On Apr 22, 9:30 pm, Woody Brison <***@gmail.com> wrote:
Part II of "this might be helpful"
_____________________________
Exegesis of 1 Corinthians 15:29
The Context
Paul had been addressing various problems in the Corinthian church,
which had evidently been influenced by an overrealized eschatology and
Hellenistic dualism.(48) Some in the church felt they were presently
experiencing the kingdom in its fullness and were truly spiritual (1
Cor. 4:8-10). Also many in the church felt that the physical body was
of little importance both in the present and in the future. This view
led some to license (6:15-16) and others to asceticism (7:1-7). Some
had evidently extended this view to deny the resurrection of believers
(15:12). Having addressed these other problems, Paul then completed
his letter by defending the doctrine of the resurrection.
Paul's argument in defense of the resurrection of believers includes
three sections. First, he reaffirmed Christ's resurrection as a
foundation for his argument that dead believers will be raised
(15:1-11). Second, he demonstrated the absurdity of denying the
resurrection of believers and he revealed the theological foundation
that supports the resurrection of believers (vv. 12-34). Third, he
affirmed that the resurrection is bodily, although he explained that
the body will be transformed for an eternal existence (vv. 35-58).
Paul began the second major section of his argument (vv. 12-34) by
demonstrating the absurdity of the position of those who deny the
resurrection. Their position was contradictory, for they denied the
resurrection of believers while affirming Christ's resurrection (vv.
11-12). His argument for the resurrection of believers then proceeded
in three directions. First, he pointed out that their position implies
that Christ was not raised from the dead, thereby destroying the
foundation for their faith (vv. 12-19). Second, Paul reversed the
proposition by arguing that the reality of Christ's resurrection
guarantees the reality of believers' resurrection (vv. 20-28).
Third, Paul pointed out the incongruity of both their own behavior and
the behavior of the apostles (vv. 29-34). By a series of rhetorical
questions he pointed up the absurdity of various activities if there
were no resurrection. The practice of baptism for the dead (v. 29) and
the apostles' risk-taking behavior (vv. 30-32) were illogical if there
is no resurrection of believers. In verse 31 he was probably
emphasizing the truth of verse 30 that he daily faced the possibility
of death. After giving a further concrete example of risk-taking in
verse 32a, he quoted from Isaiah 22:13 to argue that it would make
more sense to indulge in license than self-sacrificial behavior if
there is no resurrection (1 Cor. 15:32). He concluded this section
with some poignant words of advice, apparently designed to rebuke the
Corinthians for associating with those who deny the resurrection (v.
34).
It is evident that verse 29 is only one small part of Paul's grand
argument for the resurrection of believers. Verse 29 points out the
incongruity of denying the resurrection of believers while at the same
time participating in a certain religious practice.
Critical Exegesis of 1 Corinthians 15:29
The wide variety of interpretations of 1 Corinthians 15:29 results
from different suggested solutions to key exegetical problems. The
meaning and referents of key terms such as oiJ baptizovmenoi and tw'n
nekrw'n are the subject of some debate. However, the understanding of
the preposition uJpeVr and the resulting theological implications are
the decisive issues in this crux interpretum.
oiJ baptizovmenoi. This verse begins with the statement, =EpeiV tiv
poihvsousin oiJ baptizovmenoi uJpeVr tw'n nekrw'n, "Otherwise, what
will those do who are baptized for the dead?"(49) As already stated,
there are two basic suggestions for the meaning of baptivzw in this
context. Some suggest that this word is being used metaphorically to
describe martyrdom or Paul's sufferings for the gospel, while others
hold that Christian baptism is in view. In favor of a metaphorical
understanding is the fact that the figurative sense of "to perish" or
"to suffer" is also evident in Greek literature,(50) including the New
Testament (Mark 10:38-39).
