Who do you believe that the one caught up into the third heaven is in this passage? Many say that is was Paul. I have heard some say that it was John. What is the best evidence to support who it is?
Thanks,
God Bless, Norm
<>< <>< <><
Second Corinthian 12
-
_Anonymous
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:03 pm
Second Corinthian 12
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_Anonymous
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:03 pm
II Corinthians 12
The best evidence, admittedly not definitive, would be that
Paul is talking about himself. Fourteen years earlier is believed to be approximately the time of Acts 14:19-20 where Paul is stoned and left for dead. Note that Acts 14 does not say he was in fact dead, the same as the man in II Corinthians 12. Also, Paul's thorn in the flesh that he talks about immediately afterward was because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations (II Corinthians 12:7). None of this is conclusive of course, but does provide some evidence to support the theory that Paul was talking about himself.
There is the question of how Paul would have known what was heard was not permitted to be spoken (vs 4) since John was commanded, to tell some things that he saw and heard in Heaven as recorded in Revelation. That and Isaiah 6, for example indicates that the prohibition was not universal, but only applied to the specific things that were heard.
[/u]
Paul is talking about himself. Fourteen years earlier is believed to be approximately the time of Acts 14:19-20 where Paul is stoned and left for dead. Note that Acts 14 does not say he was in fact dead, the same as the man in II Corinthians 12. Also, Paul's thorn in the flesh that he talks about immediately afterward was because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations (II Corinthians 12:7). None of this is conclusive of course, but does provide some evidence to support the theory that Paul was talking about himself.
There is the question of how Paul would have known what was heard was not permitted to be spoken (vs 4) since John was commanded, to tell some things that he saw and heard in Heaven as recorded in Revelation. That and Isaiah 6, for example indicates that the prohibition was not universal, but only applied to the specific things that were heard.
[/u]
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
2 Cor 12
Doesn't it seem unlikely that Paul is referring to himself? If he is using a literary device to appear modest, then the device is transparent, and so creates the appearance, but not the reality, of modesty...thus, the unintended opposite result. Also, if he means himself, he is certainly picking an odd way to say so: verse 5: "On behalf of such a man I will boast; but on my own behalf I will not boast." That's borderline doubletalk.
But if he is not referring to himself, who is he referring to? The Apostle John? But is there any chance that the Patmos vision could have occurred as early as 14 years before this epistle (even accepting, as I do, a pre-AD 70 writing of Revelation)? And isn't this time frame a bit late to mean Steven, who apparently died in AD 32?
Perhaps other Christians contemporary to Paul had such visions known to Paul but not written for posterity (especially since the visionary was enjoined from repeating his vision).
I would not say it is impossible for Paul to be referring to himself; it is simply that I find it difficult to find conviction with that interpretation.
Any other thoughts?
But if he is not referring to himself, who is he referring to? The Apostle John? But is there any chance that the Patmos vision could have occurred as early as 14 years before this epistle (even accepting, as I do, a pre-AD 70 writing of Revelation)? And isn't this time frame a bit late to mean Steven, who apparently died in AD 32?
Perhaps other Christians contemporary to Paul had such visions known to Paul but not written for posterity (especially since the visionary was enjoined from repeating his vision).
I would not say it is impossible for Paul to be referring to himself; it is simply that I find it difficult to find conviction with that interpretation.
Any other thoughts?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Jim Moseley
-
_Les Wright
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 11:32 am
I have no doubt that he was talking about himself.. but maybe I should? It seems clear to me, strange, but clear that Paul has had to argue for the right to exercise authority over the Corinthians throughout much of his correspondance with them since they are so easily led astray
Also, later on Paul explains that he is boasting as a fool..(2 Cor 12:11) the bottom line it appears to me is that Paul had to 'arm' the faithful Corinthians with information that showed Paul's accomplishments for the faith, even though he turns the whole thing on its head and boasts of his weakness (2 Cor 12:9,10), which no doubt were the very points that his 'opponents' (i.e. false prophets) attacked him by...
Les
Also, later on Paul explains that he is boasting as a fool..(2 Cor 12:11) the bottom line it appears to me is that Paul had to 'arm' the faithful Corinthians with information that showed Paul's accomplishments for the faith, even though he turns the whole thing on its head and boasts of his weakness (2 Cor 12:9,10), which no doubt were the very points that his 'opponents' (i.e. false prophets) attacked him by...
Les
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason: