I knew a man in Christ fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knows;) such a one caught up to the third heaven.
All Commentaries on 2 Corinthians 12:2 Go To 2 Corinthians 12
John Chrysostom
AD 407
Great indeed was this revelation. But this was not the only one: there were many others besides, but he mentions one out of many. For that there were many, hear what he says: Lest I should be exalted overmuch through the exceeding greatness of the revelations. 'And yet,' a man may say, 'if he wished to conceal them, he ought not to have given any intimation whatever or said any thing of the sort; but if he wished to speak of them, to speak plainly.' Wherefore then is it that he neither spoke plainly nor kept silence? To show by this also that he resorts to the thing unwillingly. And therefore also he has stated the time, fourteen years. For he does not mention it without an object, but to show that he who had refrained for so long a time would not now have spoken out, except the necessity for doing so had been great. But he would have still kept silence, had he not seen the brethren perishing. Now if Paul from the very beginning was such an one as to be counted worthy of such a revelation, when as yet he had not wrought such good works; consider what he must have grown to in fourteen years. And observe how even in this very matter he shows modesty, by his saying some things, but confessing that of others he is ignorant. For that he was caught up indeed, he declared, but whether in the body or out of the body he says he does not know. And yet it would have been quite enough, if he had told of his being caught up and had been silent [about the other]; but as it is, in his modesty he adds this also. What then? Was it the mind that was caught up and the soul, while the body remained dead? Or was the body caught up? It is impossible to tell. For if Paul who was caught up and whom things unspeakable, so many and so great, had befallen was in ignorance, much more we. For, indeed, that he was in Paradise he knew, and that he was in the third heaven he was not ignorant, but the manner he knew not clearly. And see from yet another consideration how free he is from pride. For in his narrative about the city of the Damascenes 2 Corinthians 11:32 he confirms what he says, but here not; for it was not his aim to establish this fact strongly, but to mention and intimate it only. Wherefore also he goes on to say, Of such an one will I glory; not meaning that he who was caught up was some other person, but he so frames his language in the best manner he possibly could, so as at once to mention the fact, and to avoid speaking of himself openly. For what sequence would there be in bringing some one else forward, when discoursing about himself? Wherefore then did he so put it? It was not all one to say, 'I was caught up,' and, I knew one that was caught up; and 'I will glory of myself,' and, I will glory of such an one. Now if any should say, 'And how is it possible to be caught up without a body?' I will ask him, 'How is it possible to be caught up with a body?' for this is even more inexplicable than the other, if you examine by reasonings and do not give place to faith.
2. But wherefore was he also caught up? As I think, that he might not seem to be inferior to the rest of the Apostles. For since they had companied with Christ, but Paul had not: He therefore caught up unto glory him also. Into Paradise. For great was the name of this place, and it was everywhere celebrated. Wherefore also Christ said, Today you shall be with Me in Paradise. Luke 23:43
On behalf of such an one will I glory? wherefore? For if another were caught up, wherefore do you glory? Whence it is evident that he said these things of himself. And if he added, but of myself I will not glory, he says nothing else than this, that, 'when there is no necessity, I will say nothing of that kind fruitlessly and at random;' or else he is again throwing obscurity over what he had said, as best he might. For that the whole discourse was about himself, what follows also clearly shows;
