Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Thorn in the flesh | Is 57:1 | heisthe1 | 45428 | ||
Hello Scribe, The Scriptures reveal to us that physical healing has been provided for the believer through the atoning work of Christ; however, there are those who reject this view and contend that is is not God's will to heal everyone, even those who come to Him in faith. One argument these people use is that the apostle Paul himself had suffered numerous illnesses, implying that if such a one as the apostle Paul failed to receive healing, then it is only normal for many ordinary believers to remain ill. If it was not God's will to heal the apostle Paul, then it may not be God's will to heal us. I will present some of the biblical passages often used to "prove" that Paul was a sick man. I will argue that these passages in fact demonstrate the tremendous healing power of God at work in Paul's life. His life and experiences provide us with reasons to believe God for healing, not the other way around. PAUL'S INFIRMITIES. "Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first. 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. Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? or I bear you record, that, if it has been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me" (Galatians 4:13-15). This biblical passage is often quoted as proof that Paul was sick and that healing is not for everyone (or for nobody at all). Even if Paul was sick (which he was not, as we shall see), that does not prove anything about God's will in the area of healing until we also take into the account the direct statements in the Bible concerning healing. Abraham, David, Solomon, and other righteous characters in the Bible had more than one wife, and from these examples, some have concluded that God allows a man to have more than one wife at the same time. However, when we take into account the direct statements from the Bible (as oppose to the implications derived from people's actions and experices), we understand that God's will is for a man to have only one wife. In the same way, Paul's experiences prove nothing unless it is consistent with the direct statements of the Bible. Verse 13 says "ye know how through the infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first." Paul visited Galatia "at the first" in Acts 14. The Bible says Paul went into Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. The province of Galatia contained Pisidia and Lycaonia, and therefore the towns of Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. So Paul first visited Galatia in Acts 14. What happened to Paul in Acts 14? He was stoned: "And there came thither, certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who persuaded the people, and, having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he has been dead." In those days, they dug holes in the ground outside of the city. Whenever they were to stone someone, they would push the victim into the hole. Then, a crowd would gather around the hole and throw big rocks at the person's head, until they were certain that it was completely crushed. From biblical evidence, it seems that Paul was actually dead. The timing would be about 14 years before he was to write 2Corinthians, which would make Acts 14 the time when he died and temporarily went to heaven to see the visions mentioned in 2Corinthians 12:2-4. Then what happened? God raised Paul from the dead right on the spot and Paul marched right back into the same city! This is why Paul had an "infirmity of the flesh"-His skull had been crushed and he was walking around looking like that. So, instead of disproving the biblical teaching on healing, this passage in Galatians demonstrates God's supernatural healing and resurrection power. Paul was walking around supernaturally with this and many other injuries. I still have to explain the phrase "you would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me" (v.15). From these words, people have concluded that Paul had an eye disease. This interpretation is both irresponsible and dishonest-it had extinguished many people's hope for receiving healing from God. "Would have plucked out your own eyes" is simply an expression! Just like a "thorn in the flesh" is an expression equivalent to a "pain in the neck." You want to know what Paul believed? He believed this: "But if the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you" (Romans 8:11). It happened to him time and time again. It can happen to you, if you believe. I write this to you Scribe, because you do believe and if you wish I will post much more concerning Paul's injuries and the "thorn in the flesh" God blessings |
||||||
2 | Thorn in the flesh | Is 57:1 | Reformer Joe | 45885 | ||
Paul tells Timothy: "No longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments." --1 Timothy 5:23 Timothy, who was in many ways Paul's successor, suffered from frequent ailments? How is that possible if he had been taught by Paul that Jesus came so that we would be physically healthy in this life? And why would Paul not just tell him to "claim his healing," rather than prescribing wine? Paul also mentions another illness: "But I thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, who is also your messenger and minister to my need; because he was longing for you all and was distressed because you had heard that he was sick. For indeed he was sick to the point of death, but God had mercy on him, and not on him only but also on me, so that I would not have sorrow upon sorrow." --Philippians 2:25-27 Now why would Epaphroditus have been sick to the point of death in Paul's presence if Paul knew and taught him that all physical sickness in this life had been taken care of at the Cross, and if Paul could have healed him? he does not rebuke Epaphroditus for his supposed "lack of faith," but rather commends him for his service to the Lord. I know you have not been one to let a little thing like the Bible get in the way of your pre-conceived notions, but I just wanted to point it out for the benefit of everyone else who lets Scripture shape their theology. --Joe! |
