Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Mediation, Mediator

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Mediation, Mediator” utilice nuestra app.

Mediation Mediator

For mediation in paganism and in the OT see W. F. Adeneys article in Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) . For mediation in the Gospels see L. Pullans article in Dict. of Christ and the Gospels . While no formal discussion of these matters occurs here, one cannot ignore the importance of a full knowledge of the OT teaching and the possible influence of the philosophy and religion of the Graeco-Roman world upon the minds of the apostolic teachers of Christianity. It is easy to go to extremes in either direction. But the study of comparative religion does not dim the glory of Christ. The modern Christian rather claims that all the true light that lighteth every man comes from Christ (Joh 1:9). One can welcome all truth that may be taken up into Christianity (cf. C. Clemen, Primitive Christianity and its Non-Jewish Sources, 1912; H. A. A. Kennedy, St. Paul and the Mystery-Religions, 1913). It is hardly likely, however, that Jesus Himself felt the influence of this non-Jewish teaching. His conception of His own sacrificial death finds its roots in the OT, and appears in the oldest form of the Synoptic Gospels (Mar 10:45, Mat 20:28; see also Mar 10:38, Mat 26:28). It may be said at once that the central place here given to the atoning death of Christ for the sins of men, emphasized also in the Fourth Gospel (Joh 1:29; Joh 3:16; Joh 12:32, etc.), is just that conception of the relative value of the Cross in the mediatorial work of Christ found in Acts and the rest of the NT. It is embedded in the primitive Christian tradition too deeply to be a mere theological interpretation of the apostles, read back into the thought of Christ (see J. Denney, The Death of Christ, 1902, and Jesus and the Gospel4, 1913, where the writer powerfully argues that Christianity is justified in the mind of Christ). Mediation lies at the heart of all religion which assumes human sin and a righteous God who will forgive the sinner. The consciousness of sin demands a mediator to plead the cause of man with God; hence the existence of the priesthood in all religions worthy of the name. Paganism has its redeemer gods, but Christianity is rooted in the OT. The head of the family was first the priest, then the patriarch of the tribe. Then the Aaronic priesthood, and in particular the high priest, exemplified the mediatorial office. There was also prophetic and angelic mediation (Act 7:53, Gal 3:19). Mediation took the form of intercession, of covenant, or of sacrifice. Christ sums up the whole mediatorial office as prophet, priest, and sacrifice. The term mediator () or middleman occurs once of Moses (Gal 3:19 f.) as the mediator between God and the people in the giving of the Law. The other instances all refer to Christ, the one mediator between God and man (1Ti 2:5), the mediator of a better covenant (Heb 8:6), the mediator of a new () covenant (Heb 9:15; in Heb 12:24). In Heb 6:17 God interposed with an oath ( ; here the notion of middleman recedes). But the notion of mediation is far more common in the NT than the use of the word would imply. It is indeed regulative of the thought of the entire NT, as can be easily seen.

1. The Acts.-It is the living Christ, active in leading the disciples (Act 1:1 f.), who meets us in the Acts. He was received up (Act 1:2), but He will come again (Act 1:11), and meanwhile His Name has power (Act 3:6). Jesus is Lord (, Act 1:6; Act 1:21), and is addressed in prayer (Act 1:24, Act 7:59) after the Ascension. Peter on the Day of Pentecost boldly interprets Jesus as the Messiah (Act 2:31) of whose resurrection from the dead they were all witnesses (Act 2:32). He is at (or by) the right hand of the Father, and is actively engaged in His Messianic work, of which the outpouring of the Holy Spirit is one evidence (Act 2:33). The death of Jesus is not an obstacle to His Messiahship. Peter does not here formulate a doctrine of the Atonement nor specifically mention the mediatorial work of Jesus, but he calls upon all the house of Israel to understand that God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified (Act 2:36). On the strength of the claim that Jesus is both Lord and Messiah as shown by His resurrection, Peter urges repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ. This address at Pentecost, as reported by Luke, is the first formal interpretation on the part of the disciples of the significance of the work of Christ. It is too early for the full perspective to be drawn, but at heart the message is the same as we find in the later years. Jesus Christ is central in Christianity. The place of the Cross is recognized, though not fully expounded. The Lordship of Jesus the Messiah is accented as the ground for repentance. Already the reproach of the Cross was felt, and Peter justifies the suffering of Christ as part of Gods purpose as shown in the prophets (Act 3:18), though not excusing the sin of Christs murderers (Act 3:13). Peter also calls Jesus Gods servant Jesus (Act 3:13), the Holy and Righteous One (Act 3:14), the Prince of life (Act 3:15), a Prophet like unto Moses (Act 3:22), the fulfilment of the covenant promise to Abraham for the blessing of all the families of earth (Act 3:25). The nearest statement to the later interpretation of redemption on the basis of the death of Christ comes in Act 3:18 ff., where he says, Repent ye therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out. Here therefore points back to Act 3:18, which presents the necessity of the sufferings of Christ, in particular His death on the cross. The clearness of Peters conception of the power of the living Christ appears in Act 4:10-12, where he claims that the impotent man is made whole in the name of Jesus, and that Jesus is the Stone, rejected by the Jewish builders, but made the Head of the Corner by God in His Kingdom and the only hope of salvation for men everywhere (cf. 1Pe 2:4-8). Here the mediatorial work of Christ comes out sharply, and it is astonishing to note Peters courageous boldness before the Sanhedrin. There is thus no doubt as to the immediate interpretation of the Risen Christ as Lord and Saviour from sin. His death was not of a piece with that of Stephen and James, who died as martyrs. The death of Christ was part of Gods foreseen plan (Act 2:23), was predicted by the OT prophets (Act 3:18), was the basis of repentance and forgiveness of sin (Act 3:19), and, with His resurrection, proved Him to be the sole hope of salvation (Act 4:10-12).

The absence of the later technical terminology in these early addresses is proof of the substantial correctness of Lukes report. The reference to Isaiah 53 (Servant Jesus) is natural, and has the essence of Christs mediation, though the idea is not worked out. In his address to the household of Cornelius Peter pointedly says: That through his name every one that believeth on him shall receive remission of sins (Act 10:43). He is also the Judge of quick and dead (Act 10:42). Peter also says that the Jews shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in like manner as Gentiles (Act 15:11). Stephen called Jesus the Righteous One (Act 7:52), and died saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit (Act 7:59). Immediately on his conversion Saul proclaimed Jesus, that he is the Son of God (Act 9:20). At Antioch in Pisidia St. Paul announces the heart of his message about Jesus: Through this man is proclaimed unto you remission of sins: and by him every one that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses (Act 13:38 f.). From this position St. Paul never swerved. His collision with the Judaizers (Acts 15) turned on the sufficiency of the work of Christ to save, apart from the Jewish ceremonialism. To the Philippian jailer he preached salvation through faith in the Lord Jesus (Act 16:30 f.). On the Areopagus he set forth the Risen Jesus as the Judge of the world, and urged repentance for that reason (Act 17:30 f.). At Ephesus he interpreted the preaching of John the Baptist as urging faith in Jesus as the hope of salvation (Act 19:4). The elders of Ephesus he urged to feed the church of God (correct text), which he purchased with his own blood (Act 20:28), where at once the deity of Jesus is asserted and also the atoning nature of His death. Even Festus understood that St. Paul affirmed Jesus to be alive (Act 25:19). To the Jews in Rome St. Paul spoke concerning Jesus (Act 28:23) and called his message this salvation of God (Act 28:28), which the Gentiles at least will hear. The conception of Jesus as Mediator thus runs all through the Acts from the very beginning.

2. The Pauline Epistles

(a) The First Group (1 and 2 Thess.).-At bottom the same conception of Christ appears here as in the later Epistles. The work of Christ comes out incidentally, but very clearly: For God appointed us not unto wrath, but unto the obtaining of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him (1Th 5:9 f.). St. Pauls whole gospel of grace is here set forth though in somewhat general terms- , though WH [Note: H Westcott-Horts Greek Testament.] give in the margin. These two prepositions ( and ) differ in etymology (around and over), but in the Koine are sometimes used quite in the same resultant sense (Moulton, Grammar of NT Greek, vol. i., Prolegomena, 1908, p. 105). There is no getting away from the idea that the death of Christ lies at the root of the obtaining of salvation on our part, though St. Paul does not here explain the relation of Christs mediatorial work to our redemption. Another general phrase appears in 1Th 1:10 : Jesus, who delivereth us from the wrath to come, , . Here the historical Jesus is pictured as the present deliverer from the wrath-a complete deliverance (). In 2Th 2:14 St. Paul says that we realize Gods purpose through our gospel. He does not, of course, mean to put mere creed in the place of Christ. Already we find the mystic term in Christ (1Th 4:16). No objective work on the part of Christ or man, no ordinance and no creed, can take the place of vital union with God in Christ, in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth (2Th 2:13).

