Spiritual Warfare - Wild Beasts at Ephesus?

This article is taken from The Battle - An Anthology of Spiritual Warfare, which is available in two volumes for Kindle.

Link to the Battle (Volume 1) on Amazon.com !

Paul’s Battle - Wild Beasts at Ephesus

When we talk about the battle of the Christian, we don’t usually think of physical combat in a literal sense.  But there is a very curious verse that seems to indicate that Paul got himself involved in such a thing – and it is a verse that has caused great debate among Bible scholars for centuries:

If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus with no more than human hopes, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised,“Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” (1 Corinthians 15:32)

The purpose of this chapter is to explore what Paul may have meant when he talked about fighting wild beasts and then, more importantly, explore why Paul was talking about wild beasts in the first place.   There is something here that is key to apply to our own spiritual battle - but more of that later.

So, fighting with wild beasts where you, Paul?  Literally, or figuratively, may we ask?  And, if figurative, who were you talking about?

Option 1 – Persecuted in the arena

This option believes that Paul really did fight wild beasts at Ephesus.  If you are like me, you may be surprised to know that there are a number of learned people who take this view. Historically, it is not impossible that the event really did happen.  There was a large arena at Ephesus which could well have seen gladiatorial combat and fights with wild beasts.  We know from history that many Christians went to their death in such places under great persecution and in the most horrifying of circumstances. There are also some quite intriguing verses that could be interpreted as referring to such an event:

 

“But the Lord stood at my side and gave me strength, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it. And I was delivered from the lion’s mouth. The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom. To him be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” (2 Timothy 4:17)

“For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like those condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to human beings.” (1 Corinthians 4:9)

“We do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters about the troubles we experienced in the province of Asia. We were under great pressure, far beyond our ability to endure, so that we despaired of life itself. Indeed, we felt we had received the sentence of death. But this happened that we might not rely on ourselves but on God, who raises the dead. He has delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us again. On him we have set our hope that he will continue to deliver us.” (2 Corinthians 1:8-10)

Was Paul referring to this incident in the above verses or would that be reading something into it that simply isn’t there?  Well, many believe that it is highly unlikely that Paul actually fought wild beasts in Ephesus and there are at least three reasons that can be put forward:

1) Paul most likely would not have survived it to be able to tell the tale!  Even if you have watched the film Gladiator, you will know that the survival rate for gladiators was very, very small – and these were trained warriors.  Paul was, by historical accounts, small, bow-legged and with an unimpressive physique – although used to working with his hands as a tent-maker, we have no evidence that he was skilled with weaponry.  He could, of course, have been miraculously delivered out of the mouths of wild beasts just as happened to Daniel.  But see the next points…

2) If it did really happen, it is very odd that he doesn’t recount it along with his other sufferings and hardships in 2 Corinthians 11:23-29. Luke makes no mention of it in Acts either which would also be strange bit of course an argument from silence is not the strongest.

3) If he had been thrown to the beasts, it is said that he would automatically have lost his Roman citizenship - but we know from the Book of Acts that he still held it when he went before Caesar.

So a real event cannot probably be ruled out, but perhaps the most likely scenario is that if Paul was really referring to wild beasts, he meant it in a rhetorical sense – “if” I had fought wild beasts…

Option 2 – People of Ephesus

When we consider this option, we have to accept that the scene described in Acts 19 has elements which remind you of a herd of wild beasts!  Paul was teaching publicly that hand-made images of Greek gods were not gods, but false idols. This teaching ran especially annoyed the Ephesian artisans because the temple of Artemis was in Ephesus and many artisans made a profit from creating and selling gold and silver statues and other religious artifacts. In the scene in Acts 19, the city is enraged and several of Paul’s Christian traveling companions are dragged into the midst of a mob, many of that mob had no idea why they were there!  They had simply got caught up in it all – it must have felt like they were in the middle of a herd of stampeding buffalo and that they could be squashed flat or torn limb from limb at any moment.

The drawback with this argument seems to be that Paul didn’t fight with them, either metaphorically or literally.  He was taken out of that situation for his own safety.  Of course this was not the only time that he was at risk from a mob during his missionary career – it was one of those occupational hazards.

Option 3 – Philosophers

The third option is that Paul is referring to some philosophers who opposed him when he contended for the gospel.  We don’t have the space to go into a lot of detail about one bunch of philosophers who were known as the Epicureans - so you can do your own research.  But it was the Epicureans who came from the “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die” school of thought.  To put it another way, they were in favour of a pretty hedonistic lifestyle because this life was all that they had.

