Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
robert j
Posts: 1007
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by robert j »

It never ceases to amaze me that so many believe that it was Paul who made the ascent --- or claimed to have made the ascent --- to the third heaven. (2 Corinthians 12:2-10). Paul wrote that it was a man he knew.

I believe that Paul fabricated the story in his desperation to regain some authority after the visit to his Corinthian congregation by the Jewish missionaries (the so-called “super apostles”) --- missionaries the congregation liked better than Paul.

If Paul had made such an astounding ascent “14 years ago”, it seems very odd to me (and likely to his congregation as well) that he didn’t tell the congregation about it previously. But if the ascent was made by some guy Paul knew, the story becomes at least a little more believable.

The ascent itself is not Paul’s main point here --- it’s the knowledge gained, the revelation (12:7). Many interpret Paul’s weasel words (wink-wink) in verses 5-10 to mean that Paul was implying that it was actually he that had made the ascent. But no, IMO, Paul’s intention was to imply that his “thorn in the flesh” was result of his being told by this man he knew (and knowing) “words not to be spoken which man is not allowed to speak”. Paul claimed that he was being tormented by a “messenger of satan” because, IMO, he had been told of the forbidden and secret knowledge. Who knows what happened to that other guy that spilled the beans --- should Paul have been asked.

This allowed Paul to have his cake and eat it too. It provided at least a plausible excuse (it was just a guy I once knew) for not telling the congregation previously about this ascent to the heavens --- yet he could imply that he had gained some amazing revelation of secret heavenly knowledge, some greater status, in his competition with the “super apostles” --- and Paul had a ready excuse for not actually divulging this forbidden knowledge for fear of inflicting others with the torment of satan.

robert j
Last edited by robert j on Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by Charles Wilson »

Have a look at "The Spurious Alexander", Antiquities..., 17, 12, 1:

"WHEN these affairs had been thus settled by Caesar, a certain young man, by birth a Jew, but brought up by a Roman freed-man in the city Sidon, ingrafted himself into the kindred of Herod, by the resemblance of his countenance, which those that saw him attested to be that of Alexander, the son of Herod, whom he had slain..."

A possibility.

CW
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by Ben C. Smith »

robert j wrote:The ascent itself is not Paul’s main point here --- it’s the knowledge gained, the revelation (12:7). Many interpret Paul’s weasel words (wink-wink) in verses 5-10 to mean that Paul was implying that it was actually he that had made the ascent. But no, IMO, Paul’s intention was to imply that his “thorn in the flesh” was result of his being told by this man he knew (and knowing) “words not to be spoken which man is not allowed to speak”.
No way. The experience itself is described under the category of "sightings and revelations" of the Lord in verse 1. So in verse 7, when Paul says it was "because of the greatness of the revelation" that he was given the thorn, this cannot mean "because of the greatness of the knowledge passed on to me"; it has to mean what it says: "because of the greatness of the revelation", that is, of the vision or experience itself. And it makes little sense to suppose that, because Joe had a great revelation, Paul had to suffer from the thorn.

And for Paul, so proud of his personal revelation from the Lord (1 Corinthians 9.1; Galatians 1.1, 12) and not from men, to boast about somebody else's revelations... well, that may be the least Pauline idea I have run across in some time. And this in a section of text where he is at his most desperate to defend his credentials.

Bernard may well be right: Paul made it up. But, if so, he made it up about himself, not about somebody else.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
robert j
Posts: 1007
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by robert j »

Certainly Paul made claims about revelations FROM the lord. But to claim for himself –-- a Jew promoting the Jewish God, even to a Hellenist audience --- that he personally made an ascent to heaven would be, IMO, way too much for his audience to accept. Certainly the congregation would have a few Jewish friends with whom they talked about such things with. For Paul to make such a claim --- at a time when no other autobiographical claims of actually making such a journey are to be found in a Jewish context (only legendary figures) --- this would have been met with extreme skepticism. I think Paul pushed it too far to even claim that he knew such a man.