(b) The Second Group (1 and 2 Cor., Gal., Rom.).-We may still follow Lightfoots grouping in spite of the doubt about the date of Galatians. Here the material is very rich. In 1Co 1:30 St. Paul sums up his idea of the mediation of Christ: But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from God, both righteousness and sanctification and redemption. Thus Christ is shown to be the wisdom of God. St. Paul magnifies the cross of Christ (1Co 1:17). His message is the word of the cross (1Co 1:18). We preach Christ crucified (1Co 1:23). For I determined to know nothing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified (1Co 2:2). The death of Christ occupies the central place in St. Pauls message about salvation. He is aware that the Jews find it a stumbling-block and the Greeks foolishness, but he claims that it is Gods wisdom in a mystery (1Co 2:7), little as the philosophers supposed it to be true. The blood of Christ makes an appeal for holy living. He is our passover sacrifice (1Co 5:7), in His name we were washed and justified (1Co 6:11), we were bought with a price (1Co 6:20, 1Co 7:23), and owe a life of holiness to Christ. It is thus no mere mechanical notion with St. Paul, but a vital union with Christ on the basis of His atoning death on the cross. Christ died for the sake of () the weak brother, who for that reason deserves consideration (1Co 8:11). His death for man has glorified humanity. This intimate bond between the disciple and his Lord, the blood-bond, is set forth by the ordinances of baptism and communion in a far wider sense than was contemplated by the mystery-religions and their redeemer-gods (1Co 10:2 ff., (1Co 10:16-22; 1Co 11:24-26). Perhaps by in 1Co 10:3 f. St. Paul means supernatural (Denney, Death of Christ, p. 134 f.), but he does not teach that the ordinances impart the new life in Christ. They are symbols of the work of Christ made effective in the soul by the Holy Spirit, not the means for procuring the redemptive grace. Jesus Christ, not baptism and not the Lords Supper, is the Mediator. St. Paul expressly places baptism on a lower plane than the gospel which he preached (1Co 1:15-17), which he could not have done if it had per se saving efficacy or was the means of obtaining the benefit of Christs mediatorial work. He interprets the Supper as symbolic, picturing the Lords death till he come (1Co 11:26), which ye thereby proclaim (). The ordinances are thus preachers of the death of Christ for sinners and of the new life in Christ. The cup proclaims the new covenant in my blood, as St. Paul quotes from Jesus (1Co 11:25), and is to be drunk in remembrance of me. The worthy celebration of the ordinance consists in discerning the body of Christ (1Co 11:29) and not making a mere meal of the emblems. All believers are members of the mystical body of Christ the Head (1Co 12:12 ff.). St. Pauls gospel, in short, has as its first word that Christ died for sins (1Co 15:3). The preposition is (over, on behalf of). This death would have been in vain had He not risen from the dead (1Co 15:17). But the resurrection of Christ is guarantee of His power to save, so that in Christ shall all be made alive (1Co 15:22). So then the Christian, the one in Christ ( ), is victorious over sin and death through our Lord Jesus Christ (1Co 15:57).

In 2 Cor. St. Paul touches the very heart of his message about salvation in Christ. The challenge of the Judaizing sacramentalism called forth this passionate emphasis on the sufficiency of the redemptive and reconciling work of Christ. The sufferings of Christ abound unto us, (2Co 1:5). Here we have the notion of example rather than of redemption. St. Paul suffers as Jesus did. So as to 2Co 4:10, always bearing about in the body the dying of Jesus. His sufferings are killing him as they killed his Master (Denney, Death of Christ, p. 139). See also 2Co 4:8. The face of Jesus Christ gives the knowledge of Gods glory. But the locus classicus Isa 5:14-21, where the mediatorial work of Christ receives formal discussion. St. Paul is willing to be considered beside himself (Isa 5:13) in this matter (cf. 1Co 1:23). The love which Christ has for St. Paul keeps him in love (), holds him intact whatever men think of him. Knowing the love of Christ, he deliberately interprets () His death: One died for all, therefore all died, (2Co 5:14). We need not stop to show that can be used where the notion of substitution is present. It is common enough in the ostraca and papyri of the Koine (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, Eng. translation , 1911, p. 153). But see also Joh 11:50, where is explained by . See further Gal 3:13, to be discussed later. Suffice it to say that in 2Co 5:14 the clause, though parenthetical, clearly means that died in the death of Christ and do not have to die in that sense again. Jesus therefore died in their stead. It is not here contended that this notion exhausts the meaning of the death of Christ. St. Paul himself speaks of the mystic crucifixion with Christ (Gal 2:20). No theory can set forth the wealth of meaning in the death of Christ, but St. Paul here places the notion of substitution to the fore. Love prompted this wonderful gift. God carries on the work of reconciliation (). This is done through Christ (2Co 5:18) and in Christ (2Co 5:19). God offers Christ to the world as supreme proof of His love and as the ground of reconciliation. It is all of God (2Co 5:18), and He even made Christ to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Christ (2Co 5:21). No sin actually touched Christ, but He bore our sins as the sacrifice for sin that we might go free. So then St. Paul bears the message of reconciliation to men as the ambassador of Christ. All that he has said elsewhere is in accord with this central passage. See also 2Co 8:9, where the voluntary poverty of Christ in place of His pre-existent state of riches in heaven was for our sakes (), that we through his poverty ( , instrumental case) might become rich. Here the whole earthly life of Christ is brought into view, and not merely His death, as constituting the mediatorial work of the Saviour. Hence 2Co 9:15, where Jesus is the unspeakable gift, . St. Paul is positive about his conception of Jesus-so much so that he calls the Jesus of the Judaizers another Jesus, , and that gospel a different gospel, (2Co 11:4). Only one historic Jesus in the sense of St. Paul is possible, so that he uses , not .

The aim of Galatians is to show that all Christianity is contained in the Cross; the Cross is the generative principle of everything Christian in the life of man (Denney, Death of Christ, p. 152). The mediatorial work of Christ is set over against the legalistic bondage of the Judaizing gospel which St. Paul fiercely denounces as not another () gospel, but a different () gospel (Gal 1:7), in reality a complete departure from the grace of God in Christ (Gal 5:4). In Gal 1:3 f. St. Paul describes our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us out of this present evil world. Here we have in the text and in the margin of WH [Note: H Westcott-Horts Greek Testament.] s text before . Justification before God is obtained by faith in Jesus Christ, not by works of the Law (Gal 2:16). This is the truth of the gospel, the liberty in Christ as opposed to the bondage of the Law (Gal 2:3-5; Gal 2:14 f.), the weak and beggarly rudiments of the world (Gal 4:3; Gal 4:9 ff.). The life of faith which St. Paul now lives in Christ, who loved and gave himself up for me ( ), means that Christ has charge of his life, and St. Paul is in a mystic sense crucified with Christ (Gal 2:20). Christ did an objective work for St. Paul, but it has become effective through the subjective surrender to Christ, even identification with Him. A notable passage Isa 3:13, Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us. The meaning is plain enough. He is speaking not simply for Jews, but for all. The curse that came upon Christ is death. By Christs death He brought us out from under ( ) the curse of the law. We escape spiritual death because Christ received in Himself the curse of the law for sin, though He Himself had no sin. The prepositions give the same picture. Those who rely on the law are under () a curse. Christ steps under that curse and over () us. Thus we are rescued out from under () the curse and go free. That is the inevitable teaching of St. Paul in this passage. It presents clearly the notion of substitution. It may be remarked that does not itself mean instead any more than does; that is a secondary notion with both prepositions. In the Koine it is quite common with and is not unknown in the older Greek. In Christ Jesus therefore the blessing of Abraham comes upon the Gentiles (Gal 3:14). Christ is the seed promised to Abraham long before the Law (Gal 3:16-19). Christ is the schoolmaster, while the Law was merely the paedagogue to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith (Gal 3:24). Through faith in Christ we become sons of God in the full sense of sonship (Gal 3:28). The very incarnation of Christ, Gods Son, born of a woman, born under the law, made it possible for Him to redeem us from the Law and for us to receive the adoption of sons and to have the privilege of sons and heirs and say Abba, Father (Gal 4:4-6). Christ, and Christ alone, set us free and called us for freedom (Gal 5:1; Gal 5:13). But liberty is not licence (Gal 5:24), and the Cross of Christ is the glory of St. Paul (Gal 6:14).

Romans gives the same interpretation of the work of Christ as we find in Galatians, though with less passion and vehemence. The wrath of God rests upon both Gentile and Jew because of sin, which consists in violation of what conscience tells one is right (Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20). The Law brought a keener sense of sin, and all the world comes under the judgment of God. The Gentile is without excuse (Rom 1:20), as is the Jew (Rom 2:1) who is first in privilege and in penalty (Rom 2:9 f.). St. Paul expounds his gospel with care in Rom 3:21-31. The failure of man to obtain righteousness made plain the necessity for a revelation of Gods righteousness, and this is found in the gospel and is mediated through faith in Christ (Rom 1:16 f.). Real righteousness is thus apart from Law (Rom 3:21) and is purely of grace (Rom 3:24). God justifies the sinner, declares him righteous () freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, (Rom 3:24). The repetition of the article removes all ground for speculation as to St. Pauls meaning. Christ is thus the Redeemer, the Agent through whom () redemption is secured, and it is a free gift on Gods part, provided the sinner exercises faith in Christ, (Rom 3:25). More exactly St. Paul explains how this redemption is made possible in Christ, that we may obtain the righteousness of God (Rom 3:26), that he might himself be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus. On mans part God requires faith (trust), which involves repentance from sin. This we can understand as proper. But what about the death of Christ as the ground for this free offer of mercy on Gods part? Here we touch the fathomless depths of Gods love and elective grace (Rom 11:33-36). It is all of him, and through him, and unto him (, , ). But St. Paul boldly puts forth the death of Christ as Gods own solution of the problem: whom God set forth, to be a propitiation, through faith, in his blood (Rom 3:25). The middle voice () accents the will of God in the matter. The word , as Deissmann has conclusively shown from the inscriptions (Bible Studies, Eng. translation , 1901, pp. 124-135), means propitiatory sacrifice, neuter adjective as substantive, and is not here used in the sense of cover for the mercy-seat. He brands the old view as one of the most popular, most pregnant with results, and most baneful of all exegetical errors (p. 124). The phrase makes the meaning clear also. It is a propitiation in the blood of Christ, to show his [Gods] righteousness (Rom 3:25). As to how the death of Christ met the requirements of Gods righteousness St. Paul gives us no light. We must let it go at that, save that we see the greatest love in it, in that Christ died for us while we were yet sinners (Rom 5:6-8). Indeed, while we were yet enemies to God (Rom 5:10), He showed His love to us by not sparing His own Son (Rom 8:32), so that we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son (Rom 5:10). The point here is, not that God needed to be reconciled, though He had to remain just when justifying (Rom 3:26), but that we were reconciled to God. Certainly we can understand to some extent the power of the appeal of the death of Christ for us while we were ungodly sinners, enemies of God. There is far more in the great mystery of Christs death than this, but we can at least grasp something of that love for sinners that allowed the sinless Christ to be regarded as sin, and die for sinners, that they might become righteous in Christ (2Co 5:21). The great passage in Rom. (Rom 3:21-31) stands beside that in 2 Cor. (Rom 5:14-21), and they concur. The rest of Romans confirms this view. In Rom 4:25 the resurrection of Jesus is associated with His death. If He had not risen, the Death would have been in vain. We enjoy peace with God through () Jesus Christ, through whom ( ) we have had our access (, introduction) by faith into this grace (Rom 5:1 f.). The reconciliation is accomplished through Christ (Rom 5:11). We shall obtain final salvation because Christ ever lives (Rom 5:10). In some sense parallel with the relation of Adam to the race, Christ stands at the head of all who are redeemed, as the channel of life and grace (Rom 5:12-21). Christ mediates to the believer more grace than Adam did sin and death (Rom 5:20). But this wealth of grace brings obligation to holy living, not to licence (Rom 6:1, Rom 7:6). St. Paul uses the figures of death to sin as symbolized by baptism, the new slavery to God, and marriage to Christ, to illustrate the permanence of the bond with Christ. Jesus Christ set St. Paul free from the bondage of sin and the Law (Rom 7:25, Rom 8:3). God sending His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh condemned mans sin in the flesh of Jesus (Rom 8:3). The absence of the article before makes this interpretation probable. Christ is not merely the Mediator and Redeemer, but He dwells in the Christian (Rom 8:10). We are in Christ and Christ is in us. We are joint-heirs with Christ (Rom 8:17) and destined to be conformed to the image of the Son of God, the First-born among many brethren (Rom 8:29). More than that, Jesus is now the champion of the elect and makes intercession for us at Gods right hand (Rom 8:34). St. Paul defies the universe to lay a charge against the elect, rescued by the death of Christ and preserved by His unchanging love (Rom 8:33-39). It is Gods plan, and He declares us righteous. St. Paul seems to call Christ God in Rom 9:5. Christ died and came to life again that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living (Rom 14:9). So St. Paul interprets in Romans the mystery of the ages (Rom 16:25).

