So to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from becoming conceited. Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me. But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. (2 Corinthians 12:7-9, ESV)
I believe that this passage ranks as one of the most – if not the most -misunderstood passage in all of Scripture. It has lead many Christians to an inaccurate understanding of God’s will regarding sickness and God’s relationship to unclean spirits. Worse, these misunderstandings extend to the nature and character of God’s grace. What’s the thorn? To correct these misunderstandings, let’s start with the phrase, “thorn in the flesh.” Many Christians interpret this literally and think of it as a disease or infirmary of some sort. This is not correct. The phrase is an idiom, an expression that means something else. It is used in the Bible in Numbers 33:55 to describe how the inhabitants of Canaan will vex Israel if Israel does not wipe them out. Paul was certainly familiar with this phrase and its meaning. He was well-trained in Scripture as a Pharisee. Take a look at his credentials in Acts 22:3 and Acts 26:5. Paul demonstrates the quality of this training in Acts 23:6 when he created an argument within the Sanhedrin. So when Paul uses the term “thorn in the flesh” we need to interpret it as he would have understood it, not as we might think of it. This means that the phrase does not refer to a physical ailment. This is why no one can authoritatively say what the problem was. Endless speculation about his hands or his eyes has not reached a conclusion simply because there is no conclusion to be reached. The phrase refers to some group of individuals who are among God’s people and are causing problems for them. In Paul’s case, this was members of the Jewish community. Paul was preaching the gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ, and was opposed in this message by strict religious Jews who did not accept this teaching. They actually stoned him for his preaching in Lystra as recorded in Acts 14:19. To say this group was causing problems for Paul in preaching the gospel is putting it mildly. They followed him and constantly opposed his teaching. Prayed 3 times? The book of Acts records 3 times that Paul got fed up with this behavior from members of the Jewish community and said “I’m going to the Gentiles from now on!” (Acts 13:46, Acts 18:6 and Acts 19:9). This lines up perfectly with Paul’s statement that he prayed 3 times for God to remove the thorn, that is, the Jews who opposed the spread of the gospel. It’s obvious that Paul loved spreading the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ, and it should be just as obvious that Paul loved the Jewish people. He writes in Romans 9:3 that he would give up his own salvation if that would cause his Jewish brothers and sisters to come to Christ. How many of us could honestly make such a statement about any group to which we belong? How many of us share Paul’s great sorrow and unceasing anguish that Jews were rejecting Jesus as their Messiah? The fact that we do not identify ourselves as Jewish is meaningless, as Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 11:28 that he has a daily burden of concern for all the churches. Do we have Paul’s level of concern for even our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ? This is the “suffering” that God refers to in Acts 9:16 when He tells Ananias that Paul will see how he has to suffer. It’s not physical suffering. Paul is utterly dismissive of that type of suffering as he describes an incredible litany of woes beginning in 2 Corinthians 11:23. The profound suffering of Paul’s soul prophesied in Acts 9:16 mirrors the heart of God, who desires that none should perish but all come to everlasting life. (2 Peter 3:9) Grace is sufficient? Of course, everyone who comes to everlasting life comes by grace alone. This is only the first demonstration of grace in the life of the follower of Jesus Christ, but the concept of grace promoted by interpreting the “thorn” as a physical ailment is utterly bizarre. It brings to mind the image of a horribly beaten boxer crying to surrender as he is being held up by his corner man so the opponent can continue to pummel the disfigured boxer. God certainly gives us strength to endure, but this is a terribly mistaken image. A correct understanding of the “thorn” bolsters an understanding that grace is the only means of salvation. Take a look at the three instances of Paul turning away from the Jews and you will see that he was arguing with them that Jesus was the promised Messiah. Paul’s arguments were based on the incredible revelation he received from God. Paul could not argue these Jews into belief in Jesus because Satan blinded them to this truth. This role of the “messenger of Satan” is precisely described in 2 Corinthians 4:4. It is the reason we cannot argue anyone into the Kingdom of God. If Paul was able to do this successfully, he could have grown pretty boastful. (I know I would if I could do that.) Instead, God says that His grace is sufficient for salvation. Paul’s inability to argue successfully could be interpreted in a worldly sense as a failure, much like an attorney not winning a case is a failure. But God says this failure only serves to highlight the importance and sufficiency of His grace. We get a perfect, or at least improved, sense of God when He does what no one else can do. “Scripture explains Scripture”, and trying to understand it on our own terms can lead to some very wrong conclusions and even worse implications. If we start with a Scriptural definition of the “thorn” in Paul’s flesh we arrive at a coherent, accurate understanding of this passage. We also gain the blessed assurance that no matter how feeble our efforts (on full display with the quality of thought of this essay), grace is always sufficient for the task at hand.
0 Comments
Charles Baudelaire is generally credited with saying that Satan’s greatest trick was to convince the world that he does not exist. While this strategy goes pretty far, it does not work on those who accept that the Bible is true because Scripture is clear that Satan is real. Generally speaking, this group includes born-again Christians. Not one to give up easily, Satan developed a new approach specifically geared against them.
A New Approach? Now, before we start to describe this strategy it’s important to remember that Satan does not make small plans. Keep in mind that the original idea was to take over as God (Isaiah 14:14), so it should not be a surprise that anything coming from him would be done on a grand scale. His greatest trick certainly fits this description, as does his strategy of blinding unbelievers to the glory of God (2 Corinthians 4:4) so they won’t be saved. This second idea, blinding people, works pretty well and serves as a template for Satan’s strategy against Christians. Paul was concerned about how Satan could use this approach and trick followers of Jesus so that their “thoughts would be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.” (2 Corinthians 11:3) Satan’s strategy is also a variation on the theme of unforgiveness that Paul talks about in 2 Corinthians 2:12. Satan’s Scheme against Christians In a nutshell, he wrecks havoc on the lives of Christians and then gets them to blame God for it. While this may sound impossible, take a moment and think about how many Christians you know who have been angry with God because of some pain they have suffered. “Why is God doing this to me?” is a common lament and echoes the words of Job before he realized and admitted he didn’t know what he was talking about (Job 42:3). Getting Christians to blame God provides a variety of benefits for Satan. First of all, we don’t blame Satan for what’s going wrong and so we don’t resist him (James 4:7). This allows Satan to continue hurting us. We submit to Satan and allow ourselves to be blinded to the glory of God and from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. In other words, we behave in a manner directly contrary to Scripture. A More Insidious Benefit Of course, getting Christians to believe and behave contrary to Scripture is remarkable in and of itself, since we know the importance of relying on God’s word and His word alone. But there’s something even worse. When we blame God for the problems in our lives we and get angry at Him we are not about to turn to Him for solutions. We alienate ourselves from the God of all comfort (2 Corinthians 1:3). Getting Christians to forget how much God loves them, get angry at Him and give up a sincere devotion to Him, and even stop them from turning to Him to solve the problem is a perfect triple play by Satan. It is such an effective strategy that you almost have to admire how brilliant it is. Of course, nothing about Satan is admirable, and looking at this strategy with this in mind gets me pretty angry at Satan for hurting so many people in this way. How did Satan do this? It’s inconceivable that a strategy as effective as this could be based on a very simple misunderstanding of a single word. Please refer to the post “Inigo Montoyo, Theologian” to examine what it means that God is sovereign. The word may not mean what you think it does. The strategy is also based on misrepresentations of a particular passage that do not line up at all with the whole of the Bible. The entirety of Scripture points to the simple truth that God is good and that He does good things. Jesus could not have stated this any more clearly than He did in Matthew 7:11 when He said, “If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!” Hebrews 11:6 says just as clearly that God rewards those who seek Him. To Be Continued… There are interpretations of Scripture that run contrary to these clear statements about God and His character. Satan uses these to inflict pain and suffering upon His children and get them to blame God for it. Worse yet, there are those who would say that things we think of as bad such as pain, sickness and poverty are really blessings from God that we just don’t understand. Isaiah 5:20 very clearly warns us that this is a bad idea. “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” An evaluation of the misinterpreted Scriptures is coming next, so check back shortly to read it. In the meantime, take a look at the deep theological insight provided by the Spanish swordsman. Admittedly, someone who has spent their entire adult life looking to get revenge has little to teach us about grace and forgiveness, but the Spanish swordsman from The Princess Bride does have something important to teach about understanding the meaning of words. Since God is very precise in His use of language, it makes good sense for us to do the same.
