Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post Reply
Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post by Singalphile » Sat Aug 13, 2016 7:30 pm

I was looking into 1 Corinthians 15:29 because someone asked about it in a different forum (rethinkinghell.com). I was going to mention the view that Steve and others have mentioned, which is that when Paul wrote "baptized for the dead", he might have meant "baptized for Jesus".

That has seemed to me like a good, possible explanation. However, when I looked it up in the Greek, I noticed that both "the dead" and the "them" later in the verse are plural (see link above). The aforementioned view no longer seems that likely to me.

Any thoughts?

(By the way, I'd have thought that there's a thread on this specific topic somewhere, but I can't find it. And apparently "Corinthians" is to common a word to search for, but "baptism" isn't. Go figure.)
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post by Singalphile » Sun Aug 21, 2016 10:03 am

So after looking at it, I'd conclude that Paul was referring to some practice of being baptized on behalf of the dead/them (plural). I suppose it would have been some practice that his Corinthians audience was aware of and that Paul himself approved of or did not strongly object to.

Anything else would seem to be speculative, which I will now do:

I have read that there is some evidence or mention of some apparently short-lived practice of vicarious baptism in the early Church. I have suspected that the early Church, even the apostles, did not know all that happens after death or what happens to those who did not know Jesus - such as infants - or did not have the chance to be baptized, and that various opinions existed and were tolerated.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post by Homer » Tue Aug 23, 2016 5:15 pm

However, when I looked it up in the Greek, I noticed that both "the dead" and the "them" later in the verse are plural (see link above). The aforementioned view no longer seems that likely to me.
I suppose it would have been some practice that his Corinthians audience was aware of and that Paul himself approved of or did not strongly object to.
On the subject Henry Alford commented:
What shall they do] There is a tacit reprehension of the practice about to be mentioned, which is hardly possible altogether to miss. Both by the third person and by the words they which are, he indirectly separates himself and those to whom he is writing from participation in or approval of the practice:- the meaning which, what will become of - 'what account can they give of their practice?'
(note: I underlined where Alford had bold letters)

The Williams translation is helpful:
Otherwise, what do theses people mean who submit to being baptized on behalf of their dead? If the dead are never raised at all, why do they submit to being baptized on their behalf? Why too do we ourselves run such risks every hour?
Given Paul's view of the importance of faith in justification I find it hard to believe he would approve of anything remotely close to the Mormon practice.

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post by Singalphile » Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:01 pm

Homer wrote: On the subject Henry Alford commented:
What shall they do] There is a tacit reprehension of the practice about to be mentioned, which is hardly possible altogether to miss. Both by the third person and by the words they which are, he indirectly separates himself and those to whom he is writing from participation in or approval of the practice:- the meaning which, what will become of - 'what account can they give of their practice?'
(note: I underlined where Alford had bold letters)

The Williams translation is helpful:
Otherwise, what do theses people mean who submit to being baptized on behalf of their dead? If the dead are never raised at all, why do they submit to being baptized on their behalf? Why too do we ourselves run such risks every hour?
Given Paul's view of the importance of faith in justification I find it hard to believe he would approve of anything remotely close to the Mormon practice.
Thank you very much, Homer.

I'm not familiar with Henry Alford. I would argue that his "which is hardly possible altogether to miss" would be more accurate if it said "we might imagine". I guess I missed the "reprehension" in Paul's statement, and I'm not alone, I would argue. But he's right about the distancing use of the 3rd person, I think. That's worth noting.

As for the Williams translation, he seems to have added words - "these people", "submit to", "their" dead - and I don't know why.

I don't know what the Mormon practice is, but I can imagine that if someone wanted to be baptized for (or on behalf of), say, a death-bed convert who verbally desired to be baptized but didn't get the chance, I might say, "Well, it's not really Biblical as far as we know for sure, but I don't suppose it hurts anything, so go ahead," even if I wouldn't do it myself.

So if Henry Alford could imagine reprehension in Paul's mind, then I can instead imagine some tolerance for a practice that the Corinthians at least knew about or witnessed, which might at least explain why he would use the practice as an example apparently meant to support his main argument.

... or maybe not. It's a puzzler!
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post by Homer » Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:10 am

Hi Singalphile ,

The Williams translation is highly regarded because it is claimed to bring out the sense of the Greek more than any other. It particularly brings out the tense of verbs, for example, compare his translation of Matthew 16:19 with the NKJV and you get a better understanding of what Jesus was saying:
Matthew 16:19 New King James Version (NKJV)

19. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Williams:

19. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you forbid on earth must be what has already been forbidden in heaven, and whatever you permit on earth must be what is already permitted in heaven.
I see the NASB has been changed now in this place to more closely follow Williams:
Matthew 16:19 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

19. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”
My older NASB does not show the meaning of the Greek tense. I first heard of William's translation in Robert Shank's classic "Life in the Son". The Greek scholar J. R. Mantey regarded Williams as the best translation in the English language.

Henry Alford was a Greek scholar who wrote a NT commentary, highly regarded. It is my understanding that his commentary was written entirely in Greek as students were required to be fluent in Greek back in his day.

Anyway, enough about Williams and Alford. As I read the passage I think v. 30 provides support for what Alford wrote as "Why also are we (possessive pronoun in Grk) in danger every hour?" separates Paul and his brethren from those baptizing for the dead. I see Paul saying that if there is no resurrection, why would they baptize for their dead? Makes no sense. And if there is no resurrection, why do we put our lives in jeopardy by being Christians? Makes no sense either.

