Paul's Thorn in the Flesh

[@frenkvortice3858]

Love you brother. May we turn not away from sound doctrine and reproof ourselves by scriptures

[@WayneLeWag]

Thanks for this Teaching Brother Derek! I've been trying to tell people that Paul's thorn in the side is NOT sickness, otherwise the Scriptures would be contradicting itself, which "of course" the Word of God does NOT do! Thanks once again Brother 🙏

[@venturesintoglory5353]

Thank you, Derek for teaching the truth about Paul's "thorn in the flesh." It is so refreshing to hear someone teach the truth and do it so well!

[@4ucarla885]

I have heard various interpretations about Apostle Paul's "thorn in the flesh": pride, eye problems, etc. But you're making me see another side that makes more sense, the thorn being, essentially, relentless persecution by a certain evil messenger spirit from Satan to buffet him. Thank you for this teaching and for pointing to the Scriptures for support.😃

[@venturesintoglory5353]

This is an EXCELLENT teaching that examines this "thorn in the flesh" from every angle according to the Scriptures and the very nature of God!

[@CarolynLee-j1k]

THANK YOU SO MUCH!!! EXCELLENT TEACHING AND WAS EXACTLY WHAT I NEEDED. GOD BLESS YOU

[@AmandainChrist88]

I was just praying on this and I had thought of the evil people attacking me -

[@venturesintoglory5353]

Why would anyone believe that God gave Paul a "thorn in the flesh" to keep him humble, when we are told in the Scriptures over and over again to HUMBLE OURSELVES? Clearly, Satan considered Paul to be a threat to the kingdom of darkness and that is why he sent an angel to buffet him. Only Satan did not want Paul to be highly exalted in his ministry to set people free from the authority of darkness!

[@TrustinJC]

It is important to know what the thorn was that Paul says was in his flesh (2 Cor 12:7-9). He says it was a messenger of Satan. So it pertains to a message (thoughts) that Satan tries to derail his ministry with. Now to understand what it was, we need to look at passages in scripture that speak of a thorn and of messengers of Satan. Regarding the thorn, we find in Numbers 33:55 that a thorn would be left in Israel if they fail to drive out all the inhabitants. Spiritually speaking than, it has to do with a sin that we struggle to overcome. This is made clear by way of a passage in the non canonical writing known as the Shepherd of Hermas. For it tells us that every person hears from two angels. The angel of righteousness speaks into our one ear while the angel of unrighteousness speaks into the other. So the thorn in his carnal mind/flesh is the angel of unrighteousness and his attempt to get Paul to commit a grievous sin. This notion is backed up by another statement of Paul's when he says in Romans 7:15-20 that he is a slave to sin and does what he does not want to do and doesn't do what he wants to do. He says that he does do what he hates. The thorn, therefore, is a sin that he has difficulty over coming. So what was this sin? Well, it is pretty clear that it was the sin of homosexuality. In essence, we see that Paul had no regard for women due to his homosexual desires. This is why he kept women under the thumb of men and why he never married. Also of note is the fact that Daniel tells us the anti-Christ will have no regard for women. Paul than can be seen as being a prototype, or foreshadow of the coming anti-Christ. What we see than, unfortunately, is that the Catholic Church was led into doctrine and theology based on the thoughts and teachings of a gay man that had no regard for women. This means the long standing tradition of priests being unable to marry is based on a wicked lie that stems from Paul's carnal nature.

[@WayneLeWag]

WHAT?? Where on earth did you get that theology of Paul?.. What Paul was struggling with was trying to get out of the old Jewish ways and laws in which he was VERY STRICTLY brought up with from a very young age. Plus, 1 Corinthians 9:5, possibly indicates that Paul was married before his conversion, as he writes; "don't WE have the right to take a believing wife along with us,..." That Biblical passage is one indication that Paul could have been married at one point though lost his wife due to the strict Jewish laws his wife would have followed, hence his wife having nothing to do with Paul because of his conversion! Also, in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9, could be another indication that Paul was actually a widow! Because, if you study the history, all members of the Sanhedrin were required to be married! And Paul was actually an ex-member of the Sanhedrin! Nowhere in Scripture does it ever imply that Paul was a homosexual, but, according to Jewish history, it would strongly indicate that Paul would have had to be married to be a member of the Sanhedrin! Shalom, Maranatha and much blessings to you 🙏

[@wend-michelle6999]

@TrustinJC If anything, the Bible indicates MORE towards Paul being a widower. Plus, as @Anthony-Wayne McCabe so rightly said, members of the Sanhedrin were required to be married. From the Orthodox Jewish Bible: Kehillah in Corinth 1, 7:8 (1 Corinthians 7:8) “But, I say to the bochrim (unmarried) and the almanot (widows), it is beneficial for them if they remain as I am;” Another reason we think that the Apostle Paul was married, is that Paul uses the term “unmarried” two other times in this chapter to refer to those who were previously married. In verse 11, “unmarried” clearly refers to someone who was previously married but divorced. In verse 34, an “unmarried” person is distinguished from “virgins” who have never been married. That leads us to believe that “unmarried” in verse 8 also refers to someone who has been previously married. The gender is masculine in Greek, and when paired with “widows” it seems like Paul means to address those who were previously married but whose spouses have passed away. In some modern Bible translations nowadays, they are not as literal as they could be, as there is no Greek term that corresponds to the word “single.” So if you just drop that word from modern translations, it would then give you a more literal interpretation: “It is good for them to remain…as I am.” And “to remain” means to continue on in a certain state of existence. In their case, that state was one of widowhood. And Paul says “as I am.” Thus suggesting that Paul is putting himself into the same category that they are. But it is not a category of singleness in general but a category of widowhood in particular. Plus, Paul was also a Pharisee, and it would have been nearly unthinkable to imagine a never-married Pharisee. As an exemplary Pharisee (Philippians 3:5-6), Paul would have sought to fulfill the creation mandate to “be fruitful and multiply,” which means he almost certainly would have been married at some point. And verse 8 seems to confirm that he was in fact married but subsequently widowed.

[@SJ-we5sn]

2 Corinthians 9 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. King James version Exodus 16:26 And said,if thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God,and wilt do that which is right in his sight,and wilt give ear to his commandments,and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee,which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the Lord that healeth thee. King James Bible The only Bible you can trust.. Yes God can heal but there is always a condition and an infirmity is a sickness Dr Luke travelled with the apostle Paul 2Timothy 4:11 Colossians 4:14 So we see God can bring disease on any one he chooses as he is sovereign..we see that with the Egyptians