Why could Paul say henceforth we know Him no more?
Paul's Damascus road confrontation ended his former assessment of Christ as an imposter and produced a total reversal. Henceforth, his knowledge of Christ was no longer according to the flesh or Christ's earthly ministry, but focused on what follows His death, burial, and resurrection.
Les explains that Paul had known Christ in the flesh in the sense that he knew all about Him—what was happening in Israel and Galilee—and may even have been on the outer perimeter of crowds following Jesus. He thought Jesus was an imposter, a blasphemer, and a false teacher who was destroying the religion of the God of Abraham, and it burned him up. But once he was confronted on the road to Damascus, Paul did a total 180-degree turn. So henceforth he no longer knows Him according to the flesh; that earthly ministry is not where it is at for us. Les says there is nothing wrong with studying Christ's earthly ministry, but our focus is what follows His death, burial, and resurrection.
Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.
More Questions
What does Paul mean when he says 'henceforth we know no man after the flesh'?
Paul's statement that 'henceforth we know no man after the flesh' means that because of the cross—Christ's death, burial, and resurrection—we are to stop knowing or presenting Christ according to His earthly ministry.
What did Paul mean by saying he no longer knows Christ after the flesh?
In verse 16, when Paul says "we know no man after the flesh, though we have known Christ after the flesh," he is referring to his former life as Saul of Tarsus, the persecutor and religious Pharisee who knew about Jesus of Nazareth and His ministry, but after his revelations on the road to Damascus and in Arabia he no longer refers to Christ in His earthly ministry.