(c) The Third Group (Phil., Philem., Col., Eph.).-We shall treat these Epistles in this order, though the position of Philippians is disputed. These are the Epistles of the first Roman imprisonment. The standpoint of Phil. does not differ essentially from that of Gal. and Romans. St. Paul here emphasizes his notion of life with Christ (Php 1:21). The incarnation and death of Christ are treated as the supreme example of humility (Php 2:5-8). Christ in His pre-incarnate state left a place on an equality with God for the lowliest rank among men and for the shameful death of the Cross. All this brought its consequent exaltation (Php 2:9-11), and thus some light is thrown upon the philosophy of the Cross of Christ. St. Paul uses the language of the mystic to express his passionate devotion to Christ and his purpose to realize all that Christ has in store for him (Php 3:7-16), that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, becoming conformed unto his death (Php 3:10). The very difficulty of his language shows the wealth of meaning in his conception of his personal relation to Christ. Jesus was Mediator, but in no artificial way; rather He had gripped the whole of St. Pauls nature. Christ had become the passion of his life ( , Php 3:13). Christ is the great reality of life to him, . Christ brings all good (Php 4:19).

There is nothing distinctive in Philem. on the subject, though St. Paul urges Philemon to receive the converted runaway slave as a brother beloved in the Lord (Phm 1:16). Thus Christ sets free the slaves of the world.

In Col. and Eph. St. Paul combats the heresies of incipient Gnosticism with perhaps a tinge of the current mystery-religions. The horizon is wider than the Roman Empire or even the earth itself. The whole range of the universe of spirit and matter comes into view, so far as the Ancients conceived it ( ). Already in Rom 8:19-22 the whole creation is represented as being in some sense involved in sin and redemption. The Gnostic philosophy posited matter as essentially evil, and explained the Creation by the existence of subordinate aeons who came in between God and matter. Christ was conceived as one of these aeons. Thus the Person of Christ is forced to the front, and St. Paul interprets Christ in relation to the universe. He places Him on a par with God in nature (Col 1:14), and treats Christ as the Agent and Conserver of the material universe (Col 1:15-17). Thus he answers the degrading view of the Gnostics. Besides, Christ is also the Head of the spiritual universe (Col 1:18-23), that in all things he might have the pre-eminence (Col 1:18). As Creator and Head of all things, as the fullness of God (Col 1:19, Col 2:9), Christ is able to reconcile unto God all things, (Col 1:20). This peace of the universe is made possible by the blood of His Cross (Col 1:20). Here the mediatorial work of Christ is lifted to the highest possible plane (cf. 1Co 15:24-28 for an adumbration of this conception). The triumph of the Cross is emphasized further in Col 2:14 f. The Docetic Gnostics denied the real humanity of Christ, and so St. Paul mentions blood and bodily. The Cerinthian Gnostics separated the Christ from Jesus, and so St. Paul identifies them as one Christ Jesus the Lord (Col 2:6). It is essential for the Christian to hold fast the Head (Col 2:19). The of Col 2:18 is now known to be used, in an inscription in the sanctuary of Claros, of the initiate entering in (cf. The Independent, 1913, p. 376). Some of these initiates in the mystery-religions had apparently dethroned Christ from His place as Head. Christ did not do all His mediatorial work on the Cross. He will keep it up, as we have seen (1Co 15:25 ff.), till the last enemy is put under His feet, when He shall deliver up the kingdom unto the Father (1Co 15:24). Now He is at the right hand of God, and our life is hid with Christ in God and is doubly safe (Col 3:1-3). St. Paul is bold to speak the mystery of Christ (Col 4:3), who is the mystery of God (Col 2:2). In Eph 1:3 every spiritual blessing is in Christ. God chose us in him (Eph 1:4). We become sons through Jesus Christ (Eph 1:5). He bestowed His grace in the Beloved (Eph 1:6). We have our redemption through his blood (Eph 1:7). God purposed His will in him (Eph 1:9), to sum up all things in Christ (Eph 1:10), in whom also we were made a heritage (Eph 1:11), in whom ye also were sealed (Eph 1:13). Christ is Head of the Church, which is His body (Eph 1:22; cf. Col 1:18). This mystic body of Christ includes both Jew and Gentile, who have been made one in Christ and are drawn together by the blood of Christ, the middle wall of partition being thus broken down and both being united to God and to each other (Eph 2:11-14). This one new man is the household of God, the holy temple of the Lord (Eph 2:15-22). Thus the wisdom of God is shown (Eph 3:11) according to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord. Christ is not a mere official Mediator. He is the vital Head of the living body which is growing up to the fullness of Christ (Eph 4:12-16). Christ loved His body, the Church (the Kingdom), and gave Himself up for it that in the end it might be without spot or wrinkle, holy and blameless (Eph 5:25-27). This mystery is great (Eph 5:32) in regard to Christ and the Church. It is the whole mystery of redemptive love.

(d) The Fourth Group (1 Tim., Tit., 2 Tim.).-The Pastoral Epistles, which in the present writers opinion may be accepted as genuine, do not contain anything essentially new on this theme. In 1Ti 1:15 we read that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. In 1Ti 2:5 f. we have the famous passage, one mediator also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all. Here the humanity of Christ is accented in His mediatorial work, and the word is applied directly to Jesus. But His atoning death as ransom for all, , is emphasized (note both and , to make plain the substitutionary character of Christs death; cf. in Mat 20:28). In Tit 2:14 the voluntary giving of Christ is presented to redeem us and purify for Himself a people of His own. The reference is to His death. In Tit 3:4 ff. the Pauline teaching of salvation by mercy and faith, not by works, appears, through Jesus Christ our Saviour.

3. Epistle of James.-There is nothing in this book specifically on the subject, though the mediatorial work of Christ is assumed and implied in several passages. In Jam 1:1 James terms himself a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ; here the word is to be noted and also the fact that Christ is placed on a level with God in what may possibly be the earliest document in the NT. Still stronger Isa 2:1 : Hold not the faith in our Lord Jesus, the glory; if we accept the interpretation of Mayor and several other commentators, Christ is here the object of faith and so of worship, and is in descriptive apposition. The honourable () name which is called upon you refers to Christ. There may be a reference to the death of Christ in Jam 5:6, though this is not certain; but the Second Coming is presented in Jam 5:7. The Judge standeth before the doors (Jam 5:9). Though the stress in the Epistle is on the ethical side of Christianity, one notes the same doctrinal conception of Christ and His work at the basis of it all. The new birth is mentioned in Jam 1:18-21.

4. Jude.-There is a positive note in Judes Epistle, as the writer describes Our only Master and Lord ( ), Jesus Christ (Jud 1:4). Cf. Jud 1:3, the faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints, clearly having Jesus as only Master and Lord. See also our Lord Jesus Christ in Jud 1:17; the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life (Jud 1:21), where eternal life is posited in the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ. In Jud 1:24 f. we are plainly told that we can be set before the presence of Gods glory through Jesus Christ our Lord.

5. Epistles of Peter.-The genuineness of these Epistles cannot here be discussed, nor their Pauline features. They certainly give the same view of Christs mediatorial office as we find in St. Pauls writings. This conception of Christs sacrificial death meets us in 1Pe 1:2, sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ (cf. Exodus 24). The new birth comes to pass by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead (1Pe 1:3). The readers of the Epistle receive the end of their faith, even the salvation of their souls, through Jesus Christ (1Pe 1:9). The sufferings of Christ were prophesied beforehand by the Spirit of Christ (1Pe 1:11). Redemption is not with gold, but with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, even the blood of Christ (1Pe 1:19). Here the point of view of the Epistle to the Hebrews (chs. 9 and 10) is approached. Christ is the Living Stone through whom the living stones in the spiritual house offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God (1Pe 2:5), a clear picture of the mediatorial work of Christ (cf. Mat 16:18). In 1Pe 2:21 we are told expressly that Christ also suffered for you ( ), leaving you an example ( ), that you should follow his steps, where the death of Christ is given as an example for us in suffering. But that this is not the sole idea in the atoning death of Christ we need only recall (1Pe 1:18 f.), not to mention the rest of the sentence in 1Pe 2:21-24, where we read that Jesus did no sin and his own self bare our sins in his body upon the tree, that we, having died unto sins, might live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed. There is an evident reference to Isaiah 53, and the substitutionary character of the death of Christ for sins is clear enough. St. Peters own interpretation of is thus quite pertinent. Hence it is plain what is meant in 1Pe 3:18 : Because Christ also died (, WH [Note: H Westcott-Horts Greek Testament.] , but some Manuscripts ) for () sins once for all (), the righteous for () the unrighteous, that he might bring you (or us, or ) unto God. This significant passage pictures Christ as both Sacrifice and Priest (cf. Hebrews). In 1Pe 3:21 baptism is given a symbolic interpretation through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and in 1Pe 3:22 the mediatorial work of Christ continues, who is on the right hand of God, having gone into heaven. Christ suffered in the flesh (1Pe 3:18, 1Pe 4:1). Through Jesus Christ God is to be glorified in all things (1Pe 4:11). We are to rejoice if we become partakers of Christs sufferings, only we must be innocent of wrong and suffer as Christians (1Pe 4:13 ff.). This imitation of Christ in suffering is ennobled by the fact that Jesus has bought us by His own precious blood (cf. 1Pe 1:18 f., 1Pe 5:10). St. Peter calls himself a witness of the sufferings of Christ and a partaker of the glory to be revealed (1Pe 5:1).

