BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD: WHENCE IS IT? By Reid McCullough, D.D.
second only to the testimony of the many eye-witnesses mentioned in the beginning of this fifteenth chapter of First Corin thians. Christ gave this ordinance, and it is confirmed by the Father and the Holy Spirit, because we baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Therefore, the impli cations of baptism are supremely impor tant, namely death, burial and resurrec tion ; and before we baptize or bury any one in water, we ought to find out if they are dead. Just as in the case of physical death, we have to produce a certificate of death in order to bury, so in the case of Christian baptism we have to be sure to the best of our ability, whether the candidate is dead or cruci fied with Christ, else it is not baptism or “the answer of a good conscience to God” but only “the putting away of the filth of the flesh.” Baptism, which is a burial, is only for the dead, hence a person who is being baptized, is being baptized for dead, because he has satis fied the church that he is dead to the old life. When you are satisfied that he is dead, then you proceed to bury or baptize him. But here is where the dilemma rises, if as some say, “ there is no resurrec tion,” then a candidate who is being bap tized for dead should not be raised up out of the water by the officiating min ister of the gospel, but should remain buried, and that would lead to death by suffocation and be a crime. Therefore you cannot have baptism without teach ing resurrection. It is impossible . from the very nature of baptism, and this baptism is a divine ordinance, and should always be carried out according to the divine pattern. Hence the aptness of Paul’s inquiry here: “What shall they do that are being baptized for dead, if the dead rise not at all?” Another incongruity appears to the logical and spiritual mind of the apostle, and he asks another pertinent question: (Continued on Page 18)
Professor of Biblical Languages of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles
I would like to pass on to others the results of a careful study of First Corinthians 15:29. I have always felt that there was something wrong with this verse as translated in the Author ized Version, which seems to teach a practice that is mentioned no other place in the Bible. A doctrine founded on only one Scripture is far from dependable, for in Second Peter 1:20 we read: “No prophecy of the scripture is of any pri vate interpretation.” Any correct inter pretation of Scripture will be supported by many other passages, and will not de pend upon the whim or fancy of any teacher, any group of teachers, or upon any church. I have discovered that the correct translation of this verse gives the simple and satisfactory explanation of a Scripture concerning which it is stated- in the Cambridge Greek Testa ment for Schools and Colleges: “ This is a passage of extreme difficulty, and it would be impossible to notice one tithe of the explanations which have been pro posed of it.” Another rather strange thing about this so-called difficult passage is the fact that among the many new translations that have appeared, I know of not one which has made any departure from the interpretation contained in the Author ized Version, in spite of the fact that the commonly received translation has no other Scripture to support it. More over, I have always believed that the Bible was not written for the learned and educated man but for the ordinary man in the street, and that any transla tion or exegesis of a verse that requires p&ge upon page of unsatisfactory ex planations is faulty and misleading. Therefore I believe that all the difficul ties in the interpretation of this pas sage have risen from the incorrectness of the regularly received translations, and for that reason I point out some of the things in the original that have been overlooked in all the translations. I would like to say a word of glad appre ciation of Dr. Nestle’s Text, which has refused to- adhere to some of the radical changes of Westcott & Hort, and has re turned to the Textus Receptus in several places. Although Dr. Nestle has not fol lowed the Textus Receptus in this par ticular, he has placed it in the margin. Therefore, for the easy and satisfactory explanation of this passage, we follow the Textus Receptus, or the Text fol lowed by the translators of our Author ized English Version of 1611. The first thing that has been over looked in this verse is that the present tenses of the verb baptize in the Greek Page Twelve
text have been translated into English as though they were perfect tenses. The English translation “ are baptized” oc curs twice, and is really equal to “ have been baptized,” whereas the Greek pres ent tense ought to be translated “are be ing baptized.” In other words, the bap tism is not a thing of the past, but has not yet taken place, and so a problem arises when some say that “ there is no resurrection of the dead” (1 Cor. 15:12). The verse, then, should read in the Au thorized Version as follows: “ Else what shall they do that are being baptized, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then being baptized for the dead?” The questions asked here are concerning people who are being baptized, not concerning those who have been bap tized. Paul supposes himself present at a baptismal service, and remem bering that some were denying the resurrection, by two pertinent questions, shows the impossibility and folly of be ing baptized without thereby showing forth resurrection. The next thing that has been over looked in the' translations of this verse is the important fact that the words the dead ■ occur three times in the English Version as though they were a transla tion of identical words in the original. The fact is that they are a translation of two different expressions in the Greek, one of them without the definite article, and the other two with the definite ar ticle. But of these translations the mid dle one in this verse is correct because of the established use of it in the New Testament generally and .because it is so used nine times in the context from First Corinthians 15:15-34; so that if the words, if the dead rise not at all are cor rect when no definite article is used in the Greek, the question rises: How are we‘ to translate the Greek in the other ■two places, where the definite article is used? The only logical answer is to drop the article in the English translation of the other places where the article is used in the Greek; and this, it should be noted, is a common practice in Greek: putting in an article in the Greek when there is no need of it in English. This solves and simplifies the interpretation of this so-called difficult passage. Therefore, in my judgment, the correct translation of this verse is as follows: “ Else what shall they do that are being baptized for dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then being baptized for dead?” In other words, the argument here is from the significance of baptism, for we have in the divine ordinance of baptism an argument for resurrection
T H E K I N G ' S B U S I N E S S
Made with FlippingBook HTML5