystra

Again, when the heathen cripple at Lystra heard Paul preach “the Gospel,” and got a glimpse of Paul’s eyes, with their “repulsive discharges,” (?) the sight at once gave him faith to walk for the first time on earth, and Paul “perceiving that he had faith to be healed, said with a loud voice, ‘stand upright on thy feet,’ and he leaped and walked.” ‘This heathen cripple had never witnessed a miracle nor ever heard the Gospel preached until he heard it from “the sickest of men” whom God wills “shall not be cured.”

Again, is it not marvelous how Paul, with “unspeakable pus---unspeakable-looking matter running down over his face,” “the sickest of men,” suffering with the “worst and most painful of oriental diseases . . . a pitiable and appealing sight to them,” and “Jesus Christ gave it to him,” telling him, “it is the Divine will he shall not be cured’”——I say is it not marvelous how Paul in this condition could “make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God, ... from Jerusalem round about unto Illyricum?” (Rom. 15:18, 19.) Again, on the island of Melita, after seeing Paul’s unsightly disease, which must remain because “Divine power can and will operate in and through him better with ophthalmia and sickness than without it,” first, the father of Publius and then “all the other sick people in the island came and were cured.” (Acts 28:8, 9—Weymouth).

Do the Sick Glory in Sickness

The brother above quoted says, “Paul is saying just this, ‘I will glory in my ophthalmia; my eyes may be full of repulsive discharges; I may be the object of pity; no matter, I will glory in it. I will rejoice in my sickness!’” Since these men teach it is right for Paul to glory in his being “the sickest of men,” why do not they also glory in their sickness, instead of doing their best to be rid of it? If they glory in their “thorn,” why have some of them gone to a surgeon to have it cut out?

Some teachers hold that Paul’s “thorn” was a partial blindness caused by the brightness of the Divine light that shone upon him at his conversion. He, himself, tells us, in the year 60, when he wrote this epistle, that it was “above 14 years ago” that he received the abundance of the revelations which occasioned the giving of the “thorn in the flesh;” making it 12 years after his conversion that the “thorn” was given, this epistle having been written 26 years after his conversion. And, again, it would be wellnigh blasphemy to speak of a partial blindness caused by a personal glimpse of the glorified Christ as “the messenger of Satan.”

Why Paul’s Thorn?

Paul distinctly states that his buffeting by the messenger was given him lest he should be “exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations.” Is it because of the abundance of their revelations that the sick everywhere today must be taught to regard their sickness as a “thorn,” which must remain lest they be exalted?

Since Paul’s “thorn” was no hindrance to his faith for the healing of “all the other sick people in the island” of Melita, and elsewhere, why should it hinder ours; or why should it be taught today everywhere as a hindrance to what little faith for healing the sick may have received? The Bible says “faith cometh by hearing,” but in these days faith leaveth by hearing—hearing these foolish doctrines. The widespread error concerning Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” severs the Gospel, and entirely removes the foundation upon which faith for healing must rest unless the sick one received, from the Spirit and not from the Bible, a special revelation that he is to be healed.

We have noticed from the writings of these teachers that they are quick to mention the slightest physical defect in those who teach healing and are seeing the sick healed, and yet they argue that it was proper for Paul, who is the most outstanding New Testament teacher of healing, to have, as they contend, the “thorn” of bodily affliction. If we could duplicate Paul’s wonderful ministry of healing while “unspeakable pus” was all the time running from our eyes, would not this be seized upon by these very teachers as a ground for ridicule?

Paul’s Thorn Not a Hindrance to Labor

The Scriptures show that Paul’s “thorn” did not hinder him from laboring more abundantly than all others, but those who are taught that their sickness is a “thorn” that must remain are often incapacitated by their “thorn” from any labor, not even being able to care for themselves, but increasing other people’s labors by having to be waited upon. It was the Apostle Paul who wrote that we may be “prepared unto every good work,” —“thoroughly furnished unto all good works,” “zealous of good works,” “careful to maintain good works,” and “perfect in every good work to do His will.” How can the multitude of christians confined to their sickrooms by a “thorn in the flesh” “abound unto every good work?” Do these several Scriptures belong only to well christians?

If Christ’s words “My grace is sufficient” mean that He is telling Paul to remain sick, it would be the first and only instance in the Bible in which God ever told any one to keep his disease; and then the very fact of it being a solitary exception would prove the rule, and what the Scriptures abundantly show, that He healed all others. Why do so many of these teachers today reverse the Scriptures, and make Paul’s “thorn” the prominent point when discussing healing, and keep in the background the universal policy of healing revealed throughout the history recorded in the Bible? Paul’s “thorn” did not hinder him from finishing his course for God (II Tim. 4:7), while present-day teaching concerning Paul’s “thorn” has sent multitudes, often after many years of terrible suffering, to premature graves, with their course only half run—a constantly recurring, and horrible, tragedy!