God is Sovereign God’s sovereignty is clearly and absolutely established in Scripture, but it’s the meaning of that word that causes the problem. To quote Inigo, “You killed my…” No wait! (Sorry, I get a little carried away sometimes.) The word sovereign, and sovereignty, does not mean what most people think it does. Specifically, it does not mean that God is in control of everything that happens. It’s not a big surprise that folks have a difficult time understanding the meaning and implications of the word sovereign. Very few people, and fewer Christians, live under the rule of a sovereign king these days. The only current application of the term most people would be familiar with is “sovereign nation”, and even that is diluted through international treaty obligations and the United Nations. What does sovereign mean? It’s simply supreme power or authority, or, in the context of nations, the right of a nation to govern itself. A sovereign nation does not need to obey the laws of some other sovereign nation. It has the right to establish its own laws. This right is limited by treaty obligations, but absent those nations can do whatever they please, no matter how much some other nation, group or individual does not like it. This does not mean that a sovereign nation controls everything that happens in that nation. That should be pretty obvious. People violate the laws in sovereign nations all the time, and suffer the consequences defined by that nation. In practical terms, it means that a sovereign nation does not need to answer to any other nation for how it behaves / acts within its’ sovereign territory. Who does God answer to? Of course, God does not have to explain Himself or answer to anyone. “The Lord does as He pleases” according to Psalm 115:3, which is the most blatant, obvious statement of God’s sovereignty that can possibly be made. This stands in stark contrast to humanity, where everyone will have to give an account of themselves to God. (Romans 14:12). This is because God is sovereign and mankind is not. This is the idea behind Elihu’s rebuke to Job in chapter 35:6-8. By this point most readers eyes have completely glazed over and they miss the fact that one of the main points of the book is that God does not have to answer to man. God makes this abundantly clear when He addresses Job starting in chapter 38, and again most readers miss that Job answers and says he didn’t know what he was talking about throughout the entire book! (Job 42:3) Sovereignty is Simple The fact that God can do anything He wants is simple. This does not mean that He controls everything that happens. That notion even contradicts Scripture which says God has given the earth to mankind (Genesis 1:28 and Psalm 115:16). Conflating the ideas of ultimate power with ultimate control and, ultimately, responsibility is not in keeping with either Scripture itself or the concept of a loving, caring God. My favorite Old Testament law (and how many have such a thing?) is found in Leviticus 19:19 and prohibits wearing blended fabrics. Repeated in Deuteronomy 22:11, it comes along with a short list of other things that are not to be mingled, so it is obvious this is more than just fashion advice. Instead, it seems to be part of an overarching Biblical concept that has significant relevance for today.
There are two other places where God significantly speaks against the idea of blending. One is in Mark 2:21-22 (found as well in Matthew 9: 16-17) where Jesus says not to put new patches on old garments or new wine in old wineskins. The other is in Revelation 3:15-16 where the resurrected Jesus tells the Laodiceans that He wishes they were either hot or cold because their blended, lukewarm status is making Him sick. Personal Application As I think about this, it seems pretty clear that God intends that my approach to life as a Christian – my response to things, interactions with people, goals and priorities – would be very different from my days before coming to Christ. After all, I am a new creation, and the old way of doing things has ended. Blending the two approaches seems contrary to the expression of God’s will. This is most clearly expressed by Paul in Galatians 6: 8 where he draws a clear distinction between sowing to the flesh (which leads to death) and sowing to the spirit (which leads to life). Of course, before the arrival of the Holy Spirit in my life I could only sow to the flesh, but Paul is writing to the Christians in Galatia who, like me, have a choice. Larger Application I recently attended a church that believed that washing each other’s feet is an ordinance established by Jesus, and so the church should practice doing this on a regular basis. My impression is that this literal interpretation of what He did at the (so called) Last Supper is not shared by most Christians, who take it as an example of serving each other, as Paul instructs us to do in Galatians 6:2. This is not to suggest that the majority has it right and this church gets it wrong. It seems to me that the majority of churches get baptism wrong when they insist on water baptism. There is more than one kind of baptism in the Bible. Acts 8:16 and Acts 19:5 describe baptism in the name of Jesus, the baptism of John, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Of these, only the baptism of John is described as involving water. Greatest Application The use of any ritual – baptism, communion, confession – is limited to its ability to help us grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (2 Peter 3:18). It seems to me that any other perceived value is actually putting faith in our own actions, which I think is what the Bible calls sowing to the flesh. The point of any and all ritual is explained in Colossians 2:17 which says they are a foreshadowing of Christ. It’s easy to see this when comparing the animal sacrifice practiced under the law of Moses to the complete, final sacrifice of Jesus. However, sometimes I wonder if there was a temple in Jerusalem whether or not Christians would be bringing animals, birds and grain there for sacrifice. If they would, they had better check to make sure they are not wearing blended fabrics. It’s often said that the Bible is confusing or contradictory. There’s even a common misconception that God was one way in the Old Testament and altogether different in the New Testament. At the root of all these problems is a basic misunderstanding that from the beginning, God has been in the business of instructing us.
