Paul\'s Thorn in the Flesh

Paul's Thorn In The Flesh

Studying the Bible, it becomes apparent that Jesus handpicked a number of his disciples to continue to spread his message after Jesus ascended to heaven. In addition to the men who followed Jesus before his death and resurrection, the leaders of the movement known as "The Way" included the Apostle Paul. Saul of Tarsus had been one of Jesus' most vocal detractors during Jesus lifetime and was skeptical of Jesus' claims that he was the Messiah. However, when Saul encountered a resurrected Jesus on the Damascus Road, Saul's disbelief disappeared. He converted to what is now known as Christianity and began to travel and share Christ's teachings.

Paul was unique from the other apostles in another significant way; he was the only one who received a thorn in the flesh. What this thorn was is never explicitly stated in the Bible, though it seems to have been a physical ailment that caused Paul some level of discomfort. This may lead some to question why God would punish one of Jesus' most ardent followers with a thorn in the flesh? According to Scripture, Paul was given this thorn to keep him humble because meekness is a virtue of Christ. However, Scripture is not clear about whether God gave Paul the thorn in his flesh, or allowed Satan to place the thorn. In fact, Scripture is sufficiently vague to leave people with lingering questions about the thorn in Paul's side: (1) if it was a means a of keeping Paul humble, why would Paul pray three times to God to have this thorn removed; (2) if the intent was to keep him from exalting himself, why were no other disciples afflicted; (3) was this an act of Satan or of God? The thorn in Paul's flesh was a means of keeping Paul humble and bringing him closer to Christ; Paul's prayers to have the thorn removed demonstrate human weakness and the need for Christ; he, alone, received the thorn because of his unique relationship to Christ prior to Christ's death and resurrection; and regardless of who placed the thorn in Paul's side, it was an act of God because God had the power to remove the affliction and did not.

In order to understand anything about Paul, particularly the impact of the thorn in Paul's flesh, it is important to look at who Paul was prior to his conversion to Christianity. Paul was different from the other apostles in a meaningful way; not only was he not a follower of Jesus during Jesus' lifetime, he was actually an active opponent of Jesus. That is not to say that Paul was not a religious man; he was a religious man, but his religious beliefs were not the same as those espoused by Jesus. Therefore, in order to understand Paul, one must first understand Saul. Saul was a devout Jew and his religion was important to him; even after he became an apostle, he pointed out that he was a descendant of Abraham, perhaps separating himself from non-Jewish converts to early Christianity (Hawthorne et al. 1993, Kindle Electronic Edition).

Saul of Tarsus was a Jew living in Roman-occupied Jerusalem during the time of Jesus Christ. He was a Pharisee, which was a sect of Jews who were devoted to the strict observation of Jewish laws. During his lifetime, Jesus had a number of disagreements with the Pharisees, often arguing about the meaning of God's law (Matthew 15:1-20). Jesus appeared to believe that the Pharisees had lost the intent of God's law by becoming so concerned with following the detailed letter of that law. Saul is one of the members of the vocal opposition against Christ, and, in that capacity, engages in behavior that is unsavory and goes against the nature of God's law, such as being present for the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-60). Saul understood that the new religion, now known as Christianity, was beginning to spread and decided he would travel to Damascus, where he would bind the disciples and bring them back to Jerusalem. However, on his way to Damascus, Saul encountered a brilliant and blinding light and the voice of Jesus asking Saul why he persecuted him. Saul asked Jesus what he should do and Jesus told him to enter the city. Once in the city, Saul, who was at least temporarily blind, prayed for three days. God send another disciple, Ananias to help Saul, who laid his hands on Saul, told him that Jesus had sent him, and cured Saul of his blindness. Saul rose and was baptized and became the Apostle Paul (Acts 9:1-18; Acts 22:1-16).

Looking at Paul's historic behavior, not only towards Jesus but also towards his early followers, it is easy to understand the function of the thorn in Paul's side. It was intended as a means of keeping Paul humble and bringing him closer to Christ. Most of Jesus' apostles had a good relationship with Christ established prior to his death, but Paul did not. In fact, he was a detractor from Christ and had engaged in serious opposition of the new message. In that way, he may need the reminder that he is merely made of flesh, and, as such, is weak. Moreover, Paul seems to view his ability to keep his faith despite a number of physical challenges, including the thorn in his flesh, as measure of his superiority, at least over those who pretend to be apostles of Christ. In his Fool's Speech, Paul attempts to demonstrate why he is superior to the false apostles. "After insisting on his equality with them as a Hebrew, a son of Abraham, and an Israelite, he proceeds, through a catalogue of sufferings climaxing with the 'thorn in the flesh," to point to his 'weaknesses' by which he claims superiority over them (Barnett 1997, p.455).

Paul uses the idea of weakness as a model in his ministry. "With the 'thorn' unremoved, Paul exercises his ministry in humility and patience, lacking power of his own, utterly dependent on the Lord, who himself was powerless at Golgotha. God's power is made perfect in weakness" (Barnett 1997, p.44). For Paul, his weakness becomes a symbol of his submission to God.

"Paul's discussion of the meaning of his apostleship centers around one major theme: the weakness of the apostle leads to the power of the gospel" (Powers 2001, p.94). Through his submission to God, he received this affliction, and, during the course of his ministry, he accepted hardships that came with the ministry as part of that submission. In fact, of the Apostles, Paul's ministry is unique in that he seemed to replicate the death of Christ more than the life of Christ, and his letters continually suggest that one must submit to God and be weak in order to gain strength through Christ. There is other evidence of his submission and weakness in his ministry. For example, Paul refuses to take any money for preaching, but works in menial jobs to support himself in order to engage in his ministry.

The model of weakness and suffering as a means to grace and/or salvation continues to exert a strong influence in the modern Christian church. Many Christians believes that there is value in suffering, particularly in the experience of physical pain. For example, many people in the church objected to the introduction of pain control in labor, suggesting that the physical pain of labor served a spiritual purpose (Russell 1996, p.562). While such a response could be dismissed as misogynistic, the desire to withhold pain relief from people is not limited to females in childbirth. Instead, "the response of some in the Church to human suffering in terminal illness has been to value the redemptive nature of suffering -- that is, the positive role of suffering in "soul making" -- and appear to promote suffering" (Russell 1996, p.562). In other words, some Christians continue to embrace the model of weakness and suffering that Paul established.

Although Paul recognizes that the thorn in his flesh is a means that he uses to bring himself as a closer to God, he also sees the thorn as an affliction. He believes that the thorn was given to him as an elevation from Satan, though whether it was given him by Satan or by God is not clear. Regardless of its source, Paul acknowledges that Christ has given him the grace to endure the thorn. "He could not have the thorn removed, but had to endure it, and Christ gave him the grace to do so" (Dawson 2008, p.196). Paul believes that it is through this weakness that he is permitted to experience grace.

The fact that Paul openly recognizes his weakness helps explain why he would pray to have the thorn removed. While it is not clear what the thorn is, it is clear that it is not a congenital condition, but one that he developed later in life. However, both the reason for Paul's prayers about his condition and God's refusal to answer those prayers may be understood in a modern medical context. Currently, human beings have the ability to engage in a level of genetic manipulation that removes the possibility of disability from some populations. For example, pre-natal screening helps parents avoid having children with disabilities, but also results in the termination of many fetuses with genetic disabilities. This leads one commentator to suggest that "pre-natal screening will be perceived as a form of eugenics" (Deane-Drummond 2003, p.17). This comment reflects a fear that humans have the urge to play God and seek perfection. This human desire to avoid suffering is also reflected in modern medicine's desire to avoid suffering, even to the point of assisted suicide, which must be construed as individuals taking a God-like posture in various scenarios. "The issues of quality of life and sanctity of life bring to the foreground the matter of human personhood" (Russell 1996, p. 561). In other words, is an imperfect life, a life with suffering, a life worth living? Paul's life, which was productive with its suffering, establishes that it is. However, it also establishes that people do not have to be content with suffering. To end his suffering, Paul did not have to play God; he had an established relationship with Christ, so, instead of taking his own action, he sought intercession. However, the prayers were denied as a means to remind Paul of his humanity, and, therefore, of his inherent weakness.

Furthermore, it is critical to realize that, in his weakness in calling for deliverance from the thorn in his flesh, Paul is reflecting Jesus' weakness. Jesus knew his role on earth and that it would end in his death. He also knew that his suffering was part of his death. However, even Jesus had a moment of fear and doubt. While he was suffering in pain on the cross, Jesus called out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:45-46). He seems to desire deliverance from the suffering of his crucifixion, as Paul later prays for deliverance from the suffering he experiences because of the thorn in his flesh. Moreover, the fact that Paul's affliction is referred to as a thorn in his flesh suggests links to Jesus as well. Jesus had a crown of thorns placed on his head at his crucifixion (Matthew 27:29), which he could, not remove. This suggests a shared suffering with Christ, which is only highlighted by the fact that Paul asked for the suffering to end.

