In the second epistle to the Corinthians, <471201> twelfth chapter, is the record of Paul’s “thorn in the flesh.” This fact in the experience of the great apostle has caused a great deal of comment, and has been fearfully wrested and misunderstood. Among the different opinions extant concerning what it was, and certainly the least tenable, is the one which claims that it was the “old man;” or, in other words, inbred sin. A little careful study on this subject would no doubt satisfy any one as to what it was, how, when and where he received it. Certainly it can he shown that it was nothing in connection with sin.

In introducing the subject, he says: “I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell; God knoweth); such an one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell; God knoweth); how that He was caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful (margin, possible) for a man to utter.” He then goes on to say: “And 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.”

As every one knows, the man of whom he speaks, that was caught up into the third heaven, was himself. In this state he had great revelations of the glories of the heavenly world. No doubt the apostle’s meaning when he speaks of making known those revelations was that it was impossible, rather than unlawful, to do so. The first thing we wish to settle in this lesson is, that this thorn was not carnality.

1 . He states that the thorn came in connection with those revelations. Then, if it came at the time of the revelations, he certainly did not have it before. If the thorn was carnality, he did not have carnality just before the heavenly revelations.

2 . He said it was a thorn in the flesh. The word flesh in the Scriptures has two meanings — physical corporeity and carnality. In reference to the physical he says: “The life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God.” Galatians 2:20.

In reference to the carnal he says: “So they that are in the flesh cannot please God.” Romans 8:8.

Flesh in both of these expressions cannot mean the same, else it would be an irreconcilable contradiction. To which flesh did the apostle have reference in the expression, “thorn in the flesh”? To say that he meant carnality is nonsense. It would be the same as saying he had carnality in carnality if the thorn in the flesh was such. Then it must have been something which happened to his physical being.

3 . It was given him lest he “should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations.” In other words, it was given him to keep him humble. If the thorn in the flesh was inbred sin, then inbred sin was given him to keep him humble. But the very root of pride, which is the opposite of humility, is inbred sin. Strange that something which produces pride should be given him to prevent the same. If carnality keeps people humble, then unsanctified people are more humble than the sanctified, and the more carnality the better.

4 . He prayed three times that it might be removed, but the Lord saw it to be best that it should remain. Now “the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Romans 8:7.

Strange that God would want something to remain in him that was not subject to His law, but was real enmity against Himself. Paul had written to the Romans about the time in which he had these revelations, and had declared that the “old man” was crucified, and that the body of sin was destroyed; so then he must have been free from it.

5 . The best thing God could do then, consistent with His will, was to let the thorn remain, and to say, “My grace is sufficient for thee.” Is this the way that God deals with the question of carnality? This is the way some people deal with it. They think that we must battle against it all our life; that God’s grace is sufficient for us; but that lie will not destroy this element till we die. But the teaching of His Word throughout is, that we must have it destroyed now.

6 . Paul, in the ninth verse, defines the thorn in the flesh, and names it “infirmities,” showing that it was a combination of things rather than one in particular. Is there any Scripture that makes inbred sin synonymous with infirmities? We have never seen it.

7 . He said he would glory in the infirmities, meaning the thorn in the flesh.

The idea of Paul, after he had said so much in regard to getting rid of this awful fungus of the soul, turning around and saying, most gladly would he glory in it. This he does, if the thorn is carnality.

8 . He had scarcely finished the sentence of glorying in it, till we hear him say he takes pleasure in the same. What! take pleasure in carnality? Just so, if the thorn in the flesh is such. Anyway, we may wonder how he could take pleasure in that which a little while before he was so anxious to be rid of. Here we have the blessed proof of God’s abounding grace, which is not only sufficient to make us endure for Jesus’ sake the trials of life, but will also enable us actually to take pleasure in them.

We think we have given sufficient proof that the thorn in the flesh was not carnality. What, then, was it? If it was not inbred sin, then it was something in connection with his physical body. He said it took place fourteen years previous. In the margin of the Oxford Bibles are these words: “AD. 46. At Lystra, Acts 14:6.” Turning to this fourteenth chapter of Acts, we find the account of Paul being stoned at Lystra, and dragged out of the city as a dead man. There is no doubt but that Paul was stoned to death at this time.

Here he was caught up into Paradise, and saw and heard things that no mortal tongue could utter. What a change from the scenes of a moment before! With a howling mob around him, throwing brickbats, and filling the air with their fiendish yells, it seems that he departs this life, and the next moment he finds himself amid the glories of the third heaven. God had a purpose in it all, of course, but was not ready for Paul to leave the toils of soul-saving down here. One might imagine the Lord saying, “Paul, what are you doing here? I am not quite ready for you to come home. There are some more souls for you to save down there, and you will have to spend a little more time in the work; then I will send for you.” We think Paul, without any word of reluctance, said, “Amen,” and while the waiting disciples were viewing his mangled remains, life came into the body again and Paul arose to his feet Right here let me say that Paul evidently believed one could be absent from the body, and yet be in a state of consciousness.

