04 - The Messenger of Satan
Chapter 4 The Messenger of Satan “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.” (2 Corinthians 12:7)
Some claim the thorn was "the hand of God was working for Paul’s good". Common sense should make us think through that view. Messengers of Satan are in fact sent by Satan. The text clearly says it was the messenger of Satan, not God. Some wrestle with that scripture. Some have argued that “Paul’s own words very strongly indicate while the messenger was from Satan, the giver was God”. I see no such strong indication. Rather it is conjecture, a forced conclusion rooted in the requirements of Calvinistic thought. The central problem is that it ignores many things including: the text, the context, the whole council of God as well as incorrectly implying that Satan is Gods servant rather than his adversary.
Paul’s thorn was a messenger of Satan not a message from GOD. Paul cited a variety of hostile interruptions in the Chapter 11. Those events led him to make the statement about the thorn. He listed the many things he had suffered including: prison, beatings, stoning, shipwrecks, perils, hunger, thirst, fasting, cold and nakedness." A demon sent from Satan stirred all of those hardships to hinder Paul in his earthly ministry outreach.
Other scholars correctly point out that the thorn was a demon angel who continually incited rage in people to attack Paul. Virtually every Hebrew scholar recognizes a thorn, in scripture, was a metaphor. The metaphor is typically referred to as a personally, but never as a physical disease. Vincent’s Greek word study explains that the messenger was an angel under Satan’s command. The word for messenger is used 188 times in the Bible. Each and every time it refers to a personality not a thing. The messenger of Satan was a spiritual entity not a disease. A Tormenting Agent
“[Messenger of Satan] [angelos (G32) Satan (G4566)]. The torment is thus personified. "Messenger" is the word commonly rendered "angel" in the New Testament, though sometimes used of human messengers, as <Luke 7:24; Luke 7:27; Luke 9:52; James 2:25>; see also on the "angels" of the churches, <Revelation 1:20>. "Messenger and Satan" are not to be taken in apposition-- "a messenger who was Satan"-- because Satan is never called [angelos] (G32) in the New Testament. Messenger is figurative, in the sense of "agent." Satan is conceived in the New Testament as the originator of physical evil. Thus, in the gospel narrative, demoniac possession is often accompanied with some form of disease. Compare <Luke 13:16; Acts 10:38>, and see the note at <1 Corinthians 5:5> (Vincent’s Word Studies of the New Testament)
Certainly, Paul was not demon possessed. Nor was the messenger the devil himself. It was merely a representative of Satan. The messenger of Satan was a personified evil agent, or better described as a fallen angel assigned to torment Paul.
Note that Vincent shares the view that such messengers can come in the form of a disease. A demon, manifesting in the form of a disease, is a common belief of those who have a divine healing ministry. Yet, they do not hold to the opinion that Paul’s thorn was a disease. Jesus instructed his disciples to “cast out demons” along with heal the sick. There are many instances in Jesus’ ministry where He cast out demons from the body of sick people. (Matthew 8:16, Matthew 12:22-24, Mark 3:15, Luke 9:42). The same can be said for the disciples ministry (Luke 10:17, Acts 5:16; Acts 8:7). Paul also cast of evil spirits. (Acts 16:18) Paul had a healing ministry. Would not Paul have come across hypocritical to direct people to Gods healing power while he could not be healed himself?
Agreeably, messengers of Satan can manifest in ones physical body. Moreover, I think it is obvious that Paul’s life was full of physical pain and torment. However, the “thorn in the flesh” was not a single blow. Thus, it could not be a particular disease such as the commonly suggested eye disease. The demon agent sent a constant message to Paul. If it came in words, the messenger might have said; “thou shall not be free of opposition”. Paul referred spiritual warfare to, not a single physical disease.
Spiritual Warfare For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” (Ephesians 6:12) No doubt, Paul alludes to evil spirits here. Both good angels and demon angels are divided into ranks. They are all under the control of one leader. The good angels are led by the Godhead. Evil angels are under the command of the devil. Both send forth their angels to do their will. (Hebrews 1:14, Revelation 12:7; Revelation 12:9)
Generally, scholars agree that "Principalities" are principal rulers or the lower ranking demons residing in the sprit realm. Barnes calls them, “The rulers that preside over the regions of ignorance and sin with which the earth abounds”. The “Powers” [Exousias] refer to delegated demon authorities in the spirit realm. The “Rulers of the Darkness of this world” are defined by Barnes as“: Foul and malignant spirits” in a wide and a powerful empire . . . the power of selfish, corrupt, and base passions”. These demons would be the direct tempters to sin.
Adam Clark called the Spiritual wickedness, “highly refined and sublimed evil; disguised in falsehood”. He suggests they are the, “angels which kept not their first estate; who fell from the heavenly places but are ever longing after and striving to regain them; and which have their station in the regions of the air”.
In any event, Paul was sharing his revelations of the rank and order of demonic forces which war against our good fight of faith. It is not a fleshly, carnal fight. Although it is a fight we must take up in these earthen vessels known as our bodies. It is a spiritual struggle. One that requires us to pull down “fortified arguments”, (such as Paul’s thorn being sent from God) “casting aside pretenses and speculations” (such as the thorn being a disease) which are designed to hinder us from “believing all things”. The subject of Paul’s thorn is one of strongest “fortified arguments” against healing and one therefore our spiritual warfare must overcome.
