What in the World is this talking about???????
Week Two
This week’s passage: I Cor. 15:29- “Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?”
So what in the world is Paul talking about? What could “baptizing for the dead” mean?
Many Scholars consider this one of the most difficult passages to interpret in the entire Bible! Many find this contradictory to other passages in the Bible. I think it may just be much simpler than these folks make it out to be.
Do you think that this verse is advocating that one can be baptized for the lost soul of someone else that has already died unsaved???? Why or why not? Many do…..they say that Paul acknowledges the existence of the practice yet does not condemn it.
MODERN PRACTICE?
Does anyone still practice this today? Yes…..the Mormon Church does. Mormonism teaches that the living can be baptized for those who are dead, so they can accept the Baptism vicariously in the spirit world. (This is why Mormons press genealogy so hard, so they can find any relatives that may not have been saved). Does anyone know where the Mormon faith got the basis for this practice?? Interestingly enough, it is NOT found anywhere in The Book of Mormon. The practice stems from 2 sited sources: One is Joseph Smith’s “Book of Doctrine and Covenants” where he says he was “revealed” that is was okay, because it is “an unthinkable and immoral doctrine to admit that all those men who died or will die without baptism are damned forever”. The second source is from the passage we just read above.
According to what you know, can you think of any biblical passages that belief in this practice would violate?
· Luke 16:19-31--- Clearly it stated there was a “vast gulf” between the 2. There was nothing else that could be done to bring the man to Heaven…there were no second chances…..both Lazarus and the rich man’s fates were sealed UPON HOW THEY HAD LIVED!
· Matthew 28:19-20--- The Great Commission clearly states that we must baptize people. But we often stop there….what about the fact it states that we must also TEACH them???? How can we teach the dead? The dead can not obey!
· Mark 16:16--- Pretty straightforward huh? Belief is a necessary part of salvation, and those who choose not to do so will be condemned. That is it…end of story!
· I Cor. 5:10--- We will receive judgment by what??? By the things WE did in our body….alive and on this earth. It is NOT according to what others have done for us.
To me it is a matter of simple facts and clear logic. What do you think? What if we reversed it? If we claimed this practice was valid, wouldn’t we also be saying that someone could reject Christ for another??? If I die saved, can someone in the future do something to reject Christ for me? Or here is another thought…why must we wait for them to die? If we know someone who will not make the decision themselves, why not be baptized for them now, if this act of salvation is so easily transferable? The only ones that control our spiritual eternity are US and GOD! Where would be the incentive to live right and follow his commands now, if you could simply leave it in your will that “cousin Zed is to be baptized for me…”? But the fact still remains that Paul did describe the act, and we know that it still continues today. And as a result it will always be a topic for debate!
WHO was taking part in this practice?
There are 2 possibilities:
1- Members of the Corinthian Church
2- Pagans in the city of Corinth
3- (or a possible third I guess) BOTH
Could it have been members of the Church? I do not see why not. Members of today’s church are often confused and/or easily swayed into doing things that are wrong. Why could it not have been so then as well? Many will argue against though, because MANY translations use the word THEY (as in “why are THEY baptized for them?). So the argument is often made, that since he did NOT say WE or US, the practice could not have been speaking of Church members.
Could it have been a pagan practice of the region? Of course it could have! In fact it was. Just North of Corinth was the city of Eleusis, home of a Pagan religion where baptism in the sea was practiced to “guarantee a good afterlife”. Baptism for the dead was also said to be practiced here. The Corinthians were known to be easily swayed by other ideas and customs. They were in an economic hub where many different people came for business, and as a result many different ideas prospered! The Corinthian church could have easily been influenced by these people.
But, does it REALLY matter who it was? Isn’t it wrong regardless of who does it?
So let us try and make some sense of the passage:
Here are just a few of the attempts to explain---
· Baptism frees us from “THE FEAR OF DEATH”- basically, proponents of this theory state that a man might be baptized due to his fear of death and what awaits him beyond the grave. So, they act out of fear of the judgment to come.
· Baptism over the “sepulchers of martyrs”- (a sepulcher is a burial vault) This theory supposes that the early church was forced to baptize their converts in the burial tombs due to intense persecution. The Greek word used in the verse we are discussing for “for” (as in “baptized FOR the dead”) was the Greek word huper, which can mean: over, above for the sake of, on behalf of, with a view toward, or with reference to”. So they claim they were simply being baptized ABOVE the tombs. But, scholars note there is no historical evidence for this theory, and we read nowhere of any persecution in Corinth at this time.
· Baptism received “on account of the dead”- This theory states that a plague of some sort had fallen on Corinth that was killing many. Supposedly, some who had previously delayed being baptized decided to go ahead and do so, for fear of death. But again there is no real historical reason to believe a plague was going on in Corinth.
WHAT WAS PAUL REALLY FOCUSING ON HERE? WHAT WAS HE REALLY TRYING TO SAY??
CONTEXT
I think that all of these ideas are noble attempts to understand God’s word. I admire when people go searching for the truth, but I think we are simply overlooking what was trying to be stated here. I think this could all be summed up with one question “Why be baptized if there is no resurrection? If the dead DO NOT rise, why be baptized at all?”
To get a better grasp of this all, maybe we should read everything else that was being said by Paul in Chapter 15, and NOT just one verse. By reading Chapter 15, it is clear to me, that the focus here is THE RESURRECTION, and NOT baptism!!! He begins the chapter (1-11) stating “Let me remind you” that Jesus died, and was raised from the dead. And that this was fact attested by “more than 500 witnesses, as well as many others (most of who were still living!). Note what he is focusing on!
Then in vs. 12-49 Paul gives a series of arguments to drive home the reality of the resurrection of the body. It seems as though there must be false doctrine being spread to the contrary of what Christians believe. This concept which we may often take for granted, was in fact looked on as VERY foolish in ancient Greek culture (and yes, Corinth was a Greek city)!
I believe that his statement that contains mention of the practice we are discussing is simply one in a series of arguments for the reality of the resurrection! I think he was simply stating that the resurrection is a reality, and was pointing out the hypocrisy of the false teachers! And he was reminding them that Jesus was raised from the dead, and it will happen when he comes again! Basically he was saying “Do NOT fall into this lie…even the pagans believe in the resurrection since they obviously baptize for the dead”! If you look at the WHOLE passage it seems clear to me: The false teachers are inconsistent. They deny the resurrection yet they engage in a practice which is based in the hope of a resurrection!
What do you think? I encourage you to read more into God’s word and do more research this week to find what and why you think like you do! God’s word is the truth. God’s truth will set you free!