Journal: Review and Expositor
Volume: RevExp 99:3 (Summer 2002)
Article: Mediated, Mediation, Unmediated: 1 Corinthians 15:29: the History of Interpretation, and the Current State of Biblical Studies
Author: Adam C. English

Mediated, Mediation, Unmediated: 1 Corinthians 15:29: the History of Interpretation, and the Current State of Biblical Studies

Adam C. English

[Adam C. English is a PhD Candidate at Baylor University in Waco, Texas.]

Almost any critical commentary you pick up these days will provide some sort of “history of interpretation” for each verse studied. Usually, it runs like this: Chrysostom says X, Calvin says Y, I say Z. When surveying past interpretations, the question is: What is Chrysostom’s or Calvin’s final answer about this or that verse? Do they agree or disagree with my view? Modern commentators treat their exegetical predecessors as ballots to be counted, either for or against a particular interpretation. They have altogether neglected what is most instructive about our predecessors: method, style, logic, and overall theological intentions. Yet, this is where the richness of the Western exegetical heritage is located.

If we slow down and notice the hermeneutical methodology undergirding historical and even contemporary commentators, we will find certain interpretive patterns emerging. I am not referring to patterns of agreement over the meaning of this or that verse, rather patterns of interpretive priorities and methodologies. Yet, we will also observe subtle shifts in these patterns from early to medieval to modem modes of exegesis. In this study, we will probe a few notable Western1 commentators from the patristic/early medieval era, the Reformation, and the modern era with regards to 1 Corinthians 15:29 in order to uncover these patterns and shifts. The patristic/early medieval interpreters will be considered under the heading “mediated,” the Reformers under “mediation,” and modern commentators under “unmediated.” These terms will be defined in the context of a survey of the three eras and their various interpretations of 1 Corinthians 15:29.

RevExp 99:3 (Summer 2002) p. 420

As mentioned above, the verse to be used as a test case for my thesis is 1 Corinthians 15:29, οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν. I will not attempt to argue for or against any particular interpretation of this phrase. For the purposes of this investigation, it really does not matter what the correct or proper understanding of this verse is—if there even is one. The verse was chosen because it is a fascinating study in ambiguity.2 It is usually translated as “baptism on behalf of the dead.” But, what does it mean? Such a rendering, though literal, seems prima facie to be at odds with Paul’s other teachings on baptism, which emphasize the participatory nature of this key sign of grace and Christian initiation. And yet, it is clear from the context that Paul is not making a doctrinal pronouncement on baptism in 1 Corinthians 15:29. The appearance of οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν. seems to have no normative function whatsoever; it is merely an argumentum ad hoc. Yet, its meaning has not been resolved by grammar, archaeology, other ancient texts, or (least of all) co...