BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD (Gr. οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι ὑπὲ̀ρ τῶν νεκρῶν). “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?” (1 Cor 15:29) This is a famous crux interpretum. Opinion concerning its meaning has been divided since early times, and there can be few vv. of Scripture concerning which the views of modern commentators are so bewilderingly diverse.

A. Divergent views. Only a selection of the more important views can be given:

1. Vicarious baptism to benefit those who died unbaptized.

2. Baptism for the sake of the dead—i.e. in order to secure reunion with Christian relatives after death.

3. Baptism on account of the dead—i.e., because of the witness in life of Christians martyred for the faith, such faith leading to the conversion and subsequent baptism of others.

4. Baptism to take the place of the dead—i.e., to make up their number and so, perhaps, to hasten the Second Advent by assisting the completion of one of its preconditions.

5. Baptism over the dead—i.e., over their graves, to express solidarity with them if they are Christian believers; if they are not, to involve them in salvation by this ritual.

6. Ceremonial ablution because of defilement through contact with a dead body.

7. Prayer for the dead described fig. as baptism for them, rather as “sacrifice” is sometimes spiritualized as prayer in the NT.

8. Death for the dead: the death of Christians regarded as redemptive and as securing salvation for the dead, and described as baptism because this symbolizes death.

9. Baptism to wash away mortal sins.

10. Baptism to confess the resurrection of the dead, because it symbolizes death and resurrection.

11. Baptism to secure benefit after death, because the thought of death has hastened the act of baptism.

B. Important factors bearing upon the interpretation of the passage. The chief of these would appear to be the following:

1. The general context. The v. must be relevant to an argument for the resurrection of the dead.

2. The connection of thought between vv. 29 and 30. Here are either two separate arguments for the resurrection or two parts of one argument.

3. The congruity of the interpretation with apostolic thought and practice or with some perversion of the same.

4. Grammatical factors, of which the chief is the sense of ὑπὲ̀ρ τῶν νεκρῶν (“on behalf of the dead” RSV). For example, No. 9 above requires a dubious sense both for the preposition and for the noun.

C. Conclusion. The issue is anything but simple to decide. A number of the above interpretations are very forced, esp. in their understanding of the Gr. No. 10 is popular because it presents no theological problems, but is grammatically suspect. No. 2 has been powerfully advocated of late esp. by Jeremias and Raeder but No. 1 still seems much the most natural. The post-apostolic heretical sect the Marcionites certainly practiced vicarious baptism although possibly in misinterpretation of this passage. It does not seem likely that Paul was expressing approval of the practice. By an ad hominem argument, he is seeking to show the inconsistency of those who follow the practice while doubting or denying the Resurrection. “It is wholly illegitimate to suppose that because Paul pronounces no condemnation on a custom to which he refers he must have given it his approval. This is surely a misapprehension of the very nature of an argumentum ad hominem.” (H. A. A. Kennedy, St. Paul and the Mystery Religions [1913], 253.)

Bibliography F. Godet, First Corinthians (1893), ad loc.; T. C. Edwards, First Corinthians (1897), ad loc.; J. A. Beet, First and Second Corinthians (1902), ad loc.; A. Robertson and A. Plummer, First Corinthians (1911), ad loc.; H. Preisker, Die Vicariatstaufe in I Corinther 15:29 (1924); B. M. Foschini, Those Who Are Baptized for the Dead (I Cor 15:29), (1951); F. W. Grosheide, First Corinthians (1953); M. Raeder, Vicariatstaufe in I Corinther 15:29” ZNW (1955); J. Jeremias, “Flesh and Blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God,” NTS II (1955-1956), 151-159; W. F. Flemington, The NT Doctrine of Baptism (1957); G. R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the NT (1962); R. Schnackenburg, Baptism in the Thought of St. Paul (1964).