2 Corinthians 12:7

The Nature of Paul’s ‘Thorn in the Flesh’ in 2 Corinthians 12:7

This exegetical study of The Nature of Paul’s ‘Thorn in the Flesh’ in 2 Corinthians 12:7 is based on a b-greek discussion from May 23, 2004. The initial inquiry raised the question of the common English translation of ἄγγελος (angelos) in 2 Corinthians 12:7 as an impersonal entity, often understood as a physical problem, in contrast to Dutch translations which render it as a personal pronoun (“that he might depart from me”). A preliminary check of New Testament occurrences of ἄγγελος failed to find other instances where it was translated impersonally, prompting an investigation into whether Paul was afflicted by a personified “messenger of Satan” rather than an impersonal ailment.

The main exegetical issue revolves around the precise identification of Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” (σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί) and the nature of the “messenger of Satan” (ἄγγελος σατανᾶ) that was given to “buffet” (κολαφίζῃ) him. The ambiguity in the Greek text allows for interpretations ranging from a literal physical ailment, a demonic spiritual entity, or a human adversary. This ambiguity is further complicated by Paul’s rhetorical purpose in not explicitly identifying the affliction, and by intertextual connections to Old Testament imagery of thorns and other Pauline references to his weaknesses and challenges.

2 Corinthians 12:7b-8 (Nestle 1904):
ἐδόθη μοι σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί, ἄγγελος σατανᾶ, ἵνα με κολαφίζῃ, ἵνα μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι.
Ὑπὲρ τούτου τρὶς τὸν Κύριον παρεκάλεσα, ἵνα ἀποστῇ ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The SBLGNT capitalizes Σατανᾶ, whereas older Nestle editions (like 1904) may present it in lowercase: σατανᾶ. This is an orthographic rather than a substantive textual variant.
• The SBLGNT uses a straight apostrophe (’) for elision, e.g., ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ, consistent with modern typographic conventions, while older editions often use a grave accent or other marks.
• There are no significant textual variants in the critical apparatus for these verses that would alter the core interpretive debate regarding the nature of the “thorn” or “messenger.”

Textual Criticism (NA28), Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)

The Nestle-Aland 28th edition (NA28) presents the text essentially identical to the Nestle 1904 reading provided, confirming no major textual variants impact the primary terms under discussion. The interpretive challenge lies in the semantic range and contextual implications of the vocabulary.

• σκόλοψ (skolops, lit. “thorn, stake, splinter”): BDAG defines it as “a pointed piece of wood, a stake, thorn, splinter.” KITTEL notes its usage in the LXX, particularly in Numbers 33:55, Hosea 2:6, and Ezekiel 28:24, where it is used metaphorically for adversaries or persistent troubles. For instance, Numbers 33:55 speaks of the remaining inhabitants becoming “pricks in your eyes and thorns in your sides” (σκόλοπες ἐν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς ὑμῶν καὶ βολίδες ἐν ταῖς πλευραῖς ὑμῶν). This metaphorical usage is crucial, suggesting that Paul’s “thorn” might not be a literal physical object but a source of persistent trouble or opposition.
• ἄγγελος (angelos, “messenger, angel”): BDAG lists primary meanings as “messenger” or “angel/superhuman being.” KITTEL emphasizes its consistent usage for personal agents, whether human or divine/demonic. The discussion notes that the word is almost universally personal elsewhere in the NT (175 occurrences according to Trenchard), raising questions about an impersonal translation in 2 Corinthians 12:7. Its masculine nominative singular form, matching σκόλοψ, suggests an appositional relationship.
• σατανᾶς (Satanas, “Satan”): This term designates the chief adversary of God and humanity. Its use here clearly links the “messenger” to an evil, opposing force.
• κολαφίζω (kolaphizo, “to strike with the fists, beat, buffet, torment, harass”): BDAG offers “to strike with the fist, buffet” as the primary meaning, with secondary senses like “to torment” or “to harass.” KITTEL reinforces the idea of physical assault or severe mistreatment. The literal sense of “beating” (as suggested by “cudgel” in some sources) leads some to question how this could describe a physical ailment like an eye disease, while others argue for a figurative sense of “harass” or “trouble” which a chronic condition could certainly do.
• ἀσθένεια (astheneia, “weakness, illness, disease”): Paul uses this term in the subsequent verses (2 Cor 12:9-10) to describe his condition. BDAG confirms its broad semantic range, encompassing “weakness, frailty, sickness, illness, disease.” KITTEL notes its frequent association with physical infirmities. The connection between Paul’s σκόλοψ and his ἀσθένεια is a key factor for those advocating a physical ailment interpretation.
• βασκαίνω (baskainō, “to bewitch, cast an evil eye”): This hapax legomenon in Galatians 3:1 was introduced in the discussion to suggest a potential “evil eye” context for Paul’s suffering, especially in conjunction with his comments about eyes in Galatians 4:15. BDAG defines it as “to bewitch” or “to cast an evil spell on someone.”

