What was Paul's thorn in the flesh?

Some say (erroneously), it was an affliction of some kind. However, when you look carefully at the text, it's clear to see ...

You are understanding this quite correctly. This poster is clueless about this matter. His theory is that Paul went to Paradise in an extremely SINFUL condition but that was OK with God. Then God told him to continue in that condition and God's grace would be sufficient -- FOR WHAT? How in the world do people come up with such rubbish?

The first "solid clue" is the word 'infirmities' in 2 Corinthians 12:9 - which refers back to the 'thorn in the flesh' in verse 7:

1) 'For this thing' in verse 8 is a direct reference to [the] 'thorn in the flesh' in verse 7.
2) 'Most gladly therefore' in verse 9 is "in answer to" the statement of God concerning grace and strength.
3) The statement of God is "in answer to" the 'thrice' request of Paul that the 'thing' might 'depart' from him.
4) The word 'infirmities' in verse 9 demonstrates that Paul considered his 'thorn in the flesh' to be an infirmity.

The first thing with regard to the 'thorn in the flesh' that we may determine from this passage with complete confidence is that Paul's 'thorn in the flesh' was/is an 'infirmity' of some sort.

Furthermore, the implication is made that [having] the 'infirmity' caused Paul to be [more] "weak" compared to him not having the 'infirmity'.

Now - which of the following 'Six Aspects of Man' might this 'infirmity' - that "weakens" Paul - apply? :

1) Physical
2) Physiological
3) Psychological
4) Mental
5) Emotional
6) Spiritual

In some "ultra-technical" sense, it might be said that it could apply to any of them. However, in the 'grammar of the language' of the Corinthians passage of scripture, to which is it more/most likely to apply?

Just what exactly this 'infirmity' was/is - is not nearly as crucial - as what we should retain in our understanding that comes from verse 10.

The Romans passage has no [direct] special relevance to what Paul is saying in the Corinthians passage. In fact, the Romans passage is not a "self-explanatory" admission/confession about Paul's life; rather, it is a broad generalized how-it-works explanation of the relevance of the Law, sin, and salvation in the life of a Christian - it is by no means just about Paul and his life.


When you look carefully at the text, it's clear to see that Paul's 'thorn in the flesh' was some kind of 'infirmity'.

The plain-and-simple straight-forward meaning of scripture - just believe it - don't try to twist it into what you want it to say.

Physical disability does not require tge grace of God.

Tell that to the folks that have to deal with a physical disability every [hour of every] day of their lives. (especially, a severe disability that causes them great hardship)

Your logic is illogical.

"A messenger of Satan" means what? Satan tempts and and usually consistent with one's inherent weakness.

The messenger of Satan is Satan tempting with something enticing.

And because Paul was tempted continually by Satan, who obviously attacked Paul in his weakness

Generally speaking:

~ 'logic' is a good form of reasoning where 'physical' [realm] things are concerned
~ 'faith' is a good form of reasoning where 'spiritual' [realm] things are concerned

Anyone who uses only 'logic' when reasoning the scriptures - will fail - every - single - time - believe it [or not]!

Where is that in Scripture?


Where in Scripture does it say that the messenger of Satan was tempting or enticing Paul with anything?


2 Cor 12:7-10

"7And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. 8For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. 9And 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. 10Therefore 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."


Where does it say, "tempted continually" in Scripture?

Paul himself said he had a problem with concupiscence in the Roman scripture.

Well - yes and no - but mostly no...

(yes in only the most general every-man sense)

In the Romans passage you are referring to, Paul is making a how-it-works-and-how-it-happens explanation using a first-person illustration about a generality concerning everyone he is speaking to - he is not making a confession about any specific sin(s) in his own life - it is an "any-man" (human) description being explained from a first-person perspective.

It seems to me from what the scripture says that the thorn in the flesh might have been a fallen angel, or devil, since it is referred to as the messenger of Satan. If so, it seems like someone who is indwelt by the Holy Spirit can also be affected in the flesh by a devil, though I suppose that being indwelt by the Holy Spirit would make it so that someone could not be possessed by a devil.

And, this is often the problem...

Did you know that 'logic' is but [just] one form of reasoning?

And that - there is another different form of reasoning - that we call 'faith'?

And that - 'logic' is a good form of reasoning for some things but not others?

And that - 'faith' is a good form of reasoning for some things but not others?

Generally speaking:

~ 'logic' is a good form of reasoning where 'physical' [realm] things are concerned
~ 'faith' is a good form of reasoning where 'spiritual' [realm] things are concerned

Anyone who uses only 'logic' when reasoning the scriptures - will fail - every - single - time - believe it [or not]!

You're making a definitive statement that can't be made, as though you KNOW: you don't. Paul, speaking 1st person singular using the words I and me, and speaking about a very specific thing, not sin in general. If it were general, and intended to be universally applicable, he wouldn't have done so, and would have not spoke in 1st person singular, but rather would have used words like 'sin', not concupiscence, and 'we', 'us', not "I", "me". However, believe what you like. I'll follow the words as they should be followed.

Assumed continually or significantly enough that Paul besought the Lord on 3 separate occasions

As an example of sorts - while 'logic' may be used when examining "What kind of 'infirmity' did Paul have?", we know by 'faith' that it was not a "personal sin problem" that God approved of and gave Paul grace to "endure" it.

My "definitive" statement comes from the experiential ability to go beyond "drink the milk" to "eat the meat"...

It is okay to suckle the milk; however, a more mature understanding sometimes requires the ability to consume solid food.

It would take me more time than I care to spend to try to explain it to you.

Just keep studying...

Let the Holy Spirit lead you - do not follow after [human] "intellectual" thinking.