2 Cor 12.6-10. A thorn was given me. Part 2

My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.

the Black Church, Brașov, Romania.

2 Cor 12.6-9

If I wish to boast, I will not be a fool, for I will be speaking the truth. But I refrain from it, so that no one may think better of me than what is seen in me or heard from me, even considering the exceptional character of the revelations. Therefore, to keep me from being too elated, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me, to keep me from being too elated. Three times I appealed to the Lord about this, that it would leave me, but he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.” So, I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me. Therefore I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities for the sake of Christ; for whenever I am weak, then I am strong.

Although this is part 1, there is an Intro that is also the Conclusion. Following that is a discussion of who the super-apostles were. Identifying Paul's opponents is key to understanding the revelation, the timing of the revelation, the thorn, and “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.” You should read the Intro first.

background information: the revelation

Before getting into the passage per se, we will look at what Paul was saying that got him to the point of mentioning the thorn, Christ's grace being sufficient, power being made perfect in weakness, boasting gladly of his weaknesses, the power of Christ dwelling in him, being content with hardships, and: whenever I am weak, then I am strong.

The Corinthians have been causing problems by siding with the super-apostles against him (if you love the one you will hate the other). Paul's reply:

He has worked harder and suffered more than any of the super-apostles.
His apparent weakness is not a flaw: it was given to him and he embraces it as the path of Christ and the foundation of the Gospel.
The super-apostles' stature does not match the example of Christ, nor does it provide the correct foundation for the Gospel.
They don't belong here. The Gentile area is where God assigned Paul to work.
They do not truly care about you.

And so his reply counters these five points:

The super-apostles avoided the work and the difficulty. The church should see that and understand the super-apostles will not work and suffer for them.
His weakness is the example the church in Corinth should follow, not because he is something special, but because it leads them to Christ.
He can match his credentials against them, but to do something like that is foolish.
The super-apostles have a field God assigned them—and a field God didn't assign them. If they were supposed to be here, God would have told them so.
The super-apostles don't care about you. Rather than giving to you, they take from you.

There is no doubt that the super-apostles have inflamed Paul's anger. The church in Corinth is childish and silly, but he expects that of them. But they didn't stumble; they were made to stumble (2 Cor 11.29). What Paul doesn't expect, or like, or tolerate, are people from Jerusalem coming to his churches after he has left to "correct" the people's understanding. Yes, Paul understands that as the original members of the Twelve and the actual brothers of Christ, the super-apostles impress. But, the truth (which he doesn't reveal here) is that Peter was given the Gentile territories and he refused it. God spent a lot of time and energy convincing Peter that it was the thing he needed to do. Acts 10 and 11 are filled with events that God choreographed to convince Peter that the Gentiles were full and equal partners in Christ:

— An angel appears to Cornelius telling him to send men to Peter in Joppa

— Peter is given the vision of the sheet and in it were animals and birds and reptiles

— Peter was told, “What God has made clean, you must not call profane.”

— Peter is told that God sent an angel to Cornelius to tell Peter to come.

— Peter admits to Cornelius that he has been told he should not call anyone profane or unclean.

— Peter tells them he truly understands that God shows no partiality.

— Peter tells Cornelius that the prophets foretold this.

— The Holy Spirit fell upon the group and they began speaking in tongues.

— They baptized those who had received the Holy Spirit.

— Peter explained to the Jewish believers what had happened.

— Peter told them, "who was I that I could hinder God?”

— The Jewish believers accepted Peter's explanation.

Added to this are the last words of Christ to Peter (care for my sheep), Peter's speech at Pentecost, the beggar healed by Peter, Peter and John speaking with boldness before the Council, the death of Ananias and Sapphira, people being healed by Peter's shadow falling on them as he walked by, the apostles released from prison by the angel of the Lord, Peter and John witnessing the giving of the Holy Spirit in Samaria, the healing of Aeneas by Peter, the raising of Dorcas by Peter, and being released from prison again by the angel of the Lord. Peter had every evidence that Christ was with him in everything he did: preaching, healing, raising from the dead, being released from prison, and witnessing the giving of the Holy Spirit in Samaria and the Gentile areas.

Peter was a pillar. The pillar. The rock. He was the most highly regarded of the Twelve and of the brothers of Christ. It was within his power to tell the others how things were going to be from now on. For a while he did, but then he faltered. Peter leaped out of the starting blocks and was running strongly and quickly. But over time, he slowed: through weariness or fear or disinterest, we don't know. What we do know is that it happened: he slowed down, then stopped, then went into a long period of unpredictability where he would waver or even slip backwards.

(A New Testament Timeline is provided here to help you visualize the significant events.)

Peter was The Pillar until the Jerusalem Council. Until that time he was at the forefront and reported back to the others on what the expansion into these new areas meant. That all changed in Acts 15, after the decision of the Jerusalem Council was rendered. Peter spoke first, but then James took over to render the decision. The pillars agreed that Paul would go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised (Gal 2.9). It was this handshake that changed everything. Peter didn't want to go to the Gentiles, Paul did, and so Peter gave it up. With a handshake. He didn't even get a bowl of soup out of the deal.

In Acts 12, Peter was released from prison in answer to the church's prayer. When Peter arrived at the house where they were praying Peter said, “Tell this to James and to the believers.” Then he left and went to Caesarea.

That is the last we hear of Peter for a very long time (7 or 8 years). (Tellingly, it is also the first we hear of James as someone important.) The spotlight pans over to Paul. Peter is never again an important figure in the work of God.

It was the mistake of Peter—as it is with us—to take the words of Christ as expressions of his love for us, and to take Christ's actions on our behalf as gestures of his care for us. Not true. Peter (and we) thought that Jesus' threefold question "do you love me?" was about love. It wasn't. It was about Christ wanting Peter to care for his sheep. In Acts 12, Peter (and those praying for him) wanted Peter to be delivered from prison so he wouldn't be executed like James. When he was rescued they were overjoyed and amazed, and Peter considered it an opportune time to leave. But the angel of the Lord did not rescue Peter because he was God's favorite: he rescued him because there was work to do. For the people to be overjoyed, and for Peter to leave, evidenced that they thought his deliverance was to save his life. It wasn't. He was the rock upon Christ would build his church. How could he have imagined that Christ would sabotage that by letting Herod kill him?

But Peter wasn't thinking of Christ. He was thinking of himself. He didn't want to die and that colored his actions. He preferred life to death. Understandable, but that doesn't work on the path of Christ. There is no life without death. There is no fruit without the seed being buried.

What Paul discovered, after years of being hounded and beaten and crushed, is that every day is a death. If you can live like that, then death is not a reason to stop. The farther away a person gets from life, the less death matters. The closer a person gets to Christ, the less death matters.

Despite the strong, straightforward messages of Christ and God—messages that could not be interpreted any way other than how they were given—Peter left Jerusalem to save his life, and slipped into obscurity. The next time we see him is at the Jerusalem Council, 7 or 8 years later, where James(!) announces, "I(!) have reached the decision that we should not trouble those(!) Gentiles(!) who are turning to God." Amazing. James reaches the decision that people turning to God should be allowed to do that! James refers to his new brothers and sisters in Christ those Gentiles. Then Peter, seeing that he finally has a chance to get rid of this thorn in his flesh (14 years after Jesus had asked him (three times) to care for his sheep), he offers his hand to Paul and tells he can have it. Paul will go to the Gentiles, he will stay in Jerusalem.

That would have worked out fine, except Peter didn't stay in Jerusalem. He followed Paul to Antioch and split the believers: even Barnabas went over to his side. Then he went to Corinth and split the believers there. The one who refused to leave Jerusalem because of Christ leaves Jerusalem because of Paul. He won’t go to proclaim Christ, but he will go to make sure his people remain the people of God. He won't go to build the church, but he will go to tear it down.

Jesus said, Simon son of Jonah, do you love me?

Peter said, Yes Lord, you know I do.