In 2Pe 1:1 the Greek text (cf. 2Pe 1:11 : ) calls for the translation, Our God and Saviour Jesus Christ. Thus the deity and redemptive work of Christ are presented. Cf. also the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ (2Pe 1:11), the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (2Pe 1:16). In 2Pe 2:1 the heretics are described as denying even the Master that bought them. In 2Pe 3:2 Jesus is described again as the Lord and Saviour. The Lord Jesus is to return for His people (ch. 3).

6. Epistle to the Hebrews.-The mediatorial work of Jesus is the distinctive note in this wonderful book. Everything turns on the peculiar qualifications of Christ in His humanity and deity to fulfil His mission as Redeemer from sin. The Jews had challenged the worth of Christianity in comparison with Judaism. They claimed the superiority of Judaism in the revelation in the OT, in the fact that this revelation was mediated through angels, in the greatness of Moses, in the glory of the Aaronic priesthood, in the promises to Israel. It was an impressive plea, and Christianity was made to appear barren beside the richness of ritual and worship present in Judaism. The reply is a striking apologetic for Christianity as in all points superior to Judaism by showing that in each of these points the former has the advantage. The revelation in Christianity comes through the Son of God as compared with the OT prophets (Heb 1:1-8); Christianity is mediated through the Son of God, who is superior to angels both in His Divine nature as Gods Son (Heb 1:4 to Heb 2:4) and in His human nature as the Son of man (Heb 2:5-18); Jesus is superior to Moses since He is Gods Son over Gods house, not a servant in the house (Heb 3:1 to Heb 4:13); the priesthood of Christ is superior to that in Judaism (Heb 4:14 to Heb 12:3) since Jesus Himself is a better High Priest than Aaron (Heb 4:14 to Heb 7:28); He is the minister of a far better covenant (Heb 8:1-13); He now ministers in a better sanctuary (Heb 9:1-12); He offers a better sacrifice which is His own blood (Heb 9:13 to Heb 10:18), and His work rests on better promises (Heb 10:19 to Heb 12:3). The argument is masterful and complete, and furnishes the richest interpretation of the work of Christ in existence. It is a complement to the teaching of St. Paul in its emphasis (Heb 4:14 to Heb 12:3) on the priestly work of Jesus. But for Hebrews we should have only glimpses of this aspect of Christs mission. The wealth of material in the Epistle renders extended comments on important passages impossible. In the very first section (Heb 1:1-3) we see the nature of Christs Person as the effulgence of Gods glory and the very image of His substance. His work is described as universal in the cosmic relation (creation) and maintenance of the universe (cf. Col 1:15 ff.); but He is described at once as the Priest who made purification of sins and as He Who sits on the right hand of the Majesty on high as the Mediator between God and man. Jesus-and the writer loves the human name-is qualified for His work as the Son of God, and is thus superior to angels (Heb 1:4, Heb 2:5) by the high inheritance as Son. But His humanity likewise equips Jesus for His task. He is the representative man (Heb 2:5-9), fulfilling mans highest destiny because of the suffering of death, which He tasted for every man (Heb 2:9). The Incarnation perfected the human experience of Jesus through sufferings (Heb 2:10) and made Him a sympathetic High Priest as He makes propitiation () for the sins of the people, equipped by suffering and temptation to succour the tempted (Heb 2:18). Our Mediator thus has power with the Father as His Son and commands our sympathy and confidence as our Elder Brother (Heb 2:11 f.). Jesus is the apostle and high priest of our confession (Heb 3:1). The double nature of Jesus as Son of God and Son of man makes a powerful appeal to Christians to come boldly to the throne of grace, for grace to help in time of need (Heb 4:14-16). Jesus, like Aaron, has both human sympathy and Divine appointment (Heb 5:1-9). By His obedience and suffering He became the Author of eternal salvation (Heb 5:8 f.). But Jesus is far superior to Aaron in that He is like Melchizedek (Heb 5:10, Heb 7:28). He has His priesthood unchangeable (Heb 7:24), wherefore also he is able to save to the uttermost them that draw near unto God through him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them (Heb 7:25). Being free from sin He is the kind of Priest that sinners need (Heb 7:26-28). He is the mediator of a better covenant (Heb 8:6) in that this covenant is one of grace in the heart and not mere ineffective form. So He is the mediator of a new covenant (Heb 9:15). His sanctuary is heaven itself, the greater and more perfect tabernacle (Heb 9:11), into which He entered once for all, having obtained eternal redemption (Heb 9:12). He is both Sacrifice and High Priest (cf. W. P. DuBose, High Priesthood and Sacrifice, 1908). His offering is His own blood, that of the God-man, which was voluntary and so with moral value in the realm of spirit (Heb 9:13 f.). This offering was made once for all (, Heb 9:26) and really accomplishes cleansing from sin (Heb 10:12-18). He will come a second time for salvation alone (Heb 9:28). The blood of Jesus has given us boldness to enter into the holy place (Heb 10:19 ff.). There is no other sacrifice for sin if we reject this (Heb 10:26). The heroes of faith hold on to the promise of the Messiah which has come true in Christ Jesus, who is Himself the best example of faith, the Author and Perfecter of our faith (Heb 11:39 to Heb 12:3). Once more the writer speaks of Jesus the mediator of a new covenant (Heb 12:24). Christians should be loyal to Christ. He has not changed (Heb 13:8). He suffered without the gate that He might sanctify His own people through His own blood, and, if need be, we should be willing to leave the camp of Judaism and take our stand with Jesus, bearing His reproach (Heb 13:12 f.). God brought from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep with the blood of an eternal covenant, even our Lord Jesus (Heb 13:20).

7. The Johannine Epistles and the Apocalypse.-We can see clear teaching about the mediation of Christ in 1 John: The blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin (1Jn 1:7). Here we have the picture of the continuous sacrificial efficacy of the blood of Christ (cf. Hebrews). And if any man sin, we have an Advocate () with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous (1Jn 2:1). He pleads our cause with the Father (cf. Rom 8:34). And he is the propitiation () for () our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world (1Jn 2:2). Here the universal aspect of the work of Christ is presented. St. John opposes the Cerinthian Gnostics who distinguished between Jesus and Christ (1Jn 2:22; cf. 1Jn 5:1; 1Jn 5:5), and shows that confession of the Son brings knowledge of the Father (1Jn 2:23). He presents also the purifying power of hope in Christ (1Jn 3:3). The Son of God destroys the work of the devil, who sins from the beginning (1Jn 3:5 f.). God showed His love for us by sending His only begotten Son into the world as a propitiation for our sins (1Jn 4:9 f.). The Father has sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world (1Jn 4:14). God abides in the man who confesses the Son (1Jn 4:15). The water and the blood bear witness to Jesus and His work (1Jn 5:6-8), meaning probably the baptism and the blood. The baptism symbolizes the death and resurrection of Christ for our sins. By the Son of God we come to know the true God and eternal life (1Jn 5:20). Confession of the true humanity of Jesus as opposed to the Docetic Gnostics is absolutely essential (1Jn 4:2 f., 2Jn 1:7).

The Apocalypse gives a powerful picture of the mediatorial work of Christ. He loosed us from our sins by his blood (Rev 1:5). He will come again for judgment of the wicked (Rev 1:7) and for the blessing of the redeemed (Rev 22:20). He was dead and is now alive for evermore, with the keys of death and Hades (Rev 1:17 f.). Christ is the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, victorious and able to open the seals of the book, because He is also as a Lamb standing, as though He had been slain (Rev 5:5-7). Here the power of Christ is lodged in His atoning death. With His blood He purchased men of every land and nation (Rev 5:9 f.), who worship Jesus as God. Those arrayed in white robes in heaven have been washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rev 7:13 f.). Thus, as in Hebrews, Jesus is both Sacrifice and Priest. The Lamb is the Shepherd to guide unto fountains of water of life (Rev 7:17). The Lord was crucified in spiritual Sodom and Egypt (Rev 11:8). Christ is Conqueror at last, for the kingdom of the world is become the Kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ (Rev 11:15). Because of the blood of the Lamb the accuser of our brethren is cast down by the authority of Christ (Rev 12:10 f.). The Lamb that has been slain has a book of life written from the foundation of the world (Rev 13:8). The victors sing the song of Moses and of the Lamb (Rev 15:2 f.). The Lamb shall overcome, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings (Rev 17:14). The Lamb will have His marriage supper, and the Bride is the company of those redeemed by His blood (Rev 19:7 ff., Rev 21:9 f.). As Victor His garments are sprinkled with (or dipped in) the blood of His enemies (Rev 19:13). In the New Jerusalem the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb are the temple (Rev 21:22). The Lamb is the lamp, and only those are there whose names are written in the Lambs book of life (Rev 21:23; Rev 21:27). Jesus is the Root and Offspring of David, the bright and morning Star (Rev 22:16). He offers the water of life freely to all who will drink (Rev 22:17).