However, this suggestion has a number of difficulties. First, apart
from this verse there is no evidence that Paul used this term
metaphorically to indicate suffering or martyrdom. Although Murphy-
O'Connor's suggestion that the phrase "the ones being baptized for the
dead" is a Corinthian slogan alleviates the problem of Pauline usage
for the term baptivzw, his proposition seems doubtful, as previously
discussed. Second, a figurative understanding of "baptism" would also
require a figurative understanding of "the dead" (i.e., spiritually
dead), in order to avoid a mystical view of suffering or of being
killed for the benefit of the physically dead. A figurative view of
"the dead" is improbable in this context, since Paul consistently
referred to the physically dead throughout chapter 15 and even in the
immediate context (v. 29b).(51) Third, there is no historical evidence
of any believers being martyred in the Corinthian church at that time.
(52)
Viewing baptivzw as referring to Christian baptism is most likely the
correct understanding, since Paul consistently used this term with the
literal sense of the Christian initiatory rite.(53) Also Paul's
argument in verses 29-32 is more coherent if Christian baptism is in
view, since Paul would be citing two different examples of activities
that demonstrate the absurdity of denying the resurrection.(54)
Since baptivzw probably refers to literal Christian baptism in this
context, oiJ baptizovmenoi may be identified in one of two ways. Some
identify this construction as a reference to all believers, while the
majority hold that this construction refers to a specific group of
individuals within the church. The third person present tense form of
the verb baptivzontai (v. 29b) suggests that this activity was
currently being practiced by a group of individuals and was probably
well known by the Corinthians.(55) Thus the former suggestion is
extremely doubtful, as Paul probably would have used the first person
or second person plural form if he were referring to all believers or
to the Corinthian believers (cf. vv. 17, 51). As Fee states,
This is one of the rare instances in the letter where Paul addresses a
community matter only in the third person plural. In other instances
(e.g., 4:18-21; 15:12-19), even when "some" are specified, the rest of
the argument is directed at the community as a whole in the second
person plural. Since that does not happen here, one may surmise that
this is the activity of only a few.(56)
tw'n nekrw'n. Some suggest that nekrov" refers metaphorically to the
spiritually dead in verse 29a.(57) Others suggest that the first
occurrence of nekrov" in verse 29 refers to "dying bodies."(58) The
majority of commentators hold that this word refers to literally dead
persons in both occurrences, with varying suggestions as to their
identity.
The first suggestion is possible, as the word nekrov" is used both
literally and figuratively in the New Testament and by Paul.(59)
However, this interpretation is doubtful, since the literal sense is
plainly in view throughout the entire context (15:12, 13, 15, 16, 32,
35, etc.). In addition Paul clearly used nekrov" literally in the
immediate context (v. 29b). The suggestion that verse 29a is a
Corinthian slogan may alleviate some of the difficulty with the
occurrence of two distinct nuances within verse 29, but this
hypothesis is doubtful for reasons already enumerated.
Similarly, the second suggestion is likewise doubtful as this
understanding of nekrw'n as "dying bodies" is without parallel in the
New Testament and would differ with consistent Pauline usage in
chapter 15.(60) In addition, this understanding requires an ellipsis
such as tw'n nekrw'n (swmavtwn) or a tenuous connection of nekrov"
with a derivative found in classical Greek in order to produce the
sense of "corpses."(61)
Since Paul consistently used nekrov" in a literal sense throughout 1
Corinthians 15 and since the literal sense is apparent in the second
half of verse 29, a literal understanding of nekrov" as referring to
"dead individuals" is preferred.
Who are tw'n nekrw'n? Was Paul referring to dead believers,
unbelievers, or catechumens who died before being baptized? Grammar
suggests that the articular construction tw'n nekrw'n refers to a
specific group of dead individuals (with the anarthrous noun nekroiV
referring to the dead in general).(62) Pauline usage in chapter 15
confirms this. Paul seems to have been distinguishing between the dead
in general (vv. 12, 13, 15, 16, 20, 21, and 29b) and Christians who
had died (vv. 29a, 35, 42, and 52).(63)
For example later in the chapter the resurrection of dead believers is
clearly in view as indicated by the references to "a heavenly
body" (vv. 40, 47-49), "a spiritual body" (vv. 44, 46), and a body
"raised in power" (v. 43). However, in verses 12-29, the anarthrous
construction is used consistently to denote the general concept of
"the dead" in speaking of Christ being resurrected from the dead (vv.