Jesus said, take care of my sheep.

Paul said, he does not care about you.

It is this that sets the stage for Paul's comments in 2 Cor 12.

The Revelation

2 Cor 11.30–12.1-5

If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness. The God and Father of the Lord Jesus (blessed be he forever!) knows that I do not lie. In Damascus, the governor under King Aretas guarded the city of Damascus in order to seize me, but I was let down in a basket through a window in the wall, and escaped from his hands.

It is necessary to boast; nothing is to be gained by it, but I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord. I know a person in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows. And I know that such a person—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows—was caught up into Paradise and heard things that are not to be told, that no mortal is permitted to repeat. On behalf of such a one I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, except of my weaknesses.

This was not the only vision and revelation given to Paul, nor was it the first. It apparently though was the most dramatic. Nine or ten years earlier he had been met by the risen Christ on the road to Damascus and blinded. Three years later he went to Jerusalem in response to a revelation. Now, maybe five years after that, he is given this revelation: a revelation so extreme that he is restricted from ever telling what he heard. Why?

It is likely that the future was not part of Paul's revelation. John was given a revelation about the future, and published it for everyone to read. It seems probably that Paul's secret was not what would happen over the next 2000 years.

Why the dating: 14 years ago?

Why the incident of being let down in a basket through a window in the wall of Damascus as the only specific example of something that showed his weakness? A person would not see this as a weakness. It wasn't as dramatic as Peter's release from Prison, but it was not cowardice or anything to be ashamed of.

Why Paul and not Peter, or John or James?

we may not learn until after the next part of the plan of God is finished. Paul needed to know because he was going to be the one; we don't need to know because we're not the one.

My grace is sufficient for you

The typical explanation of “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness” is that the human messenger risks eclipsing the message, so the smaller the person is, the more Christ is seen. Ideally, the moon stays out of the way of the sun completely, so not even the slimmest edge of the light is blocked.

Fee (God's Empowering Presence, p 349) says Christ's "power can best be seen as Christ's own when he works mightily through Paul's weaknesses." On p 354 he adds, "His weaknesses do not render him less than a fully Spiritual man; indeed, he can delight in them precisely because the manifestation of Christ's power in his life despite such hindrances means that the ultimate focus is where it belongs—on Christ himself, not on the messenger. This too, I submit, is a work of the Spirit in Paul's life." (Fee is Pentecostal)

Kruse (New Bible Commentary, p 1204) says "God promised Paul that in the midst of the weakness and frustration which this 'thorn' produced, he would find God's power all the more present. Having heard such a word from God, Paul is able to boast about weaknesses, not because he enjoys them but because he knows that the power of Christ rests upon him in his weaknesses."

Sufficient in comparison to what?

for power is made perfect in weakness

a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me, to keep me from being too elated

No. Paul does not say that his weakness puts the focus on Christ rather than the messenger. Nor does he say that God promised him anything, or that the power of Christ rests upon him in his weaknesses. These ideas might have validity in another context, but that is not what Paul is talking about here.

From chapter 10 Paul has been railing against the super-apostles who impress with their credentials. He, on the other hand, is regarded as a non-super-apostle who does not impress. His concern was not that he was blocking the people's view of Christ, but that the super-apostles were. He did not need to learn that the power of Christ was with him in his weakness. He went into uncharted territories, braved unimaginable sufferings, worked day and night for his people, and showed in everything he did that he was a true apostle of Christ. The super-apostles, on the other hand, came in after he had whacked through the brush and briers to build the new churches, endured no such sufferings, and promoted themselves to a level above regular people. And Paul.

Paul's concern is not that he must learn something but that these others are undoing his work. Their stature as apostles is influencing the people to leave Paul—and Christ. And the gospel. Paul, who is not impressive, must explain (again!) that he came to them in weakness and fear and trembling (intentionally), not with lofty words or wisdom (intentionally) because that's how it is done. Being impressed by people of stature diminishes Christ. Paul was not diminishing and they weren't accusing him of doing anything like that. Exactly the opposite: they wanted more excitement.

Paul was not concerned about himself. He was concerned that by acting as he did he was losing the people because they didn't understand what he did: that weakness is the message of the cross.

It is not Paul who has the problem: it is the people in Corinth, the super apostles, and the false apostles. Paul is telling them (all), in terms they hopefully can understand, that he will not change. They will not get their wish. He will remain unimpressive. Christ was crucified in weakness. Paul's only desire is to follow Christ, and that is done in weakness.

Paul's thorn was not to remind him to keep his place. Paul was not shading Christ. That is not the people's dissatisfaction with him, nor apparently an accusation from the super-apostles. The people wanted someone more impressive. Paul said they should have regarded their very existence as proof of his authenticity, but absent that, he presents his credentials: reluctantly, hesitantly, with continual apologies that he is acting the fool for doing so.

He tells them of an experience 14 years earlier. (So far they have not accused him of being a liar, so he has some confidence they will accept his statement as the truth.) He doesn't explain what he was told, nor why this happened. He tells them of the thorn but not what it was or how it kept him from being "being too elated". The assumption is that "being too elated" is because of "the exceptional character of the revelations", but there is no certainty of that (some texts do not have the "therefore" in v 7). The text could possibly read:

To keep me from being too elated, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me, to keep me from being too elated. Three times I appealed to the Lord about this, that it would leave me, but he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.”

We know that Paul asked three times for the thorn to be removed but we don't know the span of time. It could have been fairly close to the time of the revelation. It could have also been that he asked once at a time when it was especially weighty, a second time years later, and a third time much later: possibly even now. The reason this is worth considering is because there had to have been a reason for Paul mentioning this. He didn't tell it to any of the other churches, nor to the Corinthians in his first letter. Something was happening now to bring this memory to the surface.

Paul mentions two other things that might give us a clue: that it happened 14 years earlier, and that he had escaped Damascus in a basket. Neither of these remarks seem especially pertinent to the people at Corinth, except that since this happened years before he came to Corinth they should know that his contentment with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities was his path all along, not just when he came to them.

Also significant, not from the perspective of his readers but from ours, is that this second letter to Corinth came very late in his ministry. Within a short time, possibly a year or so, he would go to Jerusalem and be arrested. He would spend two years in prison then be sent to prison in Rome. We don't know what happened to him after that, but at the time of the writing of this letter he was in his final year or two of freedom before those extended imprisonments.

The situation Paul is being confronted with in Corinth is similar to the problems he dealt with in Galatia. There he was being accused of being a wannabe apostle who was impressed with the pillars and longed to be in their company. The slander from Corinth is not exactly the same, but similar on some main points: the super-apostles impressed; Paul didn't.

Adding these things up, we have some possible indicators of why Paul chose this occasion to mention the vision. A significant point I think is that none of these especially were important to the believers at Corinth. If we remove everything from 11.22b to 12.13, Paul's argument is just as compelling. Paul's narrative from 11.1-22a continues easily into 12.13-21. The argument is not interrupted or diminished by the removal of that long passage:

. . . I repeat, let no one think that I am a fool; but if you do, then accept me as a fool, so that I too may boast a little. What I am saying in regard to this boastful confidence, I am saying not with the Lord’s authority, but as a fool; since many boast according to human standards, I will also boast. For you gladly put up with fools, being wise yourselves! For you put up with it when someone makes slaves of you, or preys upon you, or takes advantage of you, or puts on airs, or gives you a slap in the face. To my shame, I must say, we were too weak for that!

. . .

How have you been worse off than the other churches, except that I myself did not burden you? Forgive me this wrong! Here I am, ready to come to you this third time. And I will not be a burden, because I do not want what is yours but you; for children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents for their children. . . .

