- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
03 Sep 05
There is a reason I quoted 1Peter1:20....I have heard teaching how Paul had poor eyesight, Paul had a problem with woman, and a multiplicity of answers. But what does the bible say?...
I have learned that the bible is great on definitions. If you don't know what is meant by a word, simply go back to previous usage...let's take "thorn."
Num 33:55
55 'But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then it shall be that those whom you let remain shall be irritants in your eyes and thorns in your sides, and they shall harass you in the land where you dwell.
(NKJ)
Josh 23:13
13 "know for certain that the LORD your God will no longer drive out these nations from before you. But they shall be snares and traps to you, and scourges on your sides and thorns in your eyes, until you perish from this good land which the LORD your God has given you.
(NKJ)
Judg 2:3
3 "Therefore I also said, 'I will not drive them out before you; but they shall be thorns in your side, and their gods shall be a snare to you.'"
(NKJ)
So, a logical conclusion is what are thorns in your sides?....People!...It tells us right in the verse that satan sent "messengers"..people, to harrass Paul, and thwart his ministry...
2 Cor 12:7
7 And lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of the revelations, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be exalted above measure.
(NKJ)
If we study the bible, it gives answers. No need for guesswork.
The reason we have so many denominations is differing interpretations...the good part is that if you preach error, sooner or later there will be a contradiction...God is Perfect and The Word of God has to be Perfect...God bless...CB 🙂
03 Sep 05
Originally posted by checkbaiterVery good point CB.
There is a reason I quoted 1Peter1:20....I have heard teaching how Paul had poor eyesight, Paul had a problem with woman, and a multiplicity of answers. But what does the bible say?...
I have learned that the bible is great on definitions. If you don't know what is meant by a word, simply go back to previous usage...let's take "thorn."
Num 33:55
5 ...[text shortened]... l be a contradiction...God is Perfect and The Word of God has to be Perfect...God bless...CB 🙂
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
03 Sep 05
Originally posted by HalitoseThank you...but the credit goes to God and the Lord Jesus Christ. The Word of God has been around for a long time, and it needs to be read and handled correctly, as God in His wisdom intended. Otherwise we get a lot of confusion, which is what satan would have...🙂
Very good point CB.
04 Sep 05
2 edits
Originally posted by checkbaiterThat’s good. But it is not necessarily conclusive (still good though).
There is a reason I quoted 1Peter1:20....I have heard teaching how Paul had poor eyesight, Paul had a problem with woman, and a multiplicity of answers. But what does the bible say?...
I have learned that the bible is great on definitions. If you don't know what is meant by a word, simply go back to previous usage...let's take "thorn."
Num 33:55
5 ...[text shortened]... l be a contradiction...God is Perfect and The Word of God has to be Perfect...God bless...CB 🙂
2 Corinthians. 6 But if I wish to boast, I will not be a fool, for I will be speaking the truth. But I refrain from it, so that no one may think better of me than what is seen in me or heard from me,
7 even considering the exceptional character of the revelations. Therefore, to keep me from being too elated, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me, to keep me from being too elated.
8 Three times I appealed to the Lord about this, that it would leave me,
9 but he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness." So, I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me.
10 Therefore I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities for the sake of Christ; for whenever I am weak, then I am strong.
11 I have been a fool! You forced me to it. Indeed you should have been the ones commending me, for I am not at all inferior to these super-apostles, even though I am nothing.
(1) Paul speaks of “a thorn,” singular; and “a messenger,” singular. So I think it would be more likely to be a person, rather than “people.” Of course it could be a particular group of people. James or Peter or the group of Jerusalem apostles (“these super-apostles”?) comes to mind as a possibility.
(2) On the other hand, Paul also speaks of “my weaknesses” right after referring to his appeal to God to remove the thorn, and the response that “power is made manifest in weakness.” Therefore, it could still be something about Paul himself, something that he viewed as a weakness or personal defect. Following your lead, I did a search for the words “thorn” and “thorns.” Generally, they either seem to reference actual thorns and briars, or are used—as you point out—as a metaphor for certain people, types of people or nations. I happened to find this one though—
Proverbs 15:19 The way of the lazy is overgrown with thorns, but the path of the upright is a level highway.
Maybe Paul wanted to do even more than he was doing, but judged himself to be “lazy”—or at least lacking in the degree of energy he would have liked to have, to accomplish even more. Hard to imagine, given all his travels, etc. So I think I’d throw this one out as being ludicrously weak.
