The Mysteries, Resurrection, and 1 Corinthians 15: Comparative Methodology and Contextual Exegesis

Abstract

The Mysteries, Resurrection, and 1 Corinthians 15 focuses on the extent to which Paul’s understanding of the resurrection of the dead was affected by Greco-Roman cults. To accomplish her task, Moore delineates in her introduction what the concepts of afterlife and resurrection mean and the limitations of the study. “Afterlife” encompasses “all possibilities beyond the grave,” which includes resurrection, immortality of the soul, and transmigration of souls (p. xvi). Resurrection refers strictly to restoration of a physical body. The study is limited to a comparison between the Pauline understanding of resurrection and the most representative mystery cults of first-century Corinth: the Eleusinian mysteries, the local cult of Melikertes-Palaimon, and the cult of Isis.In ch. 1, Moore provides a brief literature review of previous comparisons between the mysteries practiced in Corinth and 1 Cor 15. While some scholars, such as Marvin Meyer, conclude that mysteries share enough of a cultural milieu that emergent Christianity could be considered a form of “mystery,” others, such as A. J. M. Wedderburn and N. T. Wright disagree, arguing that the Christian idea of resurrection is fundamentally at odds with the concept of the mysteries.In chs. 2 and 3, Moore examines literary and iconographic evidence providing information on the views of adherents of the Eleusinian mysteries and the cult of Isis. In the second chapter’s discussion of the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, Demeter’s daughter Persephone was captured by Hades and confined to the underworld. Demeter grieved over her daughter at the Temple of Eleusis. Eventually, Persephone was reunited with Demeter but needed to spend four months each year in Hades, resulting in infertility during the winter season. On her return to Hades, Persephone received special honors. Later literature, including Aristophanes’s Frogs, Plato’s Republic, and Pausanias’s Description of Greece, described how initiates of the Eleusinian Mysteries believed that participation in the cult’s rituals would enable them to share in Persephone’s honor, resulting in an enjoyable, yet nonphysical, afterlife.In ch. 3, Moore asserts that the Isis cult promised adherents a blissful afterlife. According to literary sources, such as Josephus and Apuleius, Isis’s reign extended to Hades, and “her protection of her initiates extends to that realm” (p. 66). Ancient authors often identified or equated Isis with Demeter, so that Isis’s devotees shared similar expectations to those of the Eleusinian cult. Here, Moore needs to exhibit more care in her analysis, because in antiquity comparison of religious systems differed from equating those systems, as Josephus’s descriptions of Jewish sects as “philosophies” illustrates.Chapter 4 describes the practice of the mysteries in Corinth. Although Pausanias mentions a shrine to Isis on the road to the Acrocorinth, only Apuleius described her connection with the mysteries in the region of Corinth. On the other hand, grave inscriptions indicate Corinthian devotion to the cult of Demeter/Persephone, as represented in the Eleusinian mysteries. In addition, we have evidence of a local mystery of Melikertes-Palamaion, whose rituals included the ritual reenactment of his. This ritual also indicates that the cult’s “focus on the underworld and afterlife” (p. 90). This cult also understood afterlife as enjoying special status in Hades.Chapter 5 compares Paul’s understanding of the afterlife with the mysteries. Moore concludes that, while Paul’s views on the afterlife shared with the mysteries a common hope of life after death, his hope is fundamentally different from that of the Corinthian cults. Paul’s hope entailed participating in Christ’s resurrection, whereas the cults focused on participation in cultic ritual. However, in 1 Cor 15:29, where Paul addresses “baptism for the dead,” Paul appears to share his recipients’ understanding of the afterlife. Moore, however, contends that this practice was a funerary ritual to assist the dead on their way to the afterlife. Whatever may have been his personal views on the ritual, Paul used it to illustrate his point about the resurrection of the dead, since he asserted the practice made no sense if it were disconnected with hope in the resurrection (pp. 121–22).In conclusion, Moore has indicated the different religious matrixes of the Corinthian cults of the Eleusinian mysteries, Melikertes-Palamaion, and Isis. Her exegesis of “baptism for the dead” (1 Cor 15:29) is helpful. Nevertheless, she has neglected some problematic exegetical issues. In particular, she does not address the question whether the resurrection appearances of 1 Cor 15:3–11 were physical events or visionary experiences. Likewise, how does she answer those who say that the phrase “spiritual body” of 15:35–52 refers to some sort of noncorporeal existence? Finally, she may wish to consider expanding her comparison of the mysteries and Christian faith beyond 1 Corinthians. For example, an analysis of the mysteries of Samothrace compared with 1 Thess 4–5.