The drawback to this theory is trying to understand exactly why Paul would have called these people “wild beasts” – it is possible that their philosophy gave them a license to live wild, uncontrolled lives that gave into “animalistic behaviour.
 

Option 4 – Principalities and Powers

Others see the wild beasts as a reference to the evil spirits, or ‘beasts’, at work in the demon-possessed, sorcerers and idolaters of the city.  In Jewish apocalyptic circles, the Greek word translated here as “beasts” was commonly used in reference to evil spirits and supernatural monsters. This connects with referring to demons as wild animals, a practice that Paul may well have encountered in Ephesus.

We know that folk religion, syncretism, magic and mystery cults were pervasive in 1^st century Asia Minor. In fact, Ephesus itself was known to be an epicenter of magic and witchcraft arts and the epicenter of the cult of Artemis - one of the major Greek goddesses known, amongst other things, as the Lady of the Beasts, the bull goddess and the huntress. As a huntress, she is said to have traveled in woods in the company of dogs, wild beasts and mountain nymphs – plenty of wild beast links here!

Paul’s ministry here was filled with exorcisms and power encounters (see Acts 19) and Paul’s own letter to the Ephesians reminds us that we do: “not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness.” (Ephesians 6:12).  Further evidence may be taken from the fact that evil spirits in magic were often summoned through the images and organs of wild animals. Also, in Daniel and Revelation, we see beasts used to describe massive spiritual opposition to God’s people.   Finally, we see the devil is described in 1 Peter as a “roaring lion, seeking someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8).  The evidence is certainly intriguing but not conclusive.

Option 5 – Passions

It appears that since Plato and at least up until the time of Paul’s writing, “fighting the wild beasts” was euphemistic for struggling with human passions, and especially of a sexual nature.  In particular, the philosopher, Dio Chrysostom described lusts as “savage beasts” which had to be destroyed and noted that if this was not done thoroughly they would soon overwhelm and destroy. Was Paul using the phrase euphemistically to spare the blushes of his readers?  Certainly, we know that Ephesus was rife with sexual immorality.  The temple of Diana was populated with hordes of prostitutes associated with the temple worship – but it is perhaps hard for us to see someone as experienced as Paul being enticed by such an apparently obvious temptation.  We know that Paul spoke of these passions in relations to marriage:

“Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.” (1 Corinthians 7:8-9)

It could be argued that if Paul had a particular issue with sexual temptation, he would have followed his own advice of marrying (assuming, of course, that he could find someone willing to take him on!) but the theory cannot be discounted entirely.

What is the message for us today?

Whatever Paul meant by “fighting with wild beasts”, it would be a travesty if we missed the major point that he was trying to make in this chapter.  The key to this passage is understanding the role of the resurrection – this theme was at the forefront of Paul’s mind when he was writing to the Corinthians from Ephesus.  All of 1 Corinthians 15 is devoted to the hope of the bodily resurrection of believers in Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice on the cross.  Why did Paul fight with wild beasts?  There was only an advantage to it because of one thing – the amazing reality that his body was going to be resurrected to eternal life. What do we need to remember constantly?

1. There will be eternal consequences of the battle that we are fighting here on the earth.  There should be no such thing for the Christian as simply “living in the moment.”
2. Our main priority in life is not simply to make ourselves comfortable and enjoy the pleasures of life while we can.  But nor is the Christian’s life all about defeating each day’s beasts (whatever form they may take for us as individuals); it’s about the bigger picture - our identity and life, both today and eternally, which is given meaning and power through the empty tomb.
3. There is still something to be fighting for.  “Eat and drink, for tomorrow we die” is the talk of fatalists, but it is also the talk of the defeated.   The phrase Paul uses is taken from Isaiah 22:13, referring to the Jews who were besieged by Sennacherib and the army of the Assyrians. The prophet says that instead of weeping, fasting and humiliation, as they should have been doing in those circumstances, they had given themselves up to feasting and revelry.  They had come to the conclusion that there was no use in offering resistance to the enemy, or in calling upon God for his help – it was too late and there was nothing that could be done now.   Paul never gave up the fight until the day he died and neither should we, no matter how tough the battle gets and how much that defeat seems to be the only outcome.  The empty tpmb should remind us that, actually, the battle is already won.