He was not a soul-sleeper.

We see little opportunity for doubt that Paul had direct reference to his stoning at Lystra, being the time that he had the revelations, and consequently at this time he received the thorn in the flesh. Then, what was the thorn? Just what any one would naturally suppose, viz., some physical affliction as a result of the stoning. We could hardly suppose that one could undergo such maltreatment, resulting in death (at least for a little time), without some disfigurement of the body. It would not take many blows upon the face to render it more or less shapeless throughout life, even if it did get well. There are some Scriptural evidences which show very conclusively that such was the case with Paul, and, having these things to contend with throughout the latter portion of his life, we may well suppose it occurred at the time of his stoning, and hence, was the thorn in his flesh.

Immediately after speaking of the thorn and praying for its removal, he breaks forth in these words: “Wherefore I take pleasure in weaknesses, in injuries, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake, for when I am weak, then am I strong.” (Revelation Ver.) It is evident that every word used here is in connection with this disagreeable thorn. First, through it he had weaknesses. Surely, there was some weakness as a result of that awful stoning. Second, he said he had injuries. Natural enough.

Injuries that disfigured him, as we shall soon see. Then follows the word necessities. These were the natural result of his weaknesses and injuries.

He was under the necessity of having certain care and help, which he otherwise no doubt would have dispensed with. Then he mentions persecutions. These persecutions came, no doubt, as a result of the thorn of which he speaks. Even some of the professed followers of the Lord brought about persecutions on account of his appearance. “For his letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible.” — 2 Corinthians 10:10. Persecutions from the brethren are worse by far than from the world. Following persecutions, he speaks of distresses. It is reasonable to suppose that this affliction, the thorn in the flesh, was a constant mortification, in a sense, to him. The distressing fact of his facial appearance was continually confronting him.

But this is not the only evidence concerning the nature of the thorn.

According to some statements he makes to the Galatian church, it leaves little room for doubt that his trouble was a mutilated condition of his face, particularly affecting his eyes. We do not mean to infer that he had sore eyes, but a scarred face and weakened eye sight, that made him appear unsightly. Hear him in his address to that church: “And my temptation, which was in my flesh, ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.” Galatians 4:13.

He seemed so thankful to them that they did not reject him on account of his physical condition. In the next verse he even feels that they would have been willing to make an exchange of what was complete in them for what was so afflicted in Paul. “For I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.” It seems quite conclusive that his trouble was mainly with his eyes.

As a further proof of this, we would call attention to the fact that Paul almost constantly had a companion with him, probably not only as an amanuensis, but a helper, because of impaired eye sight Probably the only epistle Paul wrote with his own hands was to these Galatians. Evidently the reason why he did not write more was his practical inability. He did write the letter to these Galatians, for they had drifted into a sad state spiritually, and Paul, to prove that it was his own epistle, wrote it with his own hand, so that it would carry with it as much weight as possible. In our Authorized Version he says, in the sixth chapter and eleventh verse: “Ye see how large a letter I have written unto you with mine own hand.” But the Revised Version brings a further proof concerning the weakness of his eyes, when it says: “See how large letters I write unto you with mine own hand.” This shows not only that he wrote the letter with his own hand, but that it was written in large characters. Why large letters? Because on account of impaired vision, he could do the work easier and better. Probably the only way he could write at all.

Again, a little later in this last chapter of Galatians, he calls attention to his disfigurement, and says: “I bear branded on my body the marks of Jesus.” — Galatians 6:17 (Revelation Ver.). Stockmen brand their stock in order to prove their ownership. Surely Paul had the marks of Christ’s ownership.

The injuries he sustained, especially at Lystra, were most conclusive and lasting evidences of the fact of his loyalty and blessed relationship to our Lord Jesus Christ. He had inward evidences in his own heart that he was fully saved, and he not only manifested to the outward world the fact by a holy life, but he had the very brand stamped upon him; something which the world was not carrying.

We would not like to lay this lesson aside without calling attention briefly to a few helpful suggestions. We learn from Paul’s experience here that God does not always answer our prayers with a “Yes.” If we would get the most out of our praying we must be so submissive to God that we will be as willing that He should say “No” as “Yes.” If He answered in the negative, He will place alongside of the refusal, “My grace is sufficient for thee.”

There should be a continual understanding between every soul and the Lord, that wherever a negative answer is best at should be given. Of course, it will be done anyway, but with that previous understanding it would save one from the disappointment. Another lesson we may learn is, that the very things we naturally dislike the most may be so changed when God reveals His will in them, that we may glory and take pleasure in them.