Some refer to these lesson plans as covenants, and some call them dispensations. Still others have problems with either term, and so rather than get into a debate over words, I prefer to call them lesson plans. It helps me to think of them in this way because it guides me to focus on the point God was trying to get across in each lesson. And why is this important? This is an important concept because God deals with humanity differently under different lesson plans. Each plan has some unique attributes, and trying to follow the wrong lesson plan will only result in frustration and confusion at best. Under a worst case scenario, this approach can cause some frightening results. Consider the woman who killed her children as a demonstration of her faith in God because she read that God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac as a test of Abraham’s faith. Hebrews 11:19 makes it clear that Abraham believed that God would raise Isaac from the dead, so this poor woman reasoned that she should also prove her faith in God in the same way. This is admittedly an extreme example, but those often are the best for illustrating a point. This sad woman was studying under the wrong lesson plan and missed the point that God was trying to teach. There are other obvious examples as well. Except for that group in Kentucky, no one thinks it’s important to build an ark. Do we see the point of the lesson plan? Actually, the example of the ark serves as a great illustration. After the flood, God promised not to flood the earth again, so building an ark is completely unnecessary. In addition, Peter explains the point of the lesson plan involving the ark, bringing out the relevancy of this incident for us. We can learn what God intends to teach without building an ark. This same principle applies to any of the lesson plans found in the Bible. The problem is that while most will agree with the examples of Abraham and Noah very few will apply this concept as a means of understanding the entire Bible. In other words, very few will take the Bible as literally true but then look for the figurative truth. Fortunately, God knew this was going to happen and included multiple examples to help our understanding. He also drew some bright lines between the different lesson plans so that we could tell when one ends and another one begins. This is one reason why lesson plans often begin with a new covenant or other significant change. And what is the biggest change of all? There is no shortage of highly educated scholars who can parse the Bible into different lesson plans, but it seems to me that the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is the brightest bright line between lesson plans that can possibly exist. Still, many very smart people miss this change and continue thinking that we are still learning under the lesson plan of the law. Some think this way because the lesson plan of the law takes up most of the Bible. From Israel at Mount Sinai to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ covers over 80% of Scripture, and, as has been said, God does not waste ink. In trying to see the lessons of so much of Scripture it’s actually pretty easy to miss the bigger picture. Others miss seeing that Jesus’ death and resurrection started a new lesson plan because Jesus spent a lot a time speaking about the lesson plan of the law. This makes perfect sense. He was Jewish and spent virtually all His time talking to a Jewish audience. Furthermore, He had to correct numerous misinterpretations of the law. Which plan are you following? So, the question really comes down to how you are relating to God. Are you trying to obey the law? That way included animal sacrifice in a building that no longer exists, so that seems a pretty difficult model to follow. Maybe you are trying to pick and choose laws, or distilling them all down to the greatest commandment and trying to love others as you love yourself. I think the only actual Biblical approach is to follow the new lesson plan taught by God to the apostle Paul, summed up in Romans 6:14 with the phrase “you are not under law, but under grace.” This describes an absolutely radical change in lesson plans lost in most Christian teaching. Let’s all strive to learn under the plan of grace so that we can avoid confusion and show it to others. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2019
Categories |