Then we come to Paul's strange remark in 12.19: "Have you been thinking all along that we have been defending ourselves before you?" Why wouldn't they have thought this? If Paul lists all the things he suffered in ch 11, why would they not think he was defending himself before them? He explains, not face on but tangentially, that "We are speaking in Christ before God", which doesn't really complete the thought of why he has not been defending himself before them. Paul clearly has been defending himself. But what if he was not defending himself before them? He says he has been telling them these things for their sake: so they would be built up. It is likely that he is not talking about expected growth over time: the process of going from milk to solid food. More likely is that he is talking about them being built up vs being torn down. Yes, he is defending himself, but not they would have the proper regard for him. The issue is that they would not leave the truth of the gospel. His concern is the same as he had for the church in Galatia: that they are "deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel." (Gal 1.6) The ones Paul battles in Galatia are the same ones causing trouble in Corinth, and their intent is the same: to build up again the very things that he had torn down (Gal 2.18). Building up the one thing tears down the other; both cannot exist at the same time. Paul came to Corinth proclaiming nothing but Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

Paul cannot care to the sheep and also not care for the sheep. The super-apostles are no less sheep than the believers at Corinth. Christ devoted himself to them. He called them friends. The fact that they do not have the strength to extract themselves from their beliefs is a weakness. Yes, it comes across as a strength, but it is a weakness.

It would be a breath of fresh air if their weakness was the kind of weakness that resulted in strength, but that is an impossible corner for them to turn. The weakness that provides opportunity for the power of Christ is not human weakness. It is weakness brought onto the person by years of beatings, abandonment, and slander. It is this weakness that gives the vine a branch that can bear much fruit. The weakness that is human weakness is the weakness that refuses to give up traditions and superstitions and heroes and comforts: not the comforts of live, but the comforts of beliefs. We cannot defend the apostles because they were Jews and the sharp turn that Jesus demanded required some time for them to adjust to. No. Paul was a Jew too. And more of a Jew than them, for he was a Pharisee and a persecutor of the church. If one appearance of Christ was enough to call it all garbage, then three years of living with Christ and many post-resurrection appearances was more than enough to convince them too. It is not for no reason that Paul lists these appearances in 1 Cor 15.4-9. Christ showed himself to them time after time: he showed himself to Paul once. Once was enough for Paul; a thousand times wasn't enough for them.

The super-apostles felt their skins bursting as the new wine was poured in and they couldn't take it. If they could not be burst apart for Christ, they certainly could not do it for Paul either. Their trajectory was settled years earlier, when Paul gave them the opportunity to turn over the Gentile areas and, with relief, said yes. They didn't want it; they didn't want to even be close to it. They issued the dictate to the church in Antioch as a way to make sure the churches close to Jerusalem did not offend them too badly. It was fine with them if Paul headed west so they didn't have to.

Paul would have been smart to have gotten it in writing. "If I go to the Gentiles, you will stay in Jerusalem." They would have said yes at the time. They had agreed, at least tacitly, that the Gentile areas would not be under their jurisdiction. But later, when they saw what they had given up, and knowing they were the pillars and the capitol "A" Apostles, went to investigate. Their stature gave them the right—the obligation—to do whatever they wanted, wherever they wanted. So when they saw things they didn't like, they changed them to the way they did like, for they were the very in-the-flesh Disciples and Apostles and Brothers of Christ. Paul stood no chance against them. Their weakness was manifested in conviction. They knew what had to be done to fix things.

Is Paul speaking to himself here?

If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends.

1 Corinthians

Peter didn't have to actually visit Corinth to have followers. Peter was in Antioch, but that was close to Jerusalem. Priscilla and Aquila came from Rome. Apollos and others could have come from other places. They could have told the church at Corinth about meeting people who were genuine witnesses and "true" apostles.

If Peter or Apollos or some other leader was there

why didn't they expel the man from the church who was sleeping with his father's mother?

why didn't they set right the abuses of the Lord's supper?

why didn't they answer the questions about the resurrection?

It is possible that being let down in a basket to escape from Damascus (11.30-33) is mentioned to give the dating of the vision. If it is not, there seems to be no reason for Paul to mention it, for it was his first escape but not the last, and it does not obviously follow the thought of 11.29. I think 11.30 begins an excursus that extends through 12.10. I think Paul was not speaking to the believers at Corinth, but the super-apostles. He knew that whatever he wrote would be read by the super-apostles as well, so he wrote to them through his letter to the church at Corinth.

