In arguing for the resurrection, Paul puts forward a strange
argument in the paragraph in 1 Corinthians 15.29-34:
Otherwise, what
do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not
raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?
What is baptism on behalf of the dead? Commentaries offer a variety of interpretations for this obscure reference, and this interpretation that I have garnered from my own reading is one I believe is along the right track.
First, the word ‘baptism’ is broader than
Christian baptism itself and means to dip in or under a liquid such as water or
wine. We should not read our Christian view of 'baptism' into the meaning of this verse.
Note, second, that Paul does not say, ‘You’ do this or that Christians should do this. He says that people do this. These 'people' are those in the Graeco-Roman culture.
Third, note that in this whole paragraph his
main point is that there is life after this life, life after death. This practice in Greek culture of a ‘baptism
on behalf of the dead’ only makes sense if people believe in life after death.
In v. 33, Paul says, ‘If the dead
are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die”.’ He is quoting a saying in Greek culture, and
his point is that we are to be raised from the dead and so we should not live
this way. He is not distinguishing at
this point of the chapter between belief in life after death and the resurrection
of the dead. To be sure, some in the
culture did believe that they should just live for the day and not concern
themselves with life after death. So, we
read in Athenaeus’ Deipnosophists:
I to all mortals now give this advice:
Live for the day with pleasure; he who
dies
Is nought; an empty shade beneath the
earth:
Man lives but a short space, and therefore
should,
While life remains, enjoy himself (8.14).
Yet the practice in the culture
of ‘baptism on behalf of the dead’ points to a different belief, one more
common, and is consistent with Jewish and Christian views that there is life
after death.
Also in this paragraph, Paul turns
the argument to himself. Why did he
fight beasts in Ephesus and why does he endure all sorts of things to proclaim
a Gospel that includes the hope of the resurrection for those in Christ if
there is no life after this life?
So, Paul’s first example about ‘baptism
on behalf of the dead’ is not a theological teaching for Christians but an
observation that people do this because they believe that the dead continue to
exist. On this single verse, the Mormon
cult has developed a major practice of researching genealogies and baptizing people
on behalf of the dead, with the notion that this will save them. This practice is not supported by Scripture
elsewhere, nor is it the right teaching on this verse. All that Paul is doing is noting that, in the
culture of his day, there is the general practice of baptism on behalf of the
dead that points to a general belief in life after death. Paul will shortly explain the Christian view
of this, that there is to be a resurrection from the dead for Christians, but
here his point is that Christian theology agrees with other religious practices
where there is a hope of life after death and a future judgement.
As to what this ‘baptism’ is, I
suggest that it is or is something like what we read in antiquity about pouring
out libations on behalf of the dead. People in the culture of the day went to the graves of the dead and poured out liquids, thinking that somehow this
is good for them and pleasing to the gods.
It may further have held out hope of connecting with the dead. Here are three quotes, one from Euripides and
two from Aeschylus. In Euripides play, Orestes, Helen asks her daughter, Hermione, to take an offering of hair and libations to Clytemnestra's grave. The offering is a gift, and the context of this is that Helen wants to make peace with Clytemnestra.
Take these libations and these tresses of mine in your hands, and go pour round Clytemnestra's tomb [115] a mingled cup of honey, milk, and frothing wine... (Euripides, Orestes 110).[1]
In Aeschylus' play, Persians, Queen Atossa, wife of dead Darius and mother of Xerxes, is worried about the absence of the Persian army from the capital and about its war against the Ionians. She says that she has dipped her 'hands in the clear-flowing water of a spring' and, with incense in her hand, approached an altar 'to make an offering of sacrificial cake to the divinities that avert evil' (Persians 200). The Chorus advises her to appeal to the gods and her dead husband. They say,
it is appropriate that you should [220] offer libations to Earth and the dead; and use auspicious words to address your husband Darius, whom you say you have seen in the night, and ask him to send into the light of day from beneath the earth blessings for you and your son; ask too that the reverse of this may be held in bondage beneath the earth and fade away in gloom (Aeschylus, Persians 219-224).[2]
Atossa later says,
It is for this reason that I have come here from the palace once again, without my chariot and my former pomp, and bring, as propitiatory libations for the father of my son, [610] offerings that soothe the dead, both white milk, pleasant to drink, from an unblemished cow, and bright honey, distillation wrought from blossoms by the bee, together with lustral water from a virgin spring; [615] and from a rustic source, this unmixed draught, the quickening juice of an ancient vine. Here too is the fragrant fruit of the pale-green olive that lives the entirety of its life in luxuriant foliage; and garlanded flowers, produce of the bounteous earth.
But come, my friends, [620] chant solemn songs as I make these libations to the dead, and summon forth the divine spirit of Darius, while I convey, in honor of the gods, these offerings for the earth to drink’ (Aeschylus, Persians 619-622).
Darius’ ghost later appears in the play (681ff). Note Atassa's dipping her hands in a spring, her offering of libations to the dead, and her hope to obtain a blessing from her dead husband and the gods.
My suggestion is that the 'baptism on behalf of the dead' is a reference to such practices in the culture, and the dipping of hands in a spring and the libations poured out seem to be particularly interesting for a connection to 'baptism'. The main point, however, is that whatever practices there are, they were done in the belief that there is life after death. Yet some Corinthians rejected the idea of a
future resurrection (v. 12), and with it they lived without a concern for
future consequences. Paul says, ‘Wake up
from your drunken stupor, as is right, and do not go on sinning’ (v. 34). Perhaps he has in mind the sinner sexually involved with his father's wife (ch. 5) or persons who claim a Christian life but do not stop doing sins listed in 6.9-10,. Recall that some of the Corinthians thought that ethics did not pertain to what they did with their bodies (6.12-20).
We might have another passage
that captures the general idea of libations for the dead in Luke 16. If so, the purpose is different as it is not
an offering to honour a dead person or the gods or God but a drink for someone
in torment. The passage in Euripides offers a parallel in that a nice drink is prepared for someone who is honoured despite her evil deed (she mistakenly killed her husband). In Jesus’ parable of the
rich man and the beggar, Lazarus, both die.
Lazarus goes to a good place and is with his ancestor, Abraham. The rich man, who cared nothing for the
beggar at his gate and just lived his life for his own pleasure, goes to a very
different place. He is in torment in Hades. He calls out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on
me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue,
for I am in anguish in this flame’ (v. 24).
If this passage has any relevance to 1 Corinthians 15.29, it is only
that the notion of libations for the dead could have different purposes. None of these are salvific, but they all
point to a belief in life after death. Christians
did not continue these pagan practices, whatever their purposes, but they did
believe in life after death and, more specifically, in a future resurrection of
the dead.
[1]
Euripides. The Complete Greek Drama, edited by Whitney J. Oates and Eugene
O'Neill, Jr. in two volumes. 2. Orestes, translated by E. P. Coleridge. New
York. Random House. 1938.
[2] Aeschylus. Aeschylus, with
an English translation by Herbert Weir Smyth, Ph. D. in two volumes. 1.
Persians. Herbert Weir Smyth, Ph. D. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.
1926.
Comments