And I’m not convinced that the wording in the passage is clear either way.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by Ben C. Smith »

robert j wrote:Certainly Paul made claims about revelations FROM the lord. But to claim for himself –-- a Jew promoting the Jewish God, even to a Hellenist audience --- that he personally made an ascent to heaven would be, IMO, way too much for his audience to accept.
I think you are underestimating both the ego on the man and the little-to-lose situation in Corinth he was increasingly finding himself in.
And I’m not convinced that the wording in the passage is clear either way.
Which part? The part that I highlighted is pretty clear. You made a distinction between knowledge/revelation and the vision/experience itself that is not borne out in the text. The text, rather, bears out the vision/experience being the revelation, as it is in similar contexts (Galatians 1.12; 2.2; the title of the book of Revelation).

If Paul is attributing this vision to somebody else, then he is saying that, because Joe received a great revelation, therefore Paul suffered a thorn, for the sake of humility. If that makes sense to you, then have at it. For me, it does not even get off the ground.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
robert j
Posts: 1007
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by robert j »

Ben C. Smith wrote:I think you are underestimating both the ego on the man and the little-to-lose situation in Corinth he was increasingly finding himself in.
IMO, Rarely have I done either. But credibility has it's limits, even when under the gun.
Ben C. Smith wrote:The part that I highlighted is pretty clear. You made a distinction between knowledge/revelation and the vision/experience itself that is not borne out in the text. The text, rather, bears out the vision/experience being the revelation, as it is in similar contexts (Galatians 1.12 ...
Certainly Paul is making some kind of implication. I think Paul is implying that the revelation in this case is having knowledge of the experience via the man he knew. The text is not clear either way.

Are you suggesting that the revelation Paul describes in Galatians 1:12 is this experience in the 3rd heaven in 2 Corinthians? Or if just comparing the contexts --- I think you are expecting too much in the way of Paul's consistency, especially between differnt letters to different audiences.

At least we agree that Paul was not being truthful about his story of the 3rd heaven.
Last edited by robert j on Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by Secret Alias »

How does one 'tell the truth' about ascending to different planets without a rocketship? This is a debate?
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by Ben C. Smith »

robert j wrote:Certainly Paul is making some kind of implication. I think Paul is implying that the revelation in this case is having knowledge of the experience via the man he knew. The text is not clear either way.
This baffles me. But again... have at it.
Are you suggesting that the revelation Paul describes in Galatians 1:12 is this experience in the 3rd heaven in 2 Corinthians?
No, not any more than I was suggesting that it was the same as the one in Revelation.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
robert j
Posts: 1007
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by robert j »

Secret Alias wrote:How does one 'tell the truth' about ascending to different planets without a rocketship? This is a debate?
By "not telling the truth" here, I meant that if one accepts that Paul's tale was about himself, and not about a man he knew as Paul wrote, then Paul is not being truthful. (and that Paul made-up the story)
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Paul’s Third Heaven Revisited

Post by Ben C. Smith »

robert j wrote:By "not telling the truth" here, I meant that if one accepts that Paul's tale was about himself, and not about a man he knew as Paul wrote, then Paul is not being truthful.
That is a very limited standard of truthfulness. One may as well say that hyperbole and figures of speech are untruthful, too. Paul makes it plain that he is talking about himself after he describes the incident. If he was lying by trying to pass his story off as the revelation of someone else, whom exactly did he fool? Anybody?

Irenaeus: Paul expressly testifies that there are spiritual things when he declares that he was caught up into the third heaven.

Hippolytus: Paul the apostle, he says, knew of this gate, partially opening it in a mystery, and stating that he was caught up by an angel, and ascended as far as the second and third heaven into paradise itself; and that he beheld sights and heard unspeakable words which it would not be possible for man to declare.

Tertullian: Paul was caught up as far as the third heaven and... brought into paradise....

Origen: Paul even heard "unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter."

If he actually had no mystical experience, no dream, no hallucination brought on by fasting or sleep deprivation, then he was lying. But to rhetorically and transparently pawn his experience off on someone else is an obvious device, not a lie.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply