some who had died. Yet another view postulates that such baptism refers to young

converts who took the place of older brethren who had died. The difficulty lies in the

preposition huper, "on behalf of". With regard to the Mormon view, there is no evidence

that a rite of this kind arose at any time in the first century. There is nothing like it till the

second century and then only in connection with heretics like the Marcionites, and in any

case, knowing the Apostle's horror of false teaching, we should expect him to expose its

falsity had it occurred at Corinth.

One thing is quite clear, namely that water baptism, symbolizing death, burial, and

resurrection, would have no point if there was no resurrection. The rite would have been

empty and meaningless. Dr. E. W. Bullinger suggests there is the figure Ellipsis here and

by supplying the words "it is" as the translators have done in Rom. 8: 34, the verse

then reads "What shall they do who are being baptized? It is on behalf of the dead if the

dead rise not at all". He points out that nekros `dead', with the article as is the verse we

are considering, usually means dead bodies, whereas without the article it refers to dead

people.

We believe this to be the best solution of the difficulty that confronts us in verse 29. It

fits perfectly with the context and is in harmony with the verse that follows, "why do we

also stand in jeopardy every hour?" What point would there be in incurring continual

dangers that accompanied his apostleship if death was the end of everything? "In death

oft" he wrote in his second letter to the Corinthian church (II Cor. 11: 23). We come to

another problem in verse 32. What did he mean by fighting with beasts at Ephesus? He

could not have been exposed literally to wild animals in the arena unless he had lost his

Roman citizenship, of which there is no evidence whatsoever. It looks as though he was

using it metaphorically of his enemies. "I die daily", he declared, that is, he was daily

exposed to the risk of death, and if "merely as a man" he faced this then there was no

point in it without the Christian hope.

Heroditus, of Ephesus, had described his countrymen as "wild beasts" 400 years

before. Likewise Epimenedes called the Cretans "beasts" (Titus 1: 12), and Ignatius, later

on, described himself as "fighting with wild beasts, being bound to ten leopards" by

which he meant a detachment of soldiers who were guarding him. The whole point is

that such experiences were valueless if there was not the hope of resurrection; why not

seek to avoid all such difficulty and danger? Why not "eat and drink, for tomorrow we

die"? (32). This is a quotation from Isa. 22: 13, but with a different context. Note Paul

does not add the words "and be merry", as many do who misquote it without the solid

hope of eternal life. There is little to be merry about in a world that is dominated by sin,

death and disappointment.