Paul says all this happened 14 years earlier, about the time he was let down in the basket to escape from Damascus. It was five years before his first missionary journey, while he was still an unknown. None of this means anything to the believers at Corinth, but it did mean something to the super-apostles. 14 years earlier Peter was the key figure in Jerusalem. It was around this time that James was killed, and Peter was imprisoned and released by the angel (Acts 12). Paul (Saul) was known to them, but only as an acquaintance of Barnabas. He was not on their radar. Shortly after he was sent away to Tarsus. If they had never heard of him again they would not have noticed.

Now they learn something that upsets everything they thought to be true. Paul was not just an acquaintance of Barnabas. He had not just been stopped by Christ on the road to Damascus. He was not just a lower-case "a" apostle. He had been summoned to Paradise and told things that he could never repeat in this life. That event equipped him to be the one to build Christ's church among the Gentiles.

Paul had many occasions (and reasons) to tell them about this. Early on, there was really no reason not to tell them. They might have responded like Joseph's brothers who hated him because of his dreams, or David's brothers who accused him of presumption and evil intentions. But there might have been value in that: James needed to be told he was not nearly as special as he imagined; Peter needed to be told the last words of Christ and being delivered from prison by the angel and the vision of the animals on the sheet were unique, one-of-a-kind-events-in-all-of-human-history that he could not ignore. John needed to be told that being the one that Jesus loved was not a unique thing.

Paul knew he was right because Christ told him what to teach. Gal 1.11-12:

The gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Paul had not worked it out in his keen mind; he learned nothing from the apostles. He was told by Christ things that the apostles knew but would not do, things that the apostles did not know and would react against once he began teaching in the Gentile regions, and things that no one else would ever know.

Christ, who also knew what it was like to be a brother, said no: this information will not be used to set things right. These words will not be repeated, to anyone, and certainly not to them. We can imagine the explosion that would have happened, but God handled the other such explosions (and even choreographed them) so it is not impossible that this could have been turned to the benefit of both Paul and Christ. But Christ never did it and he didn't allow Paul to do it either. Christ had many reasons and many opportunities to use "things that are not to be told, that no mortal is permitted to repeat" against his tormentors. He didn't defend himself. He told them what the facts of life were but he hid what he was and what he knew until it was time to light the fuse, because he knew it would not level the playing field: they would kill him.

What Christ knew that was "not to be told" was between him and the Father. Telling would not sort things out; it would bring him down. It would cheapen the secret and degrade the intimacy, and for what purpose: to put them in their place? No. Never. Their place is here, not in the third heaven where the Son and the Father exist.

What was said was between Christ and Paul. We have no right to know. We can say with certainty that it was not idle chatter. The one thing Christ cared about was the care of his sheep. Christ needed a shepherd who would lay down his life for the sheep. Whatever Paul was told, it had to have been as dear to the heart of Christ as his words at the Last Supper. Whether just in this vision or also later, Paul was taught everything he needed to know to do that. If Christ spent three years teaching the Twelve, it is not unreasonable that he spent months or even years teaching Paul.

We see a glimpse of some of this in passages like Rom 11 (all Israel will be saved), 1 Cor 15.35-56 (the resurrection), 1 Thess 4 (the coming of the Lord), 2 Thess 2 (the Day of the Lord), where Paul tells us things he could not have worked out or learned from anyone else. But Christ's immediate concern was getting someone to leave Jerusalem and lay down his life for his sheep, and that was probably central to the words spoken to Paul.

Why the thorn? Why was it necessary to keep Paul from being too elated? It was not because of the vision per se. 2 Cor 12.4 makes no sense if it reads only "was caught up into Paradise", and 12.7 does not say "the exceptional character of the vision": it says "the exceptional character of the revelation". Vision is experience; revelation is information. Paul was told things he was not permitted to repeat. That was the important part of the event: what he heard.