In any event, I don’t think that the “thorn” being something pertaining to Paul’s person is totally out of the ballpark; and it could be something that he didn’t identify publicly. “Thorn in the flesh” is a pretty common and broad metaphor, at least today, and Paul may not have intended to send anyone looking for scriptural clues. However, I think that the “thorn” being a person or group of persons might be a stronger bet. And I admit I had never really considered that till I read your post. 🙂
04 Sep 05
1 edit
Originally posted by vistesd[/i]"thorns" is used by Christ in his parables, never in a good light either. Matt 7:16 13:7 13:22
That’s good. But it is not necessarily conclusive (still good though).
2 Corinthians. 6 But if I wish to boast, I will not be a fool, for I will be speaking the truth. But I refrain from it, so that no one may think better of me than what is seen in me or heard from me,
7 even considering the exceptional character of the revelations. Therefore, to ht be a stronger bet. And I admit I had never really considered that till I read your post. 🙂
In Mark and Luke also
Is very likely that Paul would be using Christ's definition, since he was a Christian , wasn't he?
Mark 4:18 And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word, 4:19 And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and
it becometh unfruitful .
I wonder how fruitful that obvious BIG ego of his actually made him.
04 Sep 05
Originally posted by frogstompSo that the "thorns" are either: 1. (spiritually) unhealthy "cares of the world," etc. that hold false promises of happiness or fulfillment--addictions for example; and/or 2. human tendencies to latch onto such attractions? Maybe Paul's tempermentalness would fall into that category?
"thorns" is used by Christ in his parables, never in a good light either. Matt 7:16 13:7 13:22
In Mark and Luke also
Is very likely that Paul would be using Christ's definition, since he was a Christian , wasn't he?
Mark 4:18 And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word, 4:19 And the cares of ...[text shortened]... nfruitful .
I wonder how fruitful that obvious BIG ego of his actually made him.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
04 Sep 05
Originally posted by frogstompI totally disagree...Paul was a "duolos" slave for Christ. I don't know if you know what that entails, but nevertheless he was totally committed to Christ!
"thorns" is used by Christ in his parables, never in a good light either. Matt 7:16 13:7 13:22
In Mark and Luke also
Is very likely that Paul would be using Christ's definition, since he was a Christian , wasn't he?
Mark 4:18 And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word, 4:19 And the cares of ...[text shortened]... nfruitful .
I wonder how fruitful that obvious BIG ego of his actually made him.
He in my opinion, was the greatest Christian, ever. He submitted and allowed Christ to work in him in a mighty way, not to mention he wrote 14 books of the NT, as the Lord led him.
He was a pharisee, but willing gave up all, for Jesus Christ, and will be awarded accordingly, and so he should!
04 Sep 05
Originally posted by vistesdWhy not a literal "thorn in the flesh"? Or some kind of physical affliction?
That’s good. But it is not necessarily conclusive (still good though).
[i]2 Corinthians. 6 But if I wish to boast, I will not be a fool, for I will be speaking the truth. But I refrain from it, so that no one may think better of me than what is seen in me or heard from me,
7 even considering the exceptional character of the revelations. Therefore, to ...[text shortened]... ht be a stronger bet. And I admit I had never really considered that till I read your post. 🙂
04 Sep 05
Originally posted by lucifershammerWhy not a literal "thorn in the flesh"? Or some kind of physical affliction?
Why not a literal "thorn in the flesh"? Or some kind of physical affliction?
Yes; I meant my reference to “pertaining to Paul’s person” in the last paragraph to include that—but I had lost sight of it and didn’t make that clear.
Checkbaiter: He in my opinion, was the greatest Christian, ever. He submitted and allowed Christ to work in him in a mighty way …
But that does not mean he was perfect—i.e., had no personal failings or ailments. Nor does it mean that everything he said, wrote or did was “in the spirit” or “in Christ.” He was a human being, who admitted to having “weaknesses.”
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
04 Sep 05
Originally posted by vistesdIill answer the second part first...no he was not perfect, he was only a man, and while Iagree that not all he did was in the spirit, what he wrote, was. Because of the simple truth that all of the bible, including Pauls writings or books were given as "holy men of God spoke thru the holy spirit".2Peter1:21
[b]Why not a literal "thorn in the flesh"? Or some kind of physical affliction?
Yes; I meant my reference to “pertaining to Paul’s person” in the last paragraph to include that—but I had lost sight of it and didn’t make that clear.
Checkbaiter: He in my opinion, was the greatest Christian, ever. He submitted and allowed Christ to work in him ...[text shortened]... was “in the spirit” or “in Christ.” He was a human being, who admitted to having “weaknesses.”
As far as physical affliction, perhaps he had one, but this was not his "thorn". Are you implying that to keep him humble, God gave him an affliction?...this would not fit with God being "all light and in Him is no darkness at all" would it?
That to me would sound like, "ok son, good job, so far, but here, have some cancer so you won't get too heady".