12, 15, 20) and the general resurrection of the dead (vv. 13, 15, 16).
In addition verse 29 seems to resume Paul's former argument in which
he demonstrated the absurdity of denying the resurrection of dead
believers and which he concluded by referring specifically to deceased
believers (vv. 18-19). Based on Paul's apparent distinction between
"dead believers" and the "dead in general," the object of the
preposition uJpeVr is probably dead believers.
This observation leads to the question of whether these believers had
been baptized or were catechumens who died before being baptized. The
latter suggestion depends on the existence of an initiatory procedure
in Corinth that historically developed much later. The normal practice
in the early church was for baptism to follow immediately after
conversion (Acts 10:47-48; 16:31-34; 18:8; 19:5).(64)
Thus the possibility of a convert dying before being baptized was
improbable, contrary to what some have suggested.(65) Added to this
improbability is the fact that this activity in Corinth involved more
than one individual and would have had to be well known to the
Corinthians for Paul's argument to have force. Rather than referring
to an exceptional case where a convert died before baptism, Paul was
most likely referring to the more common case of dead believers who
had already been baptized.
uJpeVr. The prepositional phrase uJpeVr tw'n nekrw'n has been the
major focus in the controversy on this passage. The preposition uJpeVr
with the genitive normally has the meaning of "on behalf of,"
emphasizing representation (e.g., Eph. 5:2, 25; 1 Thess. 5:10; Titus
2:14), or "instead of," emphasizing substitution (e.g., John 11:50; 2
Cor. 5:14-15; Gal. 3:13; Phile. 13),(66) with the person as the object
of the preposition (also see Rom. 5:6, 8; 8:32; Gal. 2:20).(67) In
this case the preposition is used to express favor or advantage
accrued to a person. As a result most contemporary commentators view
the phrase uJpeVr tw'n nekrw'n as denoting an esoteric practice of
vicarious baptism in which an individual was apparently baptized as a
substitute for the benefit of a dead person.(68)
Although this is a natural rendering of the text, the major
difficulties with this interpretation are the complete lack of
historical evidence for this alleged practice in the first century and
the theological problem of Paul appealing, without qualification, to a
practice that implies that baptism has saving efficacy.(69) In
addition, since the object of the preposition tw'n nekrw'n probably
refers to dead believers, the interpretation of vicarious baptism is
doubtful, as these dead believers had most likely observed the rite of
baptism before their death.
Another suggestion that maintains the substitutionary sense of uJpevr
is that Paul was referring to individuals who were converted and
baptized to take the place of deceased believers.(70) This sense would
be parallel to Philemon 13, in which Paul spoke of Onesimus as
"ministering in the place of Philemon." Here the emphasis is more on
substitution than on any benefit accrued by Philemon (cf. Col. 1:7).
The preposition uJpevr can also be used to denote the cause or reason
of an action as in the sense of "for," "because of," or "on account
of" (see Rom. 15:9; 2 Cor. 12:8).(71) In the New Testament this
preposition is used to indicate the cause of suffering or slander
(Acts 9:16; 21:13;(72) 1 Cor. 10:30; 2 Cor. 12:10; Phil. 1:29; 2
Thess. 1:5), the cause of praise and thanksgiving (Rom. 15:9), and the
reason for prayer (2 Cor. 12:8).(73) In the passage in question, the
resulting sense would be that some new believers were being baptized
because of the influence of dead believers.(74) The chief criticism of
this view is that Pauline usage prefers the sense of "on behalf of"
with a person as the object, whereas the sense of "because of" or "on
account of" is preferred when the object is a thing.(75) The causal
sense of uJpevr is, however, used by Paul with a person as the object
either explicitly or implicitly on at least a few occasions (Acts
9:16; 21:13; Rom. 15:9; Phil. 1:29).(76)
Closely related to this understanding of uJpevr is the suggestion that
this proposition is functioning in 1 Corinthians 15:29 with the final
sense of "for": being baptized "with the purpose of becoming united
with their deceased Christian relatives at the resurrection."(77) This
understanding of uJpevr with a final sense is evident in the context
of Paul's sufferings for the Corinthians' comfort (2 Cor. 1:6),
although this usage seems to be uncommon.(78) The major problem with
this view is that the phrase uJpevr tw'n nekrw'n would require a
significant ellipsis or additional explanation to arrive at a coherent
interpretation.(79) However, other passages utilizing the final sense
of uJpevr similarly have to be filled out by the exegesis of the text.