See also articles Atonement, Priest, Propitiation, Ransom, Reconciliation, Redemption, Sacrifice, Salvation, Saviour.

Literature.-See books on NT Theology by W. F. Adeney (1894), W. Beyschlag (Eng. translation , 1895), J. Bovon (21902-05), D. F. Estes (1900), H. J. Holtzmann (21911), G. B. Stevens (1899), B. Weiss (Eng. translation , 1882-83); A. B. Bruce, St. Pauls Conception of Christianity, 1894, The Humiliation of Christ, 1876; D. Somerville, St. Pauls Conception of Christ, 1897; H. A. A. Kennedy, St. Paul and the Mystery-Religions, 1913; W. M. Ramsay, The Teaching of Paul in Terms of the Present Day, 1913; W. P. DuBose, The Gospel according to St. Paul, 1907; works on the Atonement by J. M. Campbell (1907), R. W. Dale (71878), J. Denney (1903), J. Stalker (1908); works on Hebrews by A. B. Bruce (1899), F. Delitzsch (Eng. translation , 1868-70), M. Dods (Expositors Greek Testament iv. [1910]), W. P. DuBose (High Priesthood and Sacrifice, 1908), G. Milligan (1899), A. Nairne (The Epistle of Priesthood, 1913), B. F. Westcott (1889).

A. T. Robertson.

Fuente: Dictionary of the Apostolic Church

Mediation, Mediator

me-di-ashun, medi-a-ter:

I.INTRODUCTORY

1.The Terms

(1)Mediation

(2)Mediator

2.The Principle of Mediation

II.MEDIATION IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

1.Negative Teaching in the Old Testament

2.The Positive Teaching: Early Period

3.Prophetic Mediation

4.Priestly Mediation

5.The Theocratic King: the Messiah

6.The Suffering Servant

7.Superhuman Agents of Mediation

(1)Angelic Mediation

(2)Divine Wisdom

III.IN SEMI-CANONICAL AND NON-CANONICAL JEWISH

IV.MEDIATION AND MEDIATOR IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

1.The Synoptic Gospels

(1)Christ as Prophet

(2)Christ as King

(3)Christ as Priest (Redeemer)

2.Primitive Apostolic Teachings

(1)The Early Speeches in Acts

(2)Epistles of James and Jude

(3)1 Peter

3.Epistles of Paul

(1)The Need of a Mediator

(2)The Qualifications

(3)The Means, the Death of Christ

(4)The Resurrection and Exaltation

(5)The Cosmic Aspect of Christ’s Mediatorship

4.Epistle to the Hebrews

5.The Johannine Writings

(1)The Fourth Gospel

(2)The Epistles

(3)The Apocalypse

V.CONCLUSION

LITERATURE

I Introductory.

1. The Terms:

(1) Mediation:

Mediation in its broadest sense may be defined as the act of intervening between parties at variance for the purpose of reconciling them, or between parties not necessarily hostile for the purpose of leading them into an agreement or covenant. Theologically, it has reference to the method by which God and man are reconciled through the instrumentality of some intervening process, act or person, and especially through the atoning work of Jesus Christ. The term itself does not occur in Biblical literature.

(2) Mediator:

The term mediator (= middleman, agent of mediation) is nowhere found in Old Testament or Apocrypha (English Versions of the Bible), but the corresponding Greek word , mestes, occurs once in Septuagint (Job 9:33 the King James Version, Neither is there any daysman betwixt us, where daysman stands for Hebrew mokhah, arbitrator, the American Standard Revised Version, the English Revised Version margin umpire (see DAYSMAN); Septuagint has , ho mestes hemon, our mediator, as a paraphrase for Hebrew benenu, betwixt us). Even in the New Testament, mesites, mediator, occurs only 6 times, namely, Gal 3:19, Gal 3:20 (of Moses), and 1Ti 2:5; Heb 8:6; Heb 9:15; Heb 12:24 (of Christ).

2. The Principle of Mediation:

Though the actual terms are thus very rare, the principle of mediation is one of great significance in Biblical theology, as well as in the Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy. It corresponds to a profound human instinct or need which finds expression in some form or other in most religions. It is an attempt to solve the problem raised by (1) the idea of the infinite distance which separates God from man and the universe, and (2) the deeply felt want of bringing them into a harmonious relation. The conception of mediation will differ, therefore, according to whether the distance to be surmounted is understood ethically or metaphysically. If it be thought of in an ethical or religious sense, that is, if the emphasis be laid on the fact of human sin as standing in the way of man’s fellowship with God, then mediation will be the mode by which peaceful relations are established between sinful man and the absolutely righteous God. But if the antithesis of God and the world be conceived of metaphysically, i.e. be based on the ultimate nature of God and of the world conceived as essentially opposed to each other, then mediation will be the mode by which the transcendent God, without Himself coming into direct contact with the world, is able to produce effects in it through an intermediate agent (or agents). The latter conception (largely the result of an exaggerated Platonic dualism) exerted an important influence on later Jewish thought, and even on Christian theology, and will come briefly under our consideration. But in the main we shall be concerned with the former view, as more in harmony with the development of Biblical theology which culminates in the New Testament doctrine of atonement. Mediation between God and man as presented in the Scriptures has 3 main aspects, represented respectively by the functions of the prophet, the priest, and theocratic king. Here and there in the Old Testament these tend to meet, as in Melchizedek the priest-king, and in the Suffering Servant of Deutero-Isaiah, who unites the priestly function of sacrifice with the prophetic function of revealing the Divine will. But on the whole, these aspects of mediation in the Old Testament run along lines which have no meeting-point in one person adequate to all the demands. In the New Testament they intersect in the person and work of Jesus Christ, who realizes in Himself the full meaning of the prophetic, priestly, and kingly ideals.

II. Mediation in the Old Testament.

1. Negative Teaching in the Old Testament:

We do not find in the Old Testament a fixed and final doctrine of mediation universally accepted as an axiom of religious thought, but only a gradual movement toward such a doctrine, under the growing sense of God’s exaltation and of man’s frailty and sinfulness. Such a passage as 1Sa 2:25 seems definitely to contradict the idea of mediation. Still more striking are the words of Job above referred to, There is no umpire betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both, i.e. to enforce his decision (Job 9:33), where the Septuagint paraphrases, Would that there were a mediator and a reprover and a hearer between us both. The note of despair which characterizes this passage shows that Job has no hope that such an arbitrator between him and God is forthcoming. Yet the words give pathetic utterance to the deep inarticulate cry of humanity for a mediator. In this connection we should note the protests of prophets and psalmists against an unethical view of mediation by animal sacrifices (Mic 6:6-8; Psa 40:6-8, etc.), and their frequent direct appeals to God for mercy without reference to any mediation (Psa 25:7; Psa 32:5; Psa 103:8 ff, etc.).

2. The Positive Teaching: Early Period:

(1) Mediatory Sacrifice.

In the patriarchal age, before the official priest had been differentiated from the rest of the community, the function of offering sacrifice was discharged by the head of the family or clan on behalf of his people, as by Noah (Gen 8:20), Abraham (Gen 12:7, Gen 12:8; Gen 15:9-11), Isaac (Gen 26:24 f), Jacob (Gen 31:54; Gen 33:20). So Job, conceived by the writer as living in patriarchal antiquity, is said to have offered sacrifices vicariously for his sons (Job 1:5). Melchizedek, the priest-king of Salem (Gen 14:18-20), is a figure of considerable theological interest, inasmuch as he was taken by the author of Psa 110:1-7 as the forerunner of the ideal theocratic king who was also priest, and by the author of He as prototype of Christ’s priesthood.

(2) Intercessory Prayer.

Intercession is in all stages of thought an essential element in mediation. We have striking examples of it in Gen 18:22-33; Job 42:8-10.

(3) The Mosaic Covenant.

In Moses we have for the first time a recognized national representative who acted both as God’s spokesman to the people, and the people’s spokesman before God. He alone was allowed to come near unto Yahweh, and to him Yahweh spake face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend (Exo 33:11). He went up to God and reported the words of the people to Him, as to a sovereign who cannot be approached save by his duly accredited minister (Exo 19:8). We have a striking example of his intercessory mediation in the episode of the golden calf, when he pleaded effectively with God to turn from His wrath (Exo 32:12-14), and even offered to make atonement for (kipper, literally, cover) their sin by confessing their sin before God, and being willing to be blotted out of God’s book, so that the people might be spared (Exo 32:30-32). Here we have already the germs of the idea of vicarious suffering for sin.

(4) Intercessory Mediation.

Samuel is by Jeremiah classed with Moses as the chief representative of intercessory mediation (Jer 15:1). He is reported as mediating by prayer between Israel and God, and succeeding in warding off the punishment of their sin (1Sa 7:5-12). On such occasions, prayer was wont to be accompanied by confessions of sins and by an offering to Yahweh.

3. Prophetic Mediation:

Samuel represents the transition from the ancient seer or soothsayer to the prophetic order. The prophet was regarded as the organ of Divine revelation, to consult whom was equivalent to inquiring of God (1Sa 9:9) – a commissioner sent by God (Isa 6:8 f) to proclaim His will by word and action. In that capacity he was Yahweh’s representative among men, and so could speak in a tone of authority. Prophetic revelation is essential to the Old Testament religion (compare Heb 1:1), which by it stands distinguished from a mere philosophy or natural religion. God is not merely a passive object of human discovery, but one who actively and graciously reveals Himself to His chosen people through the medium of the authorized exponents of His mind and will. Thus in the main the prophet stands for the principle of mediation in its man-ward aspect. But the God-ward aspect is not absent, for we find the prophet mediating with God on behalf of men, making intercession for them (Jer 14:19-22; Amo 7:2 f, 5 f).