Paul is focused on the resurrection and does not diverge into the propriety of baptism for the dead, only the absurdity of the practice if there is no resurrection. He similarly has discussed at length in this same letter the wearing of veils by women in the assembly and mentions women prophesying without addressing the subject of whether it is proper for them to speak at all.

Perhaps Paul clarified these matters when he arrived later:
1 Corinthians 11:34 New International Version (NIV)

34. Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment.
And when I come I will give further directions.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post by Paidion » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:55 pm

Homer, I have Williams among the many translations in my Online Bible Program, but I don't see it as "bringing out the sense of the Greek more than any other." Indeed, I see it as more of a paraphrase than a translation.

I have checked several lexicons and find none in which "forbid" is given as a definition of "δεω" (Strong's 1210) Rather they give as definitions "bind, tie, fasten with chains, etc." And when you look up the passages in the New Testament that contain the word, it is clear that the lexicons are right. How many of the following passages would make sense if the word were translated as "forbid" or "was forbidden" instead of "bound" or "had bound"?

Matthew 13:30 ‘Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, "First gather together the tares and bind <1210> them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn."’"
Matthew 14:3 For Herod had laid hold of John and bound <1210> him, and put him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife.
Matthew 21:2 saying to them, "Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied <1210>, and a colt with her. Loose them and bring them to Me.
Matthew 22:13 "Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind <1210> him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’
Matthew 27:2 And when they had bound <1210> Him, they led Him away and delivered Him to Pontius Pilate the governor.
Mark 3:27 "No one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds <1210> the strong man. And then he will plunder his house.
Mark 5:3 who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no one could bind <1210> him, not even with chains,
Mark 5:4 because he had often been bound <1210> with shackles and chains. And the chains had been pulled apart by him, and the shackles broken in pieces; neither could anyone tame him.
Mark 6:17 For Herod himself had sent and laid hold of John, and bound <1210> him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife; for he had married her.
Mark 11:2 and He said to them, "Go into the village opposite you; and as soon as you have entered it you will find a colt tied <1210>, on which no one has sat. Loose it and bring it.
Mark 11:4 So they went their way, and found the colt tied <1210> by the door outside on the street, and they loosed it.
Mark 15:1 Immediately, in the morning, the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council; and they bound <1210> Jesus, led Him away, and delivered Him to Pilate.
Acts 21:11 When he had come to us, he took Paul’s belt, bound <1210> his own hands and feet, and said, "Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘So shall <1210> the Jews at Jerusalem bind <1210> the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’"
Acts 21:13 Then Paul answered, "What do you mean by weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound <1210>, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus."
Acts 21:33 Then the commander came near and took him, and commanded him to be bound <1210> with two chains; and he asked who he was and what he had done.
Acts 22:5 "as also the high priest bears me witness, and all the council of the elders, from whom I also received letters to the brethren, and went to Damascus to bring in chains <1210> even those who were there to Jerusalem to be punished.
Acts 22:29 Then immediately those who were about to examine him withdrew from him; and the commander was also afraid after he found out that he was a Roman, and because he had bound <1210> him.
Acts 24:27 But after two years Porcius Festus succeeded Felix; and Felix, wanting to do the Jews a favor, left Paul bound <1210>.
Romans 7:2 For the woman who has a husband is bound <1210> by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband.
1 Corinthians 7:27 Are you bound <1210> to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife.
1 Corinthians 7:39 A wife is bound <1210> by law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.
Colossians 4:3 meanwhile praying also for us, that God would open to us a door for the word, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am <1210> also in chains <1210>,
2 Timothy 2:9 for which I suffer trouble as an evildoer, even to the point of chains; but the word of God is <1210> not chained <1210>.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post by Homer » Thu Aug 25, 2016 10:04 am

Paidon,

The point I was making regarding baptism for the dead was that Paul did not approve the practice. Do you disagree? Do you disagree with what Alford said?

Alfords comment verbatim:
What shall they do] There is a tacit reprehension of the practice about to be mentioned, which is hardly possible altogether to miss. Both by the third person and by the words they which are, he indirectly separates himself and those to whom he is writing from participation in or approval of the practice:- the meaning which, what will become of - 'what account can they give of their practice?'
As for the Williams translation what is clarifying is his use of the tense of the verbs. I was not particularly concerned with his use of "forbidden" for deo but I must say if he had translated it "bind" (in chains?), "knit", "tie", or "wind" it would not have clarified matters. What words in modern English would you suggest instead of bind or loose?

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post by Paidion » Thu Aug 25, 2016 12:15 pm

No Homer, I do not disagree with what Alford said about the matter.

As for Williams, it is the translation of words that is the problem. He often "translates" them incorrectly—just renders them as he thinks makes sense to him.

As for the tense, Williams had it right—as every good modern translator does.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15)

Post by Singalphile » Thu Aug 25, 2016 8:47 pm

I largely agree with everything you last wrote to me, Homer, after the info about Alford and Williams (also interesting).

I didn't mean to get into what exactly Paul meant and what he thought about the baptism for the dead. I'm quite sure that I'm not going to figure it out. My main point was that it seems that the idea that baptism "for the dead" refers to being baptized for Jesus does not seem very likely, since "the dead" is plural, as is the subsequent "them" in the verse (according to biblehub.com's Greek). But I can see why it would be a good suggestion by looking at the KJV and the NKJV because they both have "baptized for the dead" twice, which fully conceals the plural nouns ("dead"/"them").
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”