(80)
Others have suggested that the preposition demonstrates the local
sense of "over" as in "over the graves of the dead."(81) This
understanding is doubtful, as there is no historical evidence for this
practice in the first century. Also this local sense of the
preposition, although common in classical Greek, is applied only
figuratively in the Koine period.(82)
Still others suggest this preposition is used in 1 Corinthians 15:29
with the sense of "concerning" or "with reference to," as in believers
being baptized with reference to the resurrection of the dead.(83)
This interpretation is doubtful, since it requires a significant
ellipsis such as "baptized with reference to [the resurrection of] the
dead."(84)
Although the first understanding of uJpevr is most in keeping with
Pauline usage with persons as the object,(85) the theological
difficulties presented by Paul's nonqualification of an erroneous
practice suggest that this occurrence may involve a different nuance
such as "because of the influence of dead believers," "in order to be
united with dead believers at the resurrection," or perhaps even the
understanding of new converts "taking the place of dead
Christians."(86)
Conclusion
Having examined 1 Corinthians 15:29, a number of conclusions can be
made. First, the baptism referred to is probably literal water baptism
of Christians. Second, the phrase "the ones who are baptized" most
likely refers to a small group of individuals rather than the church
as a whole. Third, "the dead" for whom some individuals were being
baptized were in all probability dead believers. Fourth, these dead
believers had presumably experienced Christian baptism before they
died. If these four observations are true, it is extremely improbable
that the proposition uJpevr denotes vicarious baptism for the benefit
of the dead, as there would be no value in such a practice, since the
dead in question would already have been "saved" and probably
baptized. With the additional problem of vicarious baptism and Pauline
theology, the improbability of 1 Corinthians 15:29 referring to
vicarious baptism becomes insurmountable.
Therefore only three of the more than two hundred interpretations of 1
Corinthians 15:29 remain strong possibilities. One view translates
uJpevr with the sense of "in the place of" as in new believers' being
baptized to take the place of dead Christians. A second possibility
translates uJpevr with the final sense: "in order to be reunited with
their loved ones at the resurrection." A third view translates uJpevr
with the sense of "because of": new believers' being baptized "because
of the influence of deceased Christians." The first suggestion is
perhaps less convincing, since it could be said that all believers
take the place of deceased believers and yet Paul was evidently
referring to a select group within the church. The final two
suggestions are closely related semantically and fit the context well,
as they both refer to a select group within the church and include an
emphasis on the resurrection as the implied motive for these
practices.
Perhaps the most plausible interpretation is the third option, since
it makes sense without a significant ellipsis. No doubt many
individuals in the early church were influenced by the testimony of
other believers who had recently died or who were martyred. For
example Paul may have been influenced by Stephen's testimony when
Stephen was arrested and stoned (Acts 7). Although all three
interpretations are not immediately evident from initial readings of
the text, all three respect the contextual framework of Pauline usage
and theology.
In light of the minor role this verse plays in the overall argument of
1 Corinthians 15, it is ironic that the verse has received so much
attention in the literature. This disproportionate attention is
justified, however, if this passage refers to a practice implying the
saving efficacy of baptism. Was Paul referring to a practice
fundamentally opposed to his theology of salvation by faith alone as
the majority of modern commentators suggest? According to the evidence
revealed by this study, this is highly improbable.
In addition there is no biblical warrant given in this passage for
instituting the practice of baptism for the dead. Both the ancient and
modern practices of baptism for the dead are apparently founded on
misinterpretations of this verse.