4. Priestly Mediation:

Mediation is in a peculiar sense the function of the priest. In the main he stands for the principle in its God-ward aspect. Yet in the early period it was the man-ward aspect that was most apparent; i.e. the priest was at first regarded as the medium through which Yahweh delivered His oracles to men, the human mouthpiece of supernatural revelation, giving advice in difficult emergencies by casting the sacred lot. Before the time of the first literary prophets, the association of the priests with the ephod and the lot had receded into the background (though the high priest theoretically retained the gift of interpreting the Divine will through the Urim and Thummim, Exo 28:30; Lev 8:8); but the power they lost with the oracle they gained at the altar. First they acquired a preferential status at the local sanctuaries; then, in the Deuteronomic legislation, where sacrifice is limited to the Jerusalem sanctuary, it is assumed that only Levite priests can officiate. Finally, in the Levitical system as set forth in the Priestly Code (which regulated Jewish worship in the post-exilic times), the Aaronic priests, now clearly distinguished from the Levites, have the sole privilege of immediate access to God in His sanctuary (Num 4:19, Num 4:20; Num 16:3-5). God’s transcendence and holiness are now so emphasized that between Him and the sin-stained people there is almost an infinite chasm. Hence, the people can only enjoy its ideal right of drawing nigh unto God and offering sacrifice to Him through the mediation of the official priesthood. The mediatorship of priests derived its authority, not from their moral purity or personal worth, but from the ceremonial purity which attached to their office. All priests are not on the same level. A process of graduated sanctity narrows down their number as the approach is made to the Most Holy Place, which symbolizes the presence chamber of Yahweh. (1) Out of the sacred nation as a whole, the priestly tribe of Levi is elected and invested with a special sanctity to perform all the subordinate acts of service within the tabernacle (Num 8:19; Num 18:6). (2) Within this sacred tribe, the members of the house of Aaron are set apart and invested with a still higher sanctity; they alone officiate at the altar in the Holy Place and expiate the guilt of the people by sacrifice and prayer, thus representing the people before God. Yet even they are only admitted to the proximate nearness of the Holy Place. (3) The gradation of the hierarchy is completed by the recognition of a single, supreme head of the priesthood – the high priest. He alone can enter the Holy of Holies, and that alone once a year, on the Day of Atonement, when he makes propitiation not only for himself and the priesthood, but for the entire congregation. The ritual of the Day of Atonement is the highest exercise of priestly mediatorship. On that day, the whole community has access to Yahweh through their representative, the high priest, and through him offer atonement for their sins. Moreover, the role of the high priest as mediator is symbolized by his wearing the breastplate bearing the names of the children of Israel, whenever he goes into the Holy Place (Exo 28:29).

Something must be said of the sacrificial system, through which alone the priest exercised his mediatorial functions. For his mediatorship did not depend on his direct personal influence with God, exercised, for instance, through intercessory prayer (intercession is not mentioned by the Priestly Code (P) as a duty of the priest, though referred to by the prophets, Joe 2:17; Mal 1:9). It depended rather on an elaborate system of sacrifice, of which the priest was but an official agent. It was he who derived his authority from the system, rather than the system from him. The most characteristic features in the ritual of P are the sin offering (hatta’th, Lev 4; 5; Lev 6:24-30) and the guilt offering (‘asham, Lev 5 through 7; 14; 19), which seem peculiar to P. These are meant to restore the normal relation of the people or of individuals to God, a relation which sin has disturbed. Hence, these sacrifices, when duly administered by the priest, are distinctly mediatorial or reconciliatory in character, i.e. they make atonement for or cover (kipper) the sin of the guilty community or individuals. This seems the case also, though in a far less degree, even with the burnt, peace, and meal offerings, which, though not offered expressly, like the sin and guilt offerings, for the forgiveness of sin, nevertheless were regarded … as ‘covering,’ or neutralizing, the offerer’s unworthiness to appear before God, and so, though in a much less degree than the sin or guilt offering, as effecting propitiation (Driver in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible, IV, 132). We must beware, however, of reading the full New Testament doctrine of sin and propitiation into the sacrificial law. Two important points of difference may be noted: (1) The law does not provide atonement for all sins, but only for sins of ignorance or inadvertence, committed within the covenant. Deliberate sins fall outside the scope of priestly mediation. (2) While sin includes moral impurity, it must be admitted that the chief emphasis falls on ceremonial uncleanness, because it is only violation of physical sanctity that can be fully rectified by ritual ordinance. The law was essentially a civil code, and was not adequate to deal with inward sins. Thus the sacrificial system in itself is but a faint adumbration of the New Testament doctrine of Christ’s high-priestly work, which has reference to sin in its widest and deepest meaning. Yet, in spite of these limitations, the priestly ritual was, as far as it went, an organized embodiment of the sin-consciousness, and so prepared the way for the coming of a perfect Mediator.

5. The Theocratic King: The Messiah:

On another plane than that of the priest is the mediation of the theocratic king. Yahweh was ideally the sole king of Israel. But He governed the people mediately through His vicegerent theocratic king, the agent of His will. The king was regarded as Yahweh’s anointed (1Sa 16:6, etc.), and his person as inviolable. He was the visible representative of the invisible Divine King (Riehm). The ideal of theocratic king was most nearly represented by David, the man after Yahweh’s own heart (compare 1Sa 13:14). This fact led to Yahweh’s covenant-promise that David’s house should constitute a permanent dynasty, and his throne be established forever (2Sa 7:5-17; compare Ps 89:19-37). The indestructibility of the Davidic dynasty was the basal conviction on which the hope of a Messiah was built. It led to attention being further concentrated on one preeminent King in David’s line, who should be the Divinely accredited representative of Yahweh, and reign in His name. As a Divinely endowed human hero, the Messiah will possess attributes which will qualify Him to mediate between God and His people in national life and affairs, and so inaugurate the ideal age of peace and righteousness. He is portrayed especially as the Royal Saviour of Israel, through whom the salvation of the people is mediated and justice administered (e.g. Isa 11:1-10; Isa 61:1-3; Psa 72:4, Psa 72:13; Jer 23:5, Jer 23:6; Jer 33:15, Jer 33:16).

6. The Suffering Servant:

In the wonderful figure of exilic prophecy, the Suffering Servant of Yahweh, the principle of mediation is exemplified both in its man-ward and God-ward aspects. In its man-ward aspect, his mission is the prophetic one of being God’s anointed messenger to men, His witness before the world (Isa 42:6, Isa 42:19; Isa 43:10; Isa 49:2; Isa 50:4, Isa 50:5; Isa 61:1-3). But the profound originality of the conception of the Servant lies chiefly in the God-ward significance of his suffering (Isa 53:1-12). The Servant suffered vicariously as an atonement for the sins of the people. His death is even said to be a guilt-offering (‘asham, Isa 53:10), and he is represented as making intercession for the transgressors (Isa 53:12). Here is the profoundest expression in the Old Testament of the principle of mediatorship.

The substitution of voluntary, deliberate, human sacrifice for that of unwilling beasts elevates the sacrificial idea to a new ethical plane, and brings it into far more vital and organic relation to human life. The basis of the mediatorship of the Servant seems to be the principle of the solidarity or organic unity of the people, involving the ideal unity of the Servant and the people he represents. In the earlier servant-passages the Servant is identical with the whole nation (Isa 41:8; Isa 44:1 f, and often), and the unity is therefore actual, not ideal merely. In other passages, however, they are clearly to be distinguished, for while the people as a whole is unfaithful to its mission, the Servant remains faithful and suffers for it. Whether in Isa 53:1-12 the Servant is the pious remnant of the people or is conceived of as an individual we need not here consider. In either case, the tie between the Servant and the whole nation is never completely broken; the idea of their mystical union is still the groundwork of the prophet’s thought. In virtue of this ideal relation, the Servant is the representative of the nation before God, not in a mere official sense (as in the case of the priest), but on the ground of personal merit, as the true Israel, the embodiment of the national ideal. On that ground God can accept his suffering in lieu of the deserved penalty of the whole people. We have here a wonderful adumbration of the New Testament doctrine of atonement through the One Mediator, the Son of Man, the representative of the race. See SERVANT OF JEHOVAH.

7. Superhuman Agents of Mediation:

In later Judaism, the growing sense of God’s transcendence favored the tendency to introduce supernatural intermediaries between God and the world.

(1) Angelic Mediation.

Not until post-exilic times did angels come to have theological significance. Previously, when God was anthropomorphically conceived as appearing periodically on earth in visible form, the need of angelic mediation was not felt. The angel in early narrative (e.g. Gen 16:7-11) did not possess abiding personality distinct from God, but was God Himself temporarily manifested in human form. But the more God came to be conceived as the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, the greater was the need for mediation between God and the world, and even between God and His servant the prophet. In post-exilic writers there is an increasing disposition to fill up the gap between God and the prophet with superhuman beings. Thus Zechariah receives all Divine instruction through angels; and similarly Daniel receives explanations of his dreams. We do not in the Old Testament hear of angels interceding with God (God-ward mediation), but only as intermediaries of revelation and of the Divine will (man-ward mediation). Modern Jewish scholars deny that Judaistic angelology implied that God was transcendent in the sense of being remote and out of contact with the world. So, e.g., Montefiore (Hibbert Lectures, 423-31), but even he admits a natural disinclination to bring the Godhead downward to human conditions, and that for supernatural conversations angels formed a convenient substitute for God (p. 430). The doctrine of angels had no influence on the New Testament doctrine of mediation, which moves on the plane of the ethical, rather than on the basis of the merely physical transcendenee of God.

(2) Divine Wisdom.

Of more importance as a preparation for theology of the New Testament is the doctrine of Wisdom, in which the Jews found a middle term between the religion of Israel and the philosophy of Greece. In Pro 8:22-31 Wisdom is depicted as an individual energy, God’s elect Son, His companion and master-workman (Pro 8:30) in creation, but whose chief delight is with the children of men. Though the personification is here purely ideal and poetical, and the ethical interest predominates over the metaphysical, yet we have in such a passage a clear proof of contact with Greek thought (especially Platonism and Stoicism), and of the felt need of a mediator between God and the visible world. This mode of thought, linked to the Hebrew conception of the Divine Word as the efficient expression of God’s thought and the medium of His activity (Isa 55:11; Psa 33:6; Psa 107:20), has left its mark on Philo’s Logos-doctrine and on the New Testament Christology. See WISDOM.