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The grammatical structure of 2 Corinthians 12:7b-8 presents several points for consideration, influencing translation choices:

Firstly, the appositional relationship between σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί (“a thorn in the flesh”) and ἄγγελος σατανᾶ (“a messenger of Satan”) is pivotal. Both σκόλοψ and ἄγγελος are masculine nominative singular. This grammatical agreement means that the messenger of Satan is presented as the very nature or identity of the thorn. If ἄγγελος typically refers to a personal or spiritual entity, then the “thorn” should likewise be understood in a personal sense, rather than an impersonal physical object.

Secondly, the verb κολαφίζῃ (“to buffet/strike”) and the subsequent request ἵνα ἀποστῇ ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ (“that it/he might depart from me”) further complicate the interpretation. The verb κολαφίζω can denote both a literal physical beating (as in Matt 26:67, Mark 14:65) or a more figurative “harassment” or “torment.” If the “thorn” is a physical ailment, “harass” makes sense. If it’s a spiritual or human adversary, “beat” or “torment” could be more literal. The third-person singular subjunctive ἀποστῇ is grammatically ambiguous in terms of gender, capable of referring back to either a masculine personal agent (like ἄγγελος) or an impersonal masculine noun (like σκόλοψ). Dutch and German translations, by using a masculine pronoun (“he”), lean towards a personal interpretation.

Thirdly, intertextual connections and Paul’s broader rhetorical strategy are highly debated. The usage of σκόλοψ in the LXX (e.g., Numbers 33:55) predominantly refers to human adversaries or sources of ongoing, vexing trouble rather than a physical illness. This suggests a metaphorical reading of the “thorn” as a persistent opponent or difficult situation. Furthermore, Paul’s reference to his “weakness” (ἀσθένεια) in 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 is often cited. While ἀσθένεια can mean “sickness,” its broader semantic range of “weakness” or “frailty” allows for various interpretations, including physical infirmity, but also general vulnerability or suffering. The argument for Paul’s poor eyesight, drawing from Galatians 4:13-15 and 6:11, offers a specific physical ailment. However, the interpretation of “large letters” (Gal 6:11) as a sign of poor eyesight has been challenged as a rhetorical device for emphasis. Similarly, the “evil eye” concept (βασκαίνω in Gal 3:1) and wordplay on “eye” in Galatians 4:15 could suggest a spiritual or psychological torment rather than a purely physical one.

The discussion highlights that theological considerations have often influenced the traditional translation of the “thorn” as a sickness. Paul’s intentional ambiguity serves a rhetorical purpose: to prevent his conceit (ἵνα μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι). This suggests that the precise nature of the affliction might be secondary to its function in keeping Paul humble and reliant on divine grace, allowing for multiple plausible interpretations without definitive identification.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

Based on the grammatical analysis, lexical considerations, and intertextual allusions, the interpretation of Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” remains complex. The appositional relationship between σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί and ἄγγελος σατανᾶ strongly suggests that the thorn *is* the messenger of Satan. The key interpretive choice then becomes whether this “messenger” is understood as a personal (demonic or human) agent or as a personification of an impersonal affliction. The verb κολαφίζω supports the idea of active torment, which could be physical or otherwise.

1. “A thorn in my flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan, to torment me, so that I would not be conceited. Concerning this, I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me.”
   This translation favors the traditional impersonal view of the “thorn” as an affliction, possibly physical, and renders ἀποστῇ as impersonal (“it”). The term “torment” for κολαφίζῃ allows for both physical pain and broader affliction.
2. “A stake in my flesh was given to me, an agent of Satan, to buffet me, so that I would not be conceited. Concerning this, I pleaded with the Lord three times that he might depart from me.”
   This rendering emphasizes the personal agency of the “messenger of Satan” as a direct adversary or demonic entity, aligning with the common personal usage of ἄγγελος and the active sense of κολαφίζω as “buffet” or “beat.” The masculine pronoun “he” for ἀποστῇ reflects this personal interpretation.
3. “A troublesome adversary in my flesh was given to me, a messenger from Satan, to harass me, so that I would not be conceited. Concerning this, I pleaded with the Lord three times that this agent might withdraw from me.”
   This translation adopts a more figurative and broad interpretation of σκόλοψ, drawing on its LXX usage for “adversary” or “persistent trouble,” while maintaining the personal nature of ἄγγελος. “Harass” for κολαφίζῃ implies ongoing vexation, and “this agent” clarifies the referent of ἀποστῇ without being overly dogmatic about a specific type of personal entity.