Why it happened in Paradise rather than on earth is impossible to know. A possibility is that one of his brushes with death was actually death: he was given the revelation and then returned to his body to finish the course.

Paul kept the secret. He stayed in the background. He let the apostles take the lead. He took what they dropped from the table. He watched all these things and said nothing.

It could be hypothesized that he was given the thorn after one particularly grievous offense where he almost told one of the apostles the truth. The reason I don't hold to that is that for years he stayed far away from them and they were content with having him out there. It was only after Paul had established churches across the region as far as Corinth and was writing letters to the churches that the apostles discovered they had a problem. It was then that they appointed themselves to visit his churches and see what was going on that the problems started.

Paul was content to let the apostles stay in Jerusalem and he was content to work harder than any of them without getting any help. He was content to be misunderstood and slandered. None of those things mattered enough to bring him to his knees. But now they were coming after his people. Christ's sheep. It was one thing for the apostles to send the crazy decision of the Jerusalem Council to Antioch, but now the very ones who refused to leave Jerusalem to proclaim the gospel were leaving Jerusalem to undo the gospel. He had stayed out of their way. He had done nothing to upset things in Jerusalem or anywhere else they claimed as their territory. They had agreed he would go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. He took the area they did not want. We worked harder than any of them and turned it into a necklace of churches.

When Abram separated from Lot he gave Lot first choice. Lot took the cultivated area and the city. Abram agreed with no fuss and took what Lot didn't want. He rescued Lot when he was attacked and kidnapped by Chedorlaome.

For James and Peter to leave Jerusalem and not preach the gospel but teach another gospel was too much. In Galatia Paul took on Peter in public, denouncing him for his hypocrisy. Interestingly, Paul makes a passing reference to 14 years and a revelation in Gal 2.1. It might have been a different 14 years and a different revelation, but it is interesting that the same dating is used and the contention between Paul and the apostles is along similar grounds. It is also worth nothing that it was at this time (14 years earlier) that Peter turned over his role as the apostle to the gentiles to Paul.

But now, in Galatia James and Peter (and others) follow after Paul to tell the gentiles something more is required. And in Corinth, Paul finds the believers aligning behind their leader of choice, Peter being one (although Paul uses his pre-rock name: Cephas), and in 2 Cor still being plagued by the super-apostles who cannot tolerate a church that is not under their authority.

So Paul says no. You will not do this. He has earned the right to be be regarded their equal. He has worked harder than any of them, suffered more than any of them, watched in astonishment as they tromped through his area of work. The people in Corinth are not to blame. They must get back on the path, but they are not to blame. The blame falls squarely on the super-apostles.

All this time Paul has held his secret. He was told never to tell and he won't. But now he considers it time to show them that he has something they knew nothing of, so he draws back the curtain just enough for them to understand things have been happening they know nothing of. He wants them to know they are defiling not his work, but Christ's. He tells them the date of the revelation to surprise them into understanding that all this time that they regarded him as nothing, Christ didn't. He tells them nothing of the words, only that words were spoken: words that would never be revealed in this life, even to them. (Maybe especially to them.)

The message of Christ to Paul is “My grace is sufficient for you." You don't need things to be fair, you don't need to honored, you don't need to be understood or treated with dignity. You need only to know that it is worth it. I will make certain things turn out the way I need them to. The path is the gift. The vine is the gift. Stay on it. Even if you are the only one, stay on it. It is enough that it is just me and you. You don't need anything or anyone else.

The fact that Paul had made it 14 years is the proof that this was of Christ. None of them did it. None of them would have done it. All of them balked at the hardships and calamities, leaving it to him alone to limp along all these years, in anguish. What Paul did was beyond their understanding. If the church in Corinth should have been the ones to commend him, how much more the ones who knew from the beginning?! But instead of commending him, they imposed themselves into his work. They could not tolerate someone like this. Now Paul warns them: there is a lot you don't know in all this. Paul cannot insist they regard him as their equal, he cannot insist they go back to Jerusalem, but he can warn them: I am speaking the truth. You forced me into this. Go back where you belong.

Soon after writing this letter Paul returned to Jerusalem, was arrested through the machinations of James, and was sent to Rome to wait in prison for his hearing before the emperor.

From Rome, Paul wrote to the Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians. He sent letters to Timothy and Titus and Philemon. There is no record of him writing again to the church at Corinth. Possibly something to think about.

They treated him as a nobody all these years, and he had taken it, because what he knew was never to be repeated.

Even to the super-apostles.

But now, he was near the end.

Paul told of the revelation to turn his people away from the attraction of the super apostles. He is not saying there is anything wrong with him, or that God or Christ is displeased with anything he is doing or saying, or that except for the foot of God on his back he would stand up and be like the super-apostles. He is not admitting to a flaw that God solved by appointing a thorn to torment him. He is not Jonah, sitting on the hill hoping that God will destroy his enemies. He does not need to be reminded of anything.

His concern, his only concern, is that his lack of impressiveness has opened a window of opportunity for the super apostles to come in and turn the people from the truth. He would do anything to save them (he already has!) and so he tells them this story: for their benefit, not his. He is not admitting to a battle with pride that he beats down only with great effort. He is telling them that "weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities for the sake of Christ" is his path and he will not step off it. He is telling them he will not apologize for his apparent weakness: it is a gift he has treasured these 14 years. It is the way he got this far and the only way he will make it to the end.

The thorn was not pride. He has already said he does not want anyone think better of him because of the revelation. The elation was not because of the experience of being caught up to the third heaven per se, but because of what he was told: things that no mortal is permitted to repeat.

The thorn is because the conductor must have every instrument playing at the correct loudness. It is ugly if one trumpet is too loud or the kettle drums some in too strong. The trumpet and timpani are needed, but calmly if the score asks for it and loudly if the score asks for it. Paul is not wrong for playing the trumpet, but he is wrong for playing it too loudly right now. Later he can blaze away at full volume. Now, no: there must be harmony.

a defect in Paul but a torturous interference in his work.

in comparison to what?

Satisfaction?

Winning?

Being treated with respect?

Having this weight released?

In comparison to who? himself? or someone else who was shining bright?

power for what? for message or the messenger?

, probably because none of this information would make his people any more inclined to

Paul was simply being showed the lay of the land. This is how it is. "I will show him how much he must suffer for my sake."

Paul would have been horrified at such an inference. He did not need a thorn to know to stay out of the way. He insisted on staying out of the way. It was the others who imposed themselves into the picture. They may not have shaded Christ, but they certainly shaded Paul.

Paul's thorn was not because of self-pride. God's answer “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness” is not a reminder to Paul to keep his place, out of the Sonlight.

Paul makes an effort to claim they had no right to even be in his territory, and that at least part of their impressiveness is taking credit for things they had not done.

He says "whenever I am weak, then I am strong."

ESV

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.

MOUNCE

But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is fulfilled in weakness.” Therefore I will most gladly boast in my weaknesses, in order that the power of Christ may dwell in me.

NABRE

but he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.” I will rather boast most gladly of my weaknesses, in order that the power of Christ may dwell with me.

NASB

And He has said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness.” Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me.

NIV

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 about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.

RSV

but he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.

it is a continuation of 11.30: If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness.

10.12-14 We do not dare to classify or compare ourselves with some of those who commend themselves. But when they measure themselves by one another, and compare themselves with one another, they do not show good sense. 13 We, however, will not boast beyond limits, but will keep within the field that God has assigned to us, to reach out even as far as you. 14 For we were not overstepping our limits when we reached you; we were the first to come all the way to you with the good news[e] of Christ.

15-18 We do not boast beyond limits, that is, in the labors of others; but our hope is that, as your faith increases, our sphere of action among you may be greatly enlarged, 16 so that we may proclaim the good news[f] in lands beyond you, without boasting of work already done in someone else’s sphere of action. 17 “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” 18 For it is not those who commend themselves that are approved, but those whom the Lord commends.