If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what is the gain to me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die.
Read Chapter 15
Ambrose of Milan
AD 397
If all hope of the resurrection is lost, let us eat and drink and lose not the enjoyment of the things present, for we have none to come… The Epicureans say they are followers of pleasure because death means nothing to them, because that which is dissolved has no feeling, and that which has no feeling means nothing to us. Thus they show that they are living only carnally, not spiritually. They do not discharge the duty of the soul but only of the flesh. They think that all life’s duty is ended with the separation of the soul and body.
Of the dead, he makes use of a tragic Iambic line, when he said, "What advantageth it me if the dead are not raised? Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good manners."
If after the manner of men. (1.) According to Photius, as far as man could; (2.) better, with human hope only, human courage, enterprise, love of glory, by which men are for the most part driven to face dangers. (3.) Others explain it as meaning, "I speak after the manner of men," who readily dwell on their fights and conflicts.
I have fought with beasts at Ephesus. Theophylact, Anselm, Primasius, and Baronius think that "beasts" refers to Demetrius and his savage companions, who fought fiercely and like beasts against Paul in defence of Diana (Acts xix.). We may then translate it. "If I have fought against a man who was as a beast." So Paul calls Nero a lion ( 2 Timothy 4:17). Such men too are called bulls ( Psalm 68:30); and S. Ignatius, in his epistle to the Romans , says: "I fight daily with beasts," i.e, with the soldiers guarding him.
But Chrysostom, Ambrose, and others think that Paul was actually thrown to the beasts at Ephesus and fought with them; for this is the strict mea...
With beasts at Ephesus. He seems to mean, with men as cruel and brutal as beasts: for there is not sufficient reason to think that at Ephesus he was exposed to beasts in the amphitheatre. (Witham)
Interpreters are divided upon this passage. Calmet is of opinion that St. Paul was exposed in the amphitheatre at Ephesus, but was secured from all injury by the all-powerful hand of God: he produces the testimony of St. Chrysostom, Theo., St. Ambrose, St. Cyprian, and St. Hilary, all of whom understand this passage in the literal sense. Nicephorus cites a book, entitled The Travels of St. Paul, in confirmation of this fact, wherein (he informs us) there is a long account of this transaction. St. Jerome says, that St. Paul was condemned by the governor of Ephesus to be devoured by beasts. Estius seems to maintain the same opinion as Challoner. To inspirit us to combat, it is advisable to turn our eyes frequently to a future life. The brevity of the present is a principle common to the morali...
If after the manner of men I fought with beasts at Ephesus, what does it profit me?
What is, if after the manner of men? As far as pertains to men I fought with beasts: for what if God snatched me out of those dangers? So that I am he who ought most to be in care about these things; I, who endure so great dangers and have not yet received any return. For if no time of recompense is at hand, but our reward is shut up in this present world, ours is the greater loss. For you have believed without jeopardy, but we are slaughtered every day.
But all these things he said, not because he had no advantage even in the very suffering, but on account of the weakness of the many, and to establish them in the doctrine of the resurrection: not because he himself was running for hire; for it was a sufficient recompense to him to do that which was pleasing to God. So that when he adds, If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most pitiable, it is there again for their sake...
Paul quotes Isaiah [:–] in order to mock this suggestion. Isaiah after all was speaking about hard and reprobate people who were in the habit of talking like this. If they could find no forgiveness under the law, how much less will they be ready to be pardoned by the gospel of grace! Homilies on the Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians
He feeds on cruelties; he is punished by abstinence; he hates fasts, and his ministers preach, to that effect, as he declares them to be superfluous, having no hope of the future, and echoing that sentence of the apostle, in which he says, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall, die."
But even if the apostle had abruptly thrown out the sentence that flesh and blood must be excluded from the kingdom of God, without any previous intimation, of his meaning, would it not have been equally our duty to interpret these two substances as the old man abandoned to mere flesh and blood-in other words, to eating and drinking, one feature of which would be to speak against the faith of the resurrection: "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die.".
, for to-morrow we shall die; ".
Th the lion already let loose; suppose him on the axle, with the fire already heaped; in the very certainty, I say, and possession of martyrdom: who permits man to condone (offences) which are to be reserved for God, by whom those (offences) have been condemned without discharge, which not even apostles (so far as I know)-martyrs withal themselves-have judged condonable? In short, Paul had already "fought with beasts at Ephesus "when he decreed "destruction "to the incestuous person.
, my (prophets) t...
To another, and disturb them, heaping up to themselves plenty of money, and lend at bitter usury, and are only solicitous about mammon, whose bag is their god; who prefer eating and drinking before all virtue, saying, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die; "
