コリントの信徒への手紙一15:29-34 1 Corinthians 15:29-34,
死者が決して復活しないのなら、なぜ死者のために洗礼など受けるのですか。 （一コリント15:29）
私たちは「死者のために洗礼を受ける」ということが、コリント教会において行われていたということに驚かされます。つまり、洗礼を受けることなく死んだ人のために、生きている人が代わりに洗礼を受けるということが行われていたということです。
パウロはそれを認めているのでしょうか。必ずしも全面的に否定してはいないようですが、かと言ってそれを積極的に肯定してもいないようです。人はキリストを信じる信仰によって神に義とされ救われるというのが、パウロの基本的な考え方です。ですから、キリストを信じないで死んだ人の代わりに、生きているだれかが洗礼を受けることによって死んだ人が救われるということを、パウロが認めていたとは考えられません。また、そのような考え方や習慣が、聖書の他の箇所や古代の教会に存在したかと言えば、存在していません。ですから、「死者のために洗礼を受ける」というのは、コリント教会独特の習慣であったのでしょう。もしコリント教会で「死者のために洗礼を受ける」ということが行われていて、パウロもそれを黙認していたとすれば、次のような状況ではなかったかと推測できるのです。それは、キリストを信じる信仰はもっていたけれども洗礼は受けていなかった人が死んだ場合に、親しい人や家族がその人の代わりに洗礼を受けるということが、死後の手続きとしてなされていたのではないか、ということです。これはあくまで推測にすぎませんが、そのような可能性はあるでしょう。
すでに死んだ人にとっては、救いとは終わりの日の最後の審判のときに永遠の命の体に復活することです。ですから、今述べたような事情で、コリント教会において「死者のために洗礼を受ける」ということが行われていたとしても、「死者が決して復活しないのなら」「死者のために洗礼を受ける」ことは意味がないことになります。つまり、パウロはコリント教会の一部の信徒たちが主張しているように「死者が決して復活しないのなら」、コリント教会の中で行われていること自体が無意味なものになるということを指摘するために、29節のようなことを書いたのです。「死者のために洗礼を受ける」ことを積極的に認めようとしてこのように書いたのではありません。（4月28日の説教より）
I believe that human beings live their lives in pursuit of happiness. Article 13 of the Constitution of Japan states: “All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs.” So what then is the pursuit of happiness? Some people believe that the pursuit of happiness is the same as the pursuit of pleasure. This is the so-called hedonism.
The ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus is regarded as the originator of hedonism. Epicurus, who lived from around 341 to 270 BC, believed that pleasure is the beginning and the end of a happy life. In other words, he believed that pleasure is the good and the purpose of life. However, if the subsequent discomfort is greater than the pleasure that an action produces, then that action should not be chosen. Epicurus classified human needs into three main categories. These are: first, the natural and necessary desire for friendship, health, food, clothing and shelter; second, the natural but unnecessary desire for mansions, sumptuous food and a luxurious life; and third, the desire for fame and power, which is neither natural nor necessary. He argued that it is better to pursue only the natural and necessary desires of these and to live a life free from pain and fear. He also considered it good to pursue the quiet, unmoved, calm and immovable mind that thus arises.
Thus, Epicurus’ thinking was deep in its own way and was not about the pursuit of temporary pleasures. However, it was often misinterpreted as an affirmation of a carefree and immoral life in pursuit of the fulfilment of appetites, sexual desires and other lusts. Even today, the term “epicurean” can refer to a person who pursues sensual and ephemeral pleasures or a person who is so-called “epicurean.” When you think about it, it is impossible to classify human desires into natural and non-natural ones. When a person makes the people around him/her unhappy in an attempt to fulfil his/her own needs, it is normal for that person to consider his/her own needs as natural. It is because they think that this much is normal that they pursue the fulfilment of their own needs. Therefore, it must be said that the way of Epicurus’ thinking, although it sounds plausible in theory, is in fact incapable of guiding human life properly.