Moreover, it is important to consider that "thorn" is only one possible translation of the original term used in Paul's text. The word could also have been translated as stake. Jesus was, literally, staked to the cross during his crucifixion. As a result, "there is something to be said for drawing attention to the crucifixion at the heart of Paul's statement here," (Kreitzer 1996, p.125). Paul repeatedly compares his suffering to Christ's, not in scope, but in necessity. He believes that suffering has some intrinsic value because it is a venue through which people can become closer to God. Moreover, Jesus suffered in order to alleviate greater suffering, and it appears clear that Paul envisions his suffering, like Jesus' to be a means of helping bring people into a closer relationship with God.

Paul's prayer also serves as a demonstration of his faith. Though the exact nature of his affliction is not described, the fact that it is evident to others and impairs Paul's ability to function seems clear from Scripture. "Paul does not downplay his suffering as trifling and make it a matter of indifference" (Garland 1999, p. 226). He does not believe that his suffering has no meaning or that it should be endured with apathy. Instead, he believes that adversity should be confronted and that people should ask God for help with adversity. However, he also seems to believe that God's failure to grant his prayers and remove his suffering is not indicative of disfavor; he seems willing to accept that his suffering is essential to God's plan, while still praying for the end of his suffering.

If Paul's thorn in the flesh serves as a means of bringing him closer to Christ, one may wonder why he is the only apostle to suffer from such an affliction. First, it is important to realize that the nature of the affliction is not clearly explained. Many assume that it is a physical affliction, but the idea that Paul is suffering from a physical ailment seems controverted by evidence of what Paul has done. Paul is constantly in some type of physical service, which makes it seem unlikely that the disease is a debilitating physical disease. Instead, it seems possible that the ailment is a psychological one, such as depression or even sexual temptation, which would make sense in light of Paul's emphasis on celibacy (Garland 1999, p.520). Whatever the ailment, it appears to have been something that Paul found as an obstacle in his ministry (Garland 1999, p.521). If the problem is a psychological one, then the fact that Paul, alone, experiences the problem makes sense because he entered into his relationship as an apostle in a different way than the other apostles. He doubted Jesus. Not only that, he actively worked to try to prevent people from forming relationships with Christ. As a result, he is not coming to his relationship with Christ from the same position as the other apostles. He has demonstrated a capacity for arrogance, so that the thorn remains a reminder to be subservient.

Furthermore, there are some explanations of the affliction that explain why Paul, alone, would suffer from the thorn in his side. When Jesus revealed himself to Paul on the road to Damascus, the event was awesome in the most literal sense of that word. Paul was literally overwhelmed by his interaction with Christ; it rendered him temporarily blind and left him unable to care for himself. Paul literally had to wait for the intervention of another of Christ's followers to understand what to do and how to respond to the revelation that Jesus was, indeed, the Messiah. Some have suggested that the thorn in Paul's side has to do with the impact of that significant revelation. Rather than viewing the scenario as one solely of religious revelation, some may go so far as to suggest that the event was traumatic. As a result, Paul's thorn in his side might be, if considered in conventional terms, a form of post-traumatic stress disorder. Advocates of this view, like Sandra Hack Polaski, would suggest that exposure to trauma has the following impact on people: "We feel helpless and are unable to respond coherently. Our fundamental human assumptions that the world is orderly and meaningful and that we have a place of worth are shattered" (Polaski 2008, p.279). If one views the thorn in Paul's side as something similar to post traumatic stress disorder, then it is only reasonable that he is the only apostle to experience that thorn, because he was the only apostle that had initially worked against Christ and had his Messianic reality revealed to him through a powerful and personal vision that could have been traumatizing.

Furthermore, when investigating why Paul was the only one of the apostles to receive a thorn in his side, it is important to focus on the nature of repentance. Paul preached repentance as a critical element to belief. "Like faith, repentance is the human requirement for salvation and yet it is the gift of God" (Ryrie 2005, p.79). While Peter may be better associated with the notion of repentance, it is important to realize that Paul taught repentance as well. In modern conversation, people talk about repentance as something that people do for their sins, but the historical biblical meaning of the word was far more specific; repentance was not about asking forgiveness for generic sin. "The word means 'to change one's mind' and as it is used in the book of Acts it means to change one's mind about Jesus of Nazareth being the Messiah. This involved no longer thinking of Him as merely the carpenter's son of Nazareth, an imposter, but now receiving Him as both Lord and Messiah. Thus repentance as preached by the apostles was not a prerequisite to nor a consequence of salvation, but was actually the act of faith in Jesus Christ that brought salvation to one who repented " (Ryrie 2005, p. 79). When placed in that context, it becomes apparent that Paul is different from the other apostles because he was transformed, not only from someone who did not believe because of lack of exposure or understanding, but from someone who knew of Jesus and still considered him an imposter. He changed his understanding of the nature of Christ. In other words, Paul was the apostle who repented.