Christ the Healer: An Analysis (part 6)
A study of the book, Christ the Healer, by F. F. Bosworth:
- Part 1 (Introduction)
- Part 2 (Interpreting the Scriptures)
- Part 3 (Where Sickness Comes From)
- Part 4 (Healing and the Will of God 1)
- Part 5 (Healing and the Will of God 2)
IV. Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh
In Chapter 14 (pages 190-206), Mr. Bosworth deals in some detail with Paul’s experience as described in 2 Corinthians 12:7-10. He sees this as a critical passage, since those who place less emphasis on bodily healing make reference to the fact that Paul was not healed, in spite of prayer for restoration on three different occasions.
It is the author’s contention that Paul’s problem was not physical illness, but rather persecution. He refers us to the lengthy list of hardships described by Paul in the prior chapter (2Cor. 11:23-28). And he needs to win his point, very badly. He is fearful of the exception to his rigid system.
On the other hand, those who take an opposing view find Paul’s experience supportive, but they do not need to insist upon it. I personally believe Paul suffered a chronic physical ailment of some kind. But the nature of his problem is not specified. (God graciously allows his problem to represent that of each one who is suffering. We do not know, precisely, the burden he bore, and so we can feel a sense of identification with him in our extremity.)
It is possible that the author is correct. That Paul is referring to demonic opposition through those who sought to hinder his ministry. But that is not the most likely explanation. Some see the willingness of the Galatians to pluck out their eyes to give to Paul (Gal. 4:15) as a sign of eye problems. That is supported by his later note that he is writing to them in a large script (Gal. 6:11).
However, other explanations of these points are possible; we cannot be dogmatic. It is certain that Paul refers over and over to his “weakness” and “infirmity” (1 Cor. 2:3, 4:10; 2 Cor. 10:10, 11:21, 29-30, 12:5, 9, 10, 13;4, 9; Gal. 4:13-14). It could be that none of that relates to any physical problem, but it is surely possible that it does. Bosworth’s insistence otherwise is born of his theological bias, more than any textual evidence.
It is interesting that the author admits, regarding Gal. 4:13, “probably the infirmity here was physical” (p. 203). Yet exactly the same Greek word is used when he discusses his thorn (II Cor. 12:5, 9-10). When his other arguments are examined thoughtfully, they do not bolster his position to any great degree. Here are a few examples:
- Bosworth quotes Paul in I Cor. 4:11, “Even unto this hour, we both hunger and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted.” This, he claims, shows that Paul’s idea of buffetings was not a permanent sickness (p. 197). But one is hard pressed to see how these words rule out any other use of the term “buffeting”.
- “Since ‘buffeting’ means giving repeated blows, if Paul’s buffeting was a physical one, it would have had to be a succession of diseases, or the same disease many times repeated, or he could not have termed it a buffeting (p. 180). But is that so? Has he never heard of chronic and recurring illness?
- “These… contend that Paul’s ‘thorn’ must have been a bodily affliction because Paul says that the ‘thorn’ was ‘in the flesh’. I answer that, in the case of these Israelites [referring to Num. 33:55]… this does not mean that God was to stick Canaanites in their eyes and sides, with their heels dangling outside” (p. 193).
By posing a ridiculous interpretation of one passage, the author hopes to discredit a sensible interpretation of another. No one would propose what he has suggested. But “thorns” can be meant in some figurative or symbolic sense. In Hos. 2:6, the “hedge of thorns” seems to represent painful circumstances of some kind, intended to turn Hosea’s wife back to him again. Whether poverty of illness or danger from enemies or something else, we are not told.
- Mr. Bosworth quotes a speaker giving an explanation of Paul’s thorn as eye disease (in great detail, pages 199-200) and then proceeds to ridicule the idea. But this is a straw man technique that should have been beneath him. Most Bible teachers would not dogmatize to the degree of the one he quotes (who calls Paul “the sickest of men”). The author responds, “If ‘the sickest of men’ can accomplish more work than a well man, then let us all pray for sickness in order that we may also do more work for God” (p. 197). The comment is meant as sarcasm, but it is interesting how close it comes to Paul’s own words: “I take pleasure in infirmities… for when I am weak, then I am strong” (II Cor. 12:10).
To conclude, it is not necessary to deal in great detail with all of the writer’s points. The truth is, his theology has forced him into a corner and he must avoid the obvious. Paul says, simply, “a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me” (II Cor. 12:7). Here is how a couple of translators handle that:
“A thorn was sent to pierce my flesh–an instrument of Satan to discipline me” (The Twentieth Century New Testament). “I was given a sharp pain in my body which came as Satan’s messenger to bruise me (The New English Bible). Philips actually paraphrases, “I was given a physical handicap”.
Reputable scholarship and common sense would seem to allow for at least the possibility that Paul suffered some chronic physical ailment. But, that while Satan sought to use it to tear him down, it merely turned him back to the Lord. And Paul found, in this necessitated dependence, a far richer and more fruitful ministry.