It is not known to what extent the Corinthians at the time of Paul’s ministry accepted the way of Epicurus’ thinking. However, considering that Corinth was a commercial city with a thriving trade, where people gathered to pursue business success, and that there was a temple dedicated to Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love and beauty, and many temple prostitutes, it is easy to imagine that so-called hedonism permeated the minds and lives of the people. As we have discussed, the church in Corinth had issues concerning money and the sexuality of men and women, and the secular way of thinking and living in the city of Corinth had also infiltrated the church. Nevertheless, there was a tendency for the believers of the Corinthian church to have a false confidence that they were on a higher spiritual level. In chapter 4:8 of this letter, Paul writes to the believers of the Corinthian church, “Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! Without us you have become kings!” This is a criticism against the believers of Corinthian church, pointing out that they had already thought themselves to be spiritually satisfied and already spiritually rich. In other words, they thought that they had already been transferred to a new world beyond this world by having received God’s Holy Spirit. They assumed that they had transcended the world and were spiritually fulfilled and rich. They argued that since they were already spiritually fulfilled, there was no need for a bodily resurrection on the Last Day. This also resulted in a denial of the actual resurrection of Christ.
Verse 29 of today’s passage contains something that is difficult for us to understand. In verse 29 Paul says, “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?” “Otherwise” would mean without God’s saving work, which begins with Christ’s resurrection and is completed when Christ destroys the power of death, as described in verses 20-28. In short, as paraphrased in verse 29: “If the dead are not raised at all.” The question is then repeated: “What do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead?” and “Why are people baptized on their behalf?” That is, Paul is trying to say that “if the dead are not raised at all,” then “being baptized on behalf of the dead” makes no sense.
We are surprised that “being baptized on behalf of the dead” was practised in the Corinthian church. This means that for those who had died without being baptised, a living person was being baptised in their place. Does Paul approve of this? He does not necessarily deny it outright, but neither does he positively affirm it. Paul’s basic view is that a person is justified and saved by faith in Christ. It is therefore inconceivable that Paul would have accepted that a dead person could be saved by someone alive being baptised in place of a dead person who did not believe in Christ. Nor does such an idea or practice exist elsewhere in the Bible or in the ancient church. Therefore, “being baptized on behalf of the dead” must have been a custom unique to the Corinthian church. If “being baptized on behalf of the dead” was practised in the Corinthian church, and Paul tacitly approved of it, we can assume that the situation would have been as follows. If a person died who had faith in Christ but had not been baptised, a close relative or family member might have been baptised in his or her place as a post-mortem procedure. This is only speculation, but such a speculation is possible.
For those who have already died, salvation means resurrection to a body of eternal life at the Last Judgment on the Last Day. So, even if “being baptized on behalf of the dead” was practised in the Corinthian church under the circumstances just described, it would make no sense to “be baptized on behalf of the dead” “if the dead are not raised at all.” In other words, Paul wrote what he did in verse 29 to point out that “if the dead are not raised at all,” as some of the believers of Corinthian church claimed, then what was being done within the Corinthian church itself would be meaningless. He did not write this way to actively approve of ‘“being baptized on behalf of the dead.”
In the verses 30-32 that follow, Paul makes a strong case, based on his own experience, that there is the resurrection of the dead.
And why are we putting ourselves in danger every hour? I die every day! That is as certain, brothers and sisters, as my boasting of you—a boast that I make in Christ Jesus our Lord. If with merely human hopes I fought with wild animals at Ephesus, what would I have gained by it? If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die” (NRSV).
Paul was constantly risking his life while evangelising. As we read in the Acts of the Apostles, Paul was often persecuted for preaching Christ. He was put in prison and almost killed. As a result of his risky evangelism, some people believed in Christ in Corinth and the Christian church was established there. The presence of believers in Corinth would not have been possible without Paul’s faith in the resurrection of the dead. “My boasting of you—a boast that I make in Christ Jesus our Lord” means the boast that you have become believers in Christ and members of the church by the resurrected Christ himself working through me, Paul. Paul himself was not living by the power of the old ego, as he said, “I die every day,” but by the resurrection power of the Holy Spirit from the resurrected Christ.
