Finding Paul’s Weakness

ZVONIMIR ATLETIĆ / ALAMY STOCK PHOTO

Recently, I have been reflecting on the way that the apostle Paul came across to his audiences when he was with them in person and how his personal presence was evaluated by his largely Gentile audiences. In particular, I reflected on the comment by some in Paul’s audience found in 2 Corinthians 10:10: “His bodily presence is weak and his speech is of no account” (author’s translation). This is in contrast to what is said about his letters, namely that they are weighty and strong.

This is no incidental or minor contrast. What was it about Paul’s personal ethos (his character or appearance) that led to such statements?

I decided that the appropriate way to puzzle out this issue was to turn to what is probably Paul’s earliest letter, Galatians, as well as the Corinthian correspondence, to see what could be discerned. I was looking for hints about Paul’s “bodily weakness,” and the text that leapt out was Galatians 4:13–15, which reads:

As you know, it was because of a weakness in the flesh that I first preached the gospel to you, and even though the test of you was in my flesh [Greek: sarx], you did not despise me or reject me with contempt. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. Where, then, is your blessing of me now? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me.

Now I cannot believe that the only reference in this passage to a specific body part, namely the eyes, is accidental or incidental.

Paul’s problem seems to have been with his eyes, and this was no small problem. In that world, not only were the eyes seen as the windows on the soul but also as projectors of light or darkness. The evil eye convention involved the notion that one could be cursed if someone cast an evil eye on you. And as some commentators have rightly pointed out, the verb exeptusate (from ekptuo), translated “reject” in the passage above, literally means to spit out, which not by coincidence is the very way the ancients thought they could ward off the evil eye—by spitting and turning away. The Galatians passage does not likely refer to an illness but rather to a bodily weakness. That’s what the Greek words in question normally mean.

This in turn took me to the end of Galatians where we read: “See with what large letters I write with my own hand” (Galatians 6:11). I asked myself, what sort of person needs a large print edition? A person with weak or bad eyesight. We also have 2 Thessalonians 3:17 where Paul writes that the final greeting is in his own hand, and this is his customary action in all his letters.

What this has rightly suggested to most Pauline scholars is that Paul used a scribe to take down his letters (e.g., Romans 16:22), but at the end he would sign them or give a final greeting in his own hand. But why would a literate person like Paul need a scribe? Could it be because his eyesight was such that it was better to have a scribe with a good pair of eyes and a steady hand make a fair hand copy of what he was saying?

From those reflections, I moved on to 2 Corinthians 11–12 where Paul engages in what in rhetorical terms is called mock boasting, boasting in things ancient people did not brag about, unless they were mocking the inflated rhetoric of other self-exalters. Paul says quite clearly in 2 Corinthians 11:30 that he will boast in the things that show his weakness. There is that word again—weakness. And in the immediately following passage we hear this:

I will go on to visions and revelations from the Lord. I know a man in Christ who 14 years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows. And I know that this man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows—was caught up to paradise and heard inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell.

(2 Corinthians 12:1–4)

In all likelihood, Paul is referring again to one of his own experiences.

At this juncture, we should pause: What is wrong with this picture? Paul says he will relate a visionary experience, but the man in question says nothing about seeing anything when he was caught up into the third heaven. (Early Jews believed in several layers to heaven; for instance, Jesus calls the top layer paradise, while Paul calls it the third level of heaven.) He only heard things. This can be compared to another apocalyptic passage about a vision in Revelation 1, where John says he both heard and saw things, which after all is what one would expect from a “vision.”

And then there is the very next passage where Paul refers to an ongoing stake (Greek: skolops) in his flesh. This is a Greek word that refers to any pointed object that causes pain. Clearly, the reference to bodily flesh indicates we are dealing with an ongoing physical problem, not some spiritual or interpersonal problem. Although Paul had repeatedly prayed for its removal, the response was no—“My grace is sufficient for you; my power is made perfect in your weakness” (2 Corinthians 12:9).

I conclude that Paul’s ethos problem had to do with his eyes, whether they oozed or left him blinking a lot or rubbing his eyes. And this was indeed a major ethos problem for a person who claimed to be a seer or prophet or one who had a vision of Christ and heavenly things, never mind being a powerful preacher. Appearances and first impressions matter in a rhetorically saturated environment—and all the more so when people will judge your speech, presentation, presence, and, yes, authority on the basis of your first oral presentation.

Recently, I have been reflecting on the way that the apostle Paul came across to his audiences when he was with them in person and how his personal presence was evaluated by his largely Gentile audiences. In particular, I reflected on the comment by some in Paul’s audience found in 2 Corinthians 10:10: “His bodily presence is weak and his speech is of no account” (author’s translation). This is in contrast to what is said about his letters, namely that they are weighty and strong. This is no incidental or minor contrast. What was it about Paul’s personal ethos (his […]