III. In Semi-And Non-Canonical Jewish Literature.

In the Apocrypha, the idea of mediation is for the most part absent. We have one or two references to angelic intercession (Tobit 12:12, 15), a function not attributed to angels in the Old Testament, but prominent in later apocalyptic literature (e.g. Enoch Pro 9:10; Pro 15:2; 40:6). The tradition of the agency of angels in the promulgation of the law is first found in the Septuagint of Deu 33:2 (not in the Hebrew original), but was greatly amplified in rabbinical literature (Josephus, Ant., XV, v, 3). In The Wisdom of Solomon a bold advance is made toward the conception of Wisdom as a personal mediator of creation (especially 7:22-27). In later Judaism, the idea of the Word is further developed. The Targums constantly refer the Divine activity to the memera’ or Word of God, where the Old Testament refers it to God directly, and speaks of it as Israel’s Intercessor before God and as Redeemer. This usage seems to arise out of a reluctance to bring God into immediate contact with the world; hence, God’s self-manifestation is represented as mediated through a quasi-personal agent. The tendency finds its full development, however, not among the Jerusalem Jews, but among the Jews of Alexandria, especially in Philo’s Logos-doctrine. Deeply influenced by the Platonic dualism, Philo thought of God as pure Spirit, incapable of contact with matter, so that without mediation God could not act on the world. To fill up the great gap he conceived of intermediary beings which represented at once the Ideas of Plato, the active Powers of the Stoics, and the angels of the Old Testament. The highest of these was the Divine Logos, the mediator between the inaccessible, transcendent Being and the material universe. On the one hand, in relation to the world, the Logos is the Mediator of creation and of revelation; on the other, in his God-ward activity, he is the representative of the world before God, its High Priest, Intercessor, and Paraclete. Yet Philo’s Logos was probably nothing more than a high philosophical abstraction vividly imaged in the mind. In spite of Philo’s influence on early Christian theology, and even perhaps on some New Testament writers, his doctrine of mediation moves on quite different lines from the central New Testament doctrine, which is concerned above all with the reconciliation of God and man on account of sin, and not with the metaphysical reconciliation of the absolute and the finite world. The Mediator of Philo is an abstraction of speculative thought; the Mediator of the New Testament is a concrete historical person known to experience. See PHILO JUDAEUS.

IV. Mediation and Mediator in the New Testament.

The relatively independent lines of development which the conception of mediation has hitherto taken now meet and coalesce in Jesus Christ.

1. The Synoptic Gospels:

The traditional division of Christ’s mediatorial work into that of prophet, priest and king (very common since Calvin, but now often discarded) offers a convenient method of treating the subject, though we must avoid making the division absolute, as if Christ’s work fell apart into three separate and independent functions. The unity of the work of salvation is preserved by the fact that no one of the offices fills up a moment of time alone, but the others are always cooperative, although Christ’s mediatorial work puts now this, now that side in the foreground. The triple division is of special value, because it sets in a vivid light the continuity between the Old Testament theocracy and Christianity (Dorner, System of Christian Doctrine, English translation, III, 385 ff). These three aspects of Christ’s mediatorship can be distinguished in the Synoptics, although the formal distinction is the work of later analysis.

(1) Christ as Prophet.

It was in the character of Prophet that He mainly impressed the common mind, which was moved to inquire Whence hath this man this wisdom? and by His reply, A prophet is not without honor, etc., He virtually accepts that title (Mat 13:54, Mat 13:57). As Prophet, Christ is the mediator of revelation; through Him alone can men come to know God as Father (Mat 11:27) and the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven (Mat 13:11). In all His teaching we feel that He speaks within the center of truth, and hence can teach with authority and not as the scribes (Mat 7:29), who approach the truth from without. His teaching is part of His redemptive work, and not something extraneous to it, for the sin from which He redeems includes ignorance and error.

(2) Christ as King.

The official name Christ (= Messiah, the anointed King) refers primarily to His kingship. The Messianic hope had taught men to look forward to the rule of God on earth instituted and administered through His representative. Christ was the fulfillment of that hope. Though He held an attitude of reserve in the matter, there can be no doubt that He conceived of Himself as the Messiah (Mar 8:27-30; Mar 14:16 f; compare His entry into Jerusalem as a triumphant king, Mar 11:1 ff; the inscription on the cross, Mar 15:26). But it is also clear that He fundamentally modified the Messianic idea, (a) by suffusing it with the thought of vicarious suffering, and (b) by giving it an ethical and spiritual rather than a national and official significance. The note of His kingship was that of authority (Mar 1:27; Mar 2:10; Mat 7:29; Mat 28:18) exercised in the realm of truth and conscience. His kingship includes the future as well as the present; He is the arbiter of human destiny (Mat 25:31 ff).

(3) Christ as Priest (Redeemer).

The synoptists do not hint at the priestly analogy. Our Lord often spoke of forgiveness without mentioning Himself as the one through whom it was mediated, as if it flowed directly from the gracious heart of the Father (compare the parables of Lk 15). But there are other passages which emphasize the close connection of His person with men’s redemption. Men’s attitude to Him decides absolutely their relation to God (Mat 10:32, Mat 10:40). Rest of soul is mediated to the heavy laden through Him (Mat 11:28-30). He claims authority on earth to forgive sins (Mar 2:10). We have no evidence that He spoke definitely of His death until after Peter’s confession at Caesarea (Mar 8:31, began to teach, etc.), though we seem to have vague allusions earlier (e.g. the allegory of the bridegroom, Mar 2:19, Mar 2:20). This may be partly due to conscious reserve, in accordance with the true pedagogical method by which He adapted His teaching to the progressive receptivity of His followers. But inasmuch as we must think of Him as subject to the ordinary laws of human psychology, the idea of His death must have been to Him a growth, matured partly by outward events, and partly by the development of His inner consciousness as the Suffering Messiah. In His later ministry, He frequently taught that He must suffer and die (Mar 9:12, Mar 9:31; Mar 10:32 f; Mar 12:8; Mar 14:8 and parallel passages; compare Mar 10:38; Luk 12:49 f). There are two important passages which expressly connect His death with His mediatorial work. The first is Mar 10:45 (parallel Mat 20:28), The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. The context shows that it was while the thought of His approaching death filled His mind that our Lord uttered these words (compare Mar 10:33, Mar 10:38 f). As to the exact meaning of ransom (, lutron) there are two circles of ideas with which it may be associated. (a) It may mean a sacrificial offering, representing Hebrew kopher (literally, covering, propitiatory gift) which it translates several times in Septuagint (e.g. Exo 30:12). Thus, Ritschl defines it as an offering which, because of its specific worth to God, is a protection or coveting against sin (Rechtfertigung und Versohnung, II, 68-88). (b) It may mean ransom price, the purchase-money paid for the emancipation of a slave. In Septuagint, lutron in most cases stands for some form of the roots ga’al, to deliver, padhah, to redeem (e.g. Lev 25:51; Num 3:51). Hence, Wendt explains the ransom as the price by which Jesus redeemed His disciples from their bondage to suffering and death (Teaching of Jesus, II, 226 ff). This analogy certainly suits the context better than that drawn from the Levitical ritual, for it brings out the contrast between the liberating work of Christ and the enslaving work of those who lord it over men. We must not press the analogy in detail or seek here an answer to the question, who was the recipient of the ransom price (e.g. whether the Devil, as many Fathers, notably Origen and Gregory of Nyssa; God, as Anselm and later theologians; the eternal law of righteousness, as Dale). The purpose of the passage is primarily practical, not speculative. It is certainly pressing the figurative language of Jesus too far to insist that the ransom price is the exact quantitative equivalent of the lives liberated, or of the penalty they had deserved regarded as a debt. This is too prosaic and literalistic an interpretation of a passage which has its setting in the ethical rather than in the commercial realm, and which breathes a spirit closely akin to that of Isa 53:1-12, where suffering and service axe, as here, combined.

The other passage in which Christ definitely connects His mediatorship with His death is that which reports His words at the Last Supper (Mar 14:22-24; Mat 26:26-28; Luk 22:19 f; compare 1Co 11:24 f). The reported words are not identical in the several narratives. But even in their simplest form (in Mark), there is evidently a threefold allusion, to the paschal lamb, to the sacrifice offered by Moses at the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Exo 24:8), and to Jeremiah’s prophecy of a new covenant (Jer 31:31). There can be little doubt that the paschal feast, though it does not conform in detail to any of the Levitical sacrifices, was regarded as a sacrifice, as is indicated by the blood ceremonial (Exo 12:21-27). The blood of the covenant, too, is sacrificial; and, as we have seen, it is probable that all blood sacrifices, and not those of the sin and guilt offerings only, were associated with propitiatory power. Wendt denies that there is here any reference to sin and its forgiveness (Teachings of Jesus, II, 241 f). It must be admitted that the words in Matthew unto remission of sins, which have no counterpart in the other reports, are probably an explanatory expansion of the words actually uttered. But they are a true interpretation of their meaning, as is attested by the fact that the new covenant of Jeremiah’s prophecy was one of forgiveness and justification (Jer 31:34), and that Christ speaks of His blood as shed for others. And as the Passover signified deliverance from bondage to an earthly power (Egypt), so the Supper stands for forgiveness and deliverance from a spiritual power (sin). Clearly Christ here represents Himself as the Mediator of the new covenant, through whom men are to find acceptance with God, though the exact modus operandi of His sacrifice is not indicated.

The Synoptics give special prominence to those historical events which are most intimately associated with Christ’s mediatorship – not only the agony in the garden and the crucifixion, but also the resurrection and ascension (which make possible His intercessory mediation in heaven).

2. Primitive Apostolic Teachings:

(1) The Early Speeches in Acts.

The early speeches in Acts reveal a primitive stage of theological reflection. Yet they are essentially Christocentric. (a) It is the Messianic Kingship of Christ that is chiefly emphasized. The main thesis is that Jesus is the Messiah (the anointed one; compare Act 4:27; Act 10:38), and that His Messiahship was realized in the crucifixion and attested by the resurrection. An important feature is the use of the title Servant for Christ (Act 3:13, Act 3:16; Act 4:27, Act 4:30; compare Act 8:30-35), in evident reference to the Suffering Servant of Deutero-Isaiah. In the phrase, thy holy Servant … whom thou didst anoint, coming immediately after the Messianic quotation, against the Lord, and against his Anointed (Act 4:26 f), we have a concise instance of that coalescing of the idea of the Messiah with that of the Suffering Servant which gave the Messianic idea an entirely new meaning. As Messiah, Jesus was the sole Mediator of salvation (Act 4:12). (b) Another Old Testament type which finds its fulfillment in Jesus is that of the prophet like unto Moses (Act 3:22; Act 7:37; compare Deu 18:15, Deu 18:18). (c) But the priestly functions of Christ are not explicitly touched on. The questions are not faced, What is the God-ward significance of His death? How is it effective for man’s salvation? It is rather the man-ward significance that is made explicit, i.e. Jesus as Messiah mediates salvation to men from His place of exaltation at the right hand of God. Yet the germs of a God-ward mediation are found in the identification of the Messiah with the Suffering Servant.

(2) Epistles of James and Jude.

In these epistles the doctrine of Christ’s mediation does not occupy a prominent place. To James, Christianity is the culmination of Judaism. Christ’s mediatorial functions are set forth more by way of presupposition than by explicit statement, and the whole weight is laid on the kingly and prophetic offices. The Messiahship of Jesus is assumed to such an extent that the title Christ has become part of the proper name, and His Lordship is also implied (Jam 1:1; Jam 2:1). Nothing definite is said of His function in salvation; it is God Himself who regenerates, but the medium of regeneration is the word of truth, the implanted word (Jam 1:18, Jam 1:21), which _ must refer to the word which Jesus had preached. This implies that Jesus as prophetic teacher is the Mediator of salvation. Nothing is said of the death on the cross or its saving significance. The Epistle of Jude assumes the Lordship of Christ, through whom God’s Saviourhood works, and whose mercy results in eternal life (Jud 1:4, Jud 1:21, Jud 1:25).

(3) 1 Peter.

In 1 Peter we have the early apostolic teaching touched with Paulinism. The fact that salvation is mediated through the sufferings and death of Christ is now explicitly stated. Christ has suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous (1Pe 3:18). The suffering has significance both God-ward and man-ward. Relatively to God it is a sacrificial offering which opens up a way of access to Him; He suffered that he might bring us to God (1Pe 3:18), and that through His representative priesthood the ideal holy priesthood of all God’s people might be realized, for it is through Jesus Christ that men’s spiritual sacrifices become acceptable to God (1Pe 2:5). So the elect are sprinkled with the blood of Christ, i.e. brought into communion with God by His sacrifice (1Pe 1:2). Relatively to man, it is a means of ransoming or liberating man from the bondage compare sin. Knowing that ye were redeemed (, elutrothete, literally, ransomed, from lutron, ransom, an echo of Mar 10:45)…with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot (1Pe 1:18, 1Pe 1:19). The sacrificial language is simple and undeveloped, and it is not clear whether the figure of lamb implies a reference to the paschal lamb or to Isa 53:7, or to both. The effect on man is, however, clear. Christ bare our sins in his body upon the tree, that we, having died unto sins, might live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed (1Pe 2:24; see the whole passage, 1Pe 2:21-24, reminiscent of the figure of the Suffering Servant of Isaiah, Isa 53:1-12).

3. Epistles of Paul:

Christ’s mediatorship stands at the very center of Paul’s gospel; this in spite of the fact that only once does he apply the term mediator to Christ (1Ti 2:5), and that in the only other passage where he uses the word, he applies it to Moses, in a sense which might seem to be inconsistent with the idea of Christ’s mediatorship, namely, where he discusses the relation of law to promise. The law was ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not … of one; but God is one (Gal 3:19, Gal 3:20).

This passage has had to undergo about 300 different interpretations. The view that the mediator here is Christ (Origen, Augustine and most of the Fathers, Calvin, etc.) is clearly untenable. Modern exegetes agree that the reference is to Moses (compare Lev 26:46, where the Septuagint has by the hand of Moses; Philo calls Moses mediator and reconciler, De Vit. Moys, iii. 19), who, according to a rabbinical tradition, received the Law through the intermediation of angles (compare Act 7:53; Heb 2:2). Nor is it likely that Paul meant the reader to realize the glory of the law and the solemnity of its ordination (Meyer). The point is rather the inferiority of the law to the evangelical promise to Abraham. Mediation implies at least two parties between whom it is carried on. The law was given by a double mediatorship, that of the angels and that of Moses, and was thus two removes from its Divine source. But in relation to the promise God stood alone, i.e. acted freely, unconditionally, independently, and for Himself alone. The promise is no agreement between two, buy the free gift of the one God (so Schleiermacher, Lightfoot, etc.). This is by no means a denial of the Divine origin of the law (Ritschl), for the mediation of angels and of Moses was Divinely authorized; but it does seem to make the method of mediation inferior to that of the direct communication of God’s gracious will to man. Paul is not, however, treating of the principle of mediation in the abstract, but only that form of it which implies a contract between two parties. Christ is not Mediator in the same sense as Moses, for the free and unconditioned character of the forgiving grace which Christ mediates is by no means diminished by the fact of His mediation.

What, then, is Paul’s positive teaching on Christ’s Mediatorship?

(1) The Need of a Mediator:

The need of a Mediator arises out of the fact of sin. Sin interrupts the harmonious relation between God and man. It results in a state of mutual alienation. On the one hand, man is in a state of enmity to God (Rom 5:10; Rom 8:7; Col 1:21). On the other hand, God is moved to righteous wrath in relation to the sinner (Rom 1:18; Rom 5:9; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6). Hence, the need of a mutual change of attitude, a removal of God’s displeasure against the sinner as well as of the sinner’s hostility to God. God could not restore man to favor by a mere fiat, without some public exhibition of Divine righteousness, and vindication of His character as not indifferent to sin (compare Rom 3:25, Rom 3:26). Such exhibition demanded a Mediator.

(2) The Qualifications:

The qualification of Christ to be the Mediator depends on His intimate relation to both parties at variance.

(a) Christ’s Relation to Man:

Firstly, He is Himself a man, i.e. not merely man generically, but an individual man. The one mediator between God and men is himself man, Christ Jesus (1Ti 2:5), born of a woman (Gal 4:4), in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3, where the word likeness does not make flesh unreal, but qualifies sinful), i.e. bore to the eye the aspect of an ordinary man; secondly, He bore a particular relation to a section of humanity, the Jews (Rom 1:3; Rom 9:5); thirdly, He bore a universal relation to mankind in general. He was more than an individual among many, like a link in a chain. He was the Second Adam, the archetypal, universal, representative Man, whose actions therefore had significance beyond Himself and were ideally the actions of humanity, just as Adam’s act had, on a lower plane, a significance for the whole race (Rom 5:12-21; 1Co 15:22, 1Co 15:45).

(b) His Relation to God:

Paul very frequently speaks of Christ as the Son of God, and that in a unique sense. Moreover, He was the image of God (2Co 4:4; Col 1:15), and subsisted originally in the form of God (Phi 2:6). He is set alongside with God over against idols (1Co 8:5, 1Co 8:6), and is coordinated with God in the benediction (2Co 13:14). Clearly Paul sets Him in the Divine sphere over against all that is not God. Yet he assigns Him a certain subordination, and even asserts that His mediatorial kingship will come to an end, that God may be all in all (1Co 15:24, 1Co 15:28). But this cessation of His function as Mediator of salvation, when its end shall have been attained, cannot affect His Divine dignity, since the mediatorial sovereignty which is now ceasing was not its cause, but its consequence (B. Weiss, II, 396).

(3) The Means, the Death of Christ:

The means of effecting the reconciliation was mainly the death on the cross. Paul emphasizes the mediating value of the death both on its objective (God-ward) side and on its subjective (man-ward) side. First, it is the objective ground of forgiveness and favor with God. On the basis of what Christ has done, God ceases to reckon to men their sins (2Co 5:19). Paul’s view of the death may be seen by considering some of his most characteristic expressions. (a) It is an act of reconciliation. This involves a change of attitude, not only in man, but in God, a relinquishing of the Divine wrath without which there can be no restoration of peaceful relations (though this is disputed by many, e.g. Ritschl, Lightfoot, Westcott, Beyschlag), but not a change of nature or of intention, for the Divine wrath is but a mode of the eternal love, and moreover it is the Father Himself who provides the means of reconciliation and undertakes to accomplish it (2Co 5:19; compare Col 1:20, Col 1:21; Eph 2:16). (b) It is an act of propitiation (Rom 3:25, , hilasterion, from , hilaskesthai, to render favorable or propitious). Here there is a clear though tacit reference to a change of attitude on God’s part. He who was not formerly propitious to man was appeased through the death of Christ. Yet the propitiatory means are provided by God Himself, who takes the initiative in the matter (whom God set forth, etc.). (c) It is a ransom. The Mediator gave himself a ransom for all (1Ti 2:6). The idea of payment of a ransom price is clearly implied in the word redemption (Rom 3:24; 1Co 1:30; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14, , apolutrosis, from lutron, ransom). It is not alone the fact of liberation (Westcott, Ritschl), but also the cost of liberation that is referred to. Hence, Christians are said to be redeemed, bought with a price (Gal 3:13; Gal 4:5; 1Co 6:20; 1Co 7:23; compare 1Pe 1:18 f). Yet the metaphor cannot be pressed to yield an answer to the question to whom the ransom was paid. All that can safely be said is that it expresses the tremendous cost of our salvation, namely, the self-surrendered life (the blood) of Christ. (d) Strong substitutionary language is sometimes used, notably in Gal 3:13 (having become a curse for us) and in 2Co 5:21 (Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf). But the sinless substitute is not regarded as actually punished (that would be a moral contradiction). His death was not penal substitution, but a substitute for penalty. It had the value to God of the punishment of sinners, in virtue of His oneness with the race. It was the recognition from within humanity of the sinfulness of sin, and expressed the Divine righteousness as fully as penalty would have done. The secret seems to be Christ’s sympathetic love by which He identified Himself with man’s