Many do not believe we are in spiritual warfare. They avoid mentioning the devil. Usually they are the loudest proponents of teaching Paul’s Thorn was a sickness, given to keep Paul humble. Those who do not believe in spiritual warfare, divine healing or miracles, would understandably look for another interpretation of what the messenger was. Who Gave the Thorn?
One researcher argued his case with linguistic high jinks. He claimed that “the subject of the passive verb “given” was God, NOT Satan”. Therefore, he insisted, “the thorn was given by God.” My own research found no Greek scholars to be so dogmatic as to claim God was the only subject and thus gave Paul the thorn. Some commentators share that point of view. However, there are clearly two other subjects in the text, Satan and his messenger. When I pointed this out, the same person back stepped, saying, “If God didn’t give it, he allowed it”. The giver of the thorn is certainly recognized in the structure of the whole comment. It is Satan. If it meant, as some suggest, that Paul said; "there was given to me by God, a thorn", there is no need to add to the statement that key phrase; “the messenger of Satan”. I repeat, in all that Paul wrote, it is his understanding that Satan was an adversary, and not the servant of God.
God Did Allowed It
Consider the assessment that God allowed it. Evil is all around us. Just because evil exists and therefore obviously allowed by God to exist, are we to conclude that evil is Gods Will? It is not Gods Will. He hates evil and told us to do the same.
“Ye that love the LORD, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked.” (Psalms 97:10)
We can also acknowledge that God allows sin, sickness and a host of others wicked things. None of which is the Will of God. Evil is always associated with sin, disobedience, or ignorance. Why is it that in the case of Paul’s thorn, and its clear reference to being a messenger of Satan, we are to conclude God did it? Is it justified to determine God was the giver of the thorn because He allowed it? I cannot concede to that concept. It is a conclusion formed from a fatalistic concept. It is not rooted or grounded in sound doctrine.
Someone once said correctly: “God will allow anything you will allow”. God does not want us to sin does He? Yet, He allows it! Does that mean that God commissioned it or was the Father of it? Absolutely not! Why not recognize the messenger of Satan is an evil source just as sin is. It was the "messenger of Satan” not a gift of God. Satan was the giver with a clear purpose to keep Paul’s light from shining. Satan sent this messenger to aggressively keep Paul’s ministry and message down. Paul encountered satanic opposition every day of his life.
Adam Clarke’s Commentary makes this comment about the grievous pain Paul felt and endured in his flesh. He sees Paul’s thorn as times of distress and opposition.
"What this thorn in the flesh might be has given birth to a multitude of conjectures: . . . I believe the apostle to refer simply to the DISTRESSES he had endured through the opposition he met at Corinth; which were as painful and grievous to him as a thorn in his flesh”. Does God use Satan? This question itself requires an investigative book to research all the implications in scripture. The Bible states in detail and with many illustrations, which God uses His Word, angels, the gifts of the Sprit and Holy Spirit Himself, to minister to His saints. We should never forget that the Holy Spirit is our teacher while Satan is not. This is especially true in the case of Paul who was receiving abounding messages from God. God used visions, dreams, His own angels, the Holy Spirit, and even the Lord spoke to Paul.
Most researchers, when trying to analyze the question cite several Old Testament references. There is the obvious case of Job. Satan stood before God requesting permission to get at Gods best man on the earth, Job. God granted limited permission. However, there is much more to the story that most scholars overlook. Frankly, it is highly questionable if one should conclude that God “used” Satan in the case of Job. Furthermore, it is certain Satan was not a good messenger from God. Satan wanted to hurt Job, not benefit him. God does not need to use Satan to send a message to His servants. When you read the whole story, we see that God spoke very clearly and forcefully to Job. (Job chapter 38-40) My point is that in any of those Old Testament circumstances, we dare not imply the conditions of that era usurps the New Testament covenant that is based on better promises. (Hebrews 8:6). Job for instance, was not even under the Old Covenant, let alone familiar with the New Covenant we now live in.
While it is true, God never changes, that is in reference to His character and judgments not His methods. God has modified the ways He deals with man throughout the ages. He made covenants with Noah, Abraham and a host of men on a personal level, such as the case of David. By the time Paul received the thorn in the flesh, he was subject to the New Testament Law, written in his heart by the new birth. He had a mediator between him and God - Jesus - whom Job did not have. (Job 9:33) Does God “use” Satan to punish people? While I do not think the word “use” is appropriate, we must acknowledge that God does turn some people over to Satan. However, as you reflect on this reference, note that it refers specifically to a person living in open sin.
“To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” (1 Corinthians 5:5) This reference did not and could not apply to Paul and his thorn in the flesh. Paul was not living in blatant sin. Neither was he in danger of losing his salvation. Paul was in the hands of God. He had close communication with God. Paul was a willing, obedient and faithful servant. He was a proved and approved. He was in right standing with God. What right do we have then to force the speculative notion that Paul was prone conceit?
While God is shown throughout the Bible to use evil personages, such as pagans to bring about just consequences, God has never done evil. Yet, it remains such a common blunder to think God does evil, James found it necessary to confront that error.
“Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed”. (James 1:13-14)