||||||
3 | Thorn in the flesh | Is 57:1 | heisthe1 | 46003 | ||
Othra vez!!! In verse 23, Paul's medical advice to Timothy a. Water in the ancient world was often unreliable in regard to purity, Paul's advice is reliable to Timothy as it is to any traveling person. b. Timothy was the victim of 'frequent infirmities'; yet Paul did not simply command a healing on apostolic authority, or even send him a handkerchief with healing power (Acts 19:11-12). c. Paul did not have miraculous powers at his beck and call, but only at the prompting of the Holy Spirit - and apparently, there was no such prompting in Timothy's case d. If it is God's will for all to be healed 'right now', then Paul (and the Holy Spirit who inspired him) lead Timothy into sin - calling him to look to a natural remedy instead of a divine healing. SICK NIGH UNTO DEATH. "For indeed he was sick nigh unto death..." (Philippians 2:27). Paul here refers to a Christian named Epaphroditus. Some "scholars" of the Bible read verses 25-27 and then teach "See, see! Paul left somebody sick. He failed to heal somebody." The implication is that it is not God's will to heal everyone, and therefore if you pray for healing, do not be too expectant since it may not be God's will to heal you. Just because someone was sick does not mean YOU have to be. Epaphroditus was not the "Word made flesh." If those "scholars" had read just a few verses down, they would have seen the reason for Epaphroditus sickness: Verse 30 says, "Because of the work of Christ he was nigh unto death, not regarding his life, to supply your lack of service toward me." Epaphroditus overworked! See those words "not regarding his life"? Epaphroditus made a choice to continue to work when he should have stopped. There were not many people helping Paul at this time so Epaphroditus pushed himself to "supply your lack of service" (or "take up the slack," make up the difference"). Epaphroditus pushed himself too far - that is all is to it. If he had rested and then got back to work, he would have stayed well. He did not even have to overwork - he made that decision himself. Now don't go and over work yourself :) God bless |
||||||
4 | Thorn in the flesh | Is 57:1 | Reformer Joe | 46024 | ||
Wow...you can add ANYTHING to the Bible and make it say what you want it to! Yoy still didn't address in your cut-and-paste job, why Timothy would be getting sick so often. But let's look at that argument, anyway: "a. Water in the ancient world was often unreliable in regard to purity, Paul's advice is reliable to Timothy as it is to any traveling person." If every believer could "drink poison" and not be harmed (Mark 16), what would be the problem with a little bad water? In any case, this doesn't address the point of my question. "b. Timothy was the victim of 'frequent infirmities'; yet Paul did not simply command a healing on apostolic authority, or even send him a handkerchief with healing power (Acts 19:11-12)." I have no idea what the point is here. "c. Paul did not have miraculous powers at his beck and call, but only at the prompting of the Holy Spirit - and apparently, there was no such prompting in Timothy's case" Oh, so in other words, in that case, in that time, and in those circumstances, it wasn't God's will for Timothy to be instantly healed? That is very convincing; problem is, you are convincing me of the point that I was already making. "d. If it is God's will for all to be healed 'right now', then Paul (and the Holy Spirit who inspired him) lead Timothy into sin - calling him to look to a natural remedy instead of a divine healing." What is being said here? That Paul was sinning in his divinely-inspired instructions to Timothy? There is nothing in this segment of your post that supports your point-of-view. If anything, it is an adequate defense of mine. Thanks! As far as Epaphroditus, you quoted: "Epaphroditus made a choice to continue to work when he should have stopped." Please show me ANYWHERE in Philippians 2 where Paul criticizes the actions of Epaphroditus. We see nothing but approval of Epaphroditus fulfilling Philippians 1:29. Epaphroditus was not sick because he overworked, but because, despite the fact he was sick, he continued to work for Paul's behalf (and the Lord's, of course) to the point of death. And that is not what Paul considers "overwork" (please show me any Scriptural support for "overwork" as a sin, except in the case of Sabbath-breaking); but rather he is using Epaphroditus and Timothy in chaper 2 as an example of this principle: "Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others." --Philippians 2:3-4 Yeah, Epaphroditus putting Paul ahead of his own health was SUCH a sin! Your prosperity doctrine is not only unbiblical; it is purely evil in its implications. --Joe! |
||||||