Historical Evidences.
The Rev. Wm. Jenks in Commentary says
concerning 1 Cor. 15:29: “But what is this baptism for the dead? It is
necessary to be known, that the apostles’ argument may be understood; whether
it concludes for the thing in dispute universally or only against the particular
persons who were baptized for the dead. But who shall interpret this very
obscure passage, it being not agreed, what is meant by baptism; whether it be
taken in a proper or figurative sense; and if in a proper sense whether it be to
be understood of Christian baptism properly so called, or some other ablution.
And as little is it agreed who are the dead, or in what sense for is to
be taken. . . . Some understand it, of a custom observed, as some of the
ancients tell us among many who professed the Christian name in the first ages
of baptizing some in the name and stead of catechumens dying without baptism.”
In Buck’s Dictionary he says that baptism
for the dead was “a practice formerly in use, when a person dying without
baptism, another was baptized in his stead; thus supposing that God would
accept the baptism of the proxy, as though it had been administered to the
principal. If this can be proved (as some think it can) that this practice was
as early as the days of Paul, it might probably form a solution of those
remarkable words in 1 Cor. 15:29.”
Tertullian, of the second century, in
chapter 48 of his article on the Resurrection, says: “but inasmuch as ‘some are
also baptized for the dead,’ we will see whether there be any good reason for
this. Now it is certain that they adopted this (practice) with such presumption
as made them suppose that the vicarious baptism would be beneficial to the
flesh of another in anticipation of the resurrection; for unless it were a
bodily resurrection, there would no pledge secured by this process of corporeal
baptism. ‘Why are they then baptized for the dead?’ Paul asks, unless the
bodies rise again which are thus baptized? For it is not the soul which is
sanctified by the baptismal bath.”
Smith in his Dictionary of the Bible
says upon this subject, that Tertullian gives an account of “a custom of vicarious
baptism as existing among the Marcionites; and Chrysostom relates of the same,
that when one of their catechumens (probationers) died without baptism,” they
used to ask some living man if he wished to be baptized for the departed, and
on his reply “Yes” they so baptized him. He also says: “Epiphanius relates a
similar custom among the Corinthians which he said prevailed from fear that in
the resurrection those should suffer punishment who had not been baptized. The
question naturally occurs, Did Paul allude to a custom of this kind? . . . If
so, he no doubt adduced it as an argument to the situation. ‘If the dead rise
not at all, what benefit do they expect who baptize vicariously for the dead.’
The greater number of modern commentators have adopted this as the simplest and
most rational sense of the apostles’ words. Chrysostom believes the apostle to
refer to the profession of faith in baptism, part of which was, ‘I believe in
the resurrection of the dead.’ The former interpretation commends its simplicity.”
(G. T. Griffiths, The Instructor; A Synopsis of the Faith and Doctrines of
The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints [1893], 139-40)