Paul’s Praying a Worthy Example

If the afflicted who believe this latter day teaching will follow Paul by praying until God speaks to them and tells them, as they think He did Paul, that He wants them to keep their affliction, and gives them the reason for it, we would quickly say, “Amen!” for we love the will of God.

In Gal. 4:13, Paul does say, “Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the Gospel unto you at the first.” Probably the infirmity here was physical, but “at the first” does not mean that he remained weak. Does it not mean the opposite? Else why would he say “at the first?” Probably, as some scholars believe, this was just after his stoning at Lystra.

After Paul, in the plainest words, tells what his “thorn” was, how strange that ministers today should say it is something else, and use it against the scriptural doctrine of healing, when Paul, himself, was the greatest teacher on this subject among the apostles and other writers of the New Testament.

Paul’s Preaching Stimulative of Faith

For instance, it was the gospel Paul preached in Ephesus that gave faith for the “special miracles” of healing we have mentioned. He said, concerning his own preaching there, “I have kept back nothing that was profitable for you.” If all preachers today would keep back nothing that was profitable, they would surely all be teaching healing.

In Romans 15:18-20, it was Paul who said he “fully preached the Gospel of Christ (preached the full Gospel) , and made the Gentiles obedient by word and deed through mighty signs and wonders by the power of the Spirit of God . . . from Jerusalem round about unto Illyricum.”

Twenty-five years after he had become an Apostle, he wrote to the Corinthians (I Cor. 11:30), “For this cause many are weak and sickly among you.” If Paul’s “thorn” was physical infirmity, or he was sick, they would probably write back to him, asking, “For what cause are you weak and sickly?”

It was Paul who wrote, “Know ye not that your bodies are the temples of the Holy Ghost?” “the members of Christ;” “members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones;” that “we have the firstfruits of the Spirit” (firstfruits of our spiritual and physical salvation), “that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our . . . mortal flesh” (II Cor. 4:11) ; that “the Spirit ... shall also quicken your mortal (not dead) bodies” (Romans 8:11) ; that “He is the Savior of the body,”—“The Lord for the body and the body for the Lord.”

Called to Be Saints

Paul is the Apostle who wrote “Unto the Church of God which is at Corinth ... called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord . . . God hath set some in the Church... miracles... gifts of healing,” etc.; that these “gifts and callings of God are without repentance” (i.e., are not revoked) ; and that all are commanded to “covet earnestly the best gifts.”

Paul did not believe, as men are teaching today, that these blessings were confined to Israel, but he did believe that the “middle wall of partition” was “broken down,” that in Christ there is “neither Jew nor Greek,” but that we are “all one in Christ Jesus.” Accordingly, he heals the Gentile at Lystra crippled from birth, the same as Peter and John did the Jewish cripple at the Beautiful Gate. Paul also believed that the Old Testament types “were written for our admonition ;” that “as many as are of faith are Abraham’s seed;” that “to Abraham and his seed were the promises made;” and that “if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Gal. 3:29).

Paul on the Island of Melita

It was Paul who taught that it was “in Him” that “all the promises of God... are yea and amen,” “to the glory of God by us” (Gentiles). In other words, that all the promises of God, including all His promises to heal, owe their existence and power to the substitutionary work of Christ for us; that the redeeming work of Christ was for all; and, accordingly, the very last chapter of Acts shows us that Paul believed and proved that it was God’s will to heal, not some of them, but “all the other sick people in the island” of Melita (Acts 28:9, (Weymouth.)

Paul differentiated between miracles and healing, and therefore did not believe in every person being instantly made whole, because he left Trophimus at Miletum sick, and Epaphroditus was “sick nigh unto death” for the Gospel’s sake (or from overwork), and from which he did not recover instantaneously. Paul was not a fanatic concerning the natural laws of health, which are as Divine as God’s miracles, and he did not hesitate to recommend “the fruit of the vine” in the place of water alone for Timothy’s stomach trouble.

Paul believed in the sick themselves having faith for healing, for he did not say to the cripple “stand upright on thy feet,” until he perceived that “he had faith to be healed.” Jesus, himself, could do no miracle in Nazareth because of community unbelief.

An Instructive Resume

Is it not strange how any minister can set aside the whole Bible, as far as the subject of healing is concerned, keeping in the background—God’s Redemptive and Covenant name, “Jehovah-Rapha,” God’s Covenant of Healing, The teaching and promises of healing in the Old Testament types, The universal precedent of healing set throughout the history of the Old Testament, The words, teaching, commands, promises, and healing ministry of Christ, by which He revealed the will of God for our bodies, The gifts of healing set in the Church, The Church ordinance of anointing, which is commanded, The fact that Christ bore our sicknesses as well aS our sins on Calvary, The multiplied thousands of those healed since the days of the Apostles, down to and including our days in particular.

Is it not strange that they can set all of this aside, and, when speaking on the subject of healing, choose as their text the Scripture concerning Paul’s “thorn,” which scholars admit they cannot prove has any reference to either sickness or healing?