The statement, “with merely human hopes I fought with wild animals at Ephesus, what would I have gained by it?” indicates that Paul was in great danger in the city of Ephesus. Paul wrote this letter while he was in Ephesus, the capital of the province of Asia, on his third missionary journey, and in his second letter to the Corinthians, written after this letter, Paul writes as follows.
For we do not want you to be unaware, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead (2 Corinthians 1:8-9).
In Ephesus, Paul says he was severely persecuted and “we felt that we had received the sentence of death.” This may refer to the disturbances led by the silversmith Demetrius, described in Acts 19:21-40.
Ephesus had a large temple dedicated to the Greek goddess Artemis. Demetrius, a silversmith who profited from making and selling silver shrines of Artemis, said as follows.
And you see and hear that not only in Ephesus but in almost all of Asia this Paul has persuaded and turned away a great many people, saying that gods made with hands are not gods. And there is danger not only that this trade of ours may come into disrepute but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis may be counted as nothing, and that she may even be deposed from her magnificence, she whom all Asia and the world worship (Acts 19:26-27).
The people became very angry and shouted, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!” causing chaos in the town. The commotion was quieted by the Ephesian town clerk ordering the crowd to be dismissed, but if it had continued, Paul would have been killed by the crowd. Thus, there were strong forces in Ephesus that opposed the gospel of Christ. Paul may be referring to the fact that he had to face such forces by saying, “I fought with wild animals at Ephesus.”
He asks, “If with merely human hopes I fought with wild animals at Ephesus, what would I have gained by it?” This is, of course, a question that elicits the answer “nothing!” In other words, Paul took such a risk not from human motives, but from the motive of faith, because he had received Christ’s resurrection life. If Christ’s resurrection is not true, and if believing in Christ does not entitle one to Christ’s resurrection life, then Paul, like ordinary Greeks, would have said: “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” It was not only the ancient Greeks who had this attitude. In fact, among the Israelites of Old Testament times, there were also people who thought in this way. In the Old Testament, Isaiah 22:13 describes people who continued to sin without repentance, saying, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” And many people today still think like that. Without faith in the resurrection of the dead, people live according to so-called hedonism.
In fact, some members of the Corinthian church fell into such secular hedonism. In addition to the problems of money and the sexuality of men and women in the Corinthian church, there was the problem that only those who were financially rich enjoyed eating and drinking in the church. That is, “in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk” (1 Corinthians 11:21). At the root of such problems must have been unbelief, which denied the resurrection of the dead. Therefore, Paul calls on the believers of the Corinthian church not to fellowship with believers who deny the resurrection of the dead, but to straighten themselves out. In verses 33 and 34, he says harshly, “Do not be deceived: ‘Bad company ruins good morals.’ Wake up from your drunken stupor, as is right, and do not go on sinning. For some have no knowledge of God. I say this to your shame.” In other words, he says that those who deny the resurrection of the dead are those who “have no knowledge of God.”
As I said at the beginning of today’s sermon, the pursuit of happiness is a human right. However, it is easy for human beings to fall into the trap of thinking that the pursuit of happiness is ultimately the pursuit of pleasure. And even if, like Epicurus, we say that we pursue pleasure so that only natural and necessary desires are satisfied, we end up justifying our various desires and becoming slaves to our desires. In contrast, Paul sought and received “resurrection” life in the midst of such suffering as “I die every day!” And by proclaiming the cross and resurrection of Christ, he sought to share “resurrection” life with many people. For Paul, the pursuit of happiness was the pursuit of “resurrection” life. What are we Christians in Japan pursuing in our lives? Let us live our lives on earth not in pursuit of empty pleasures, but in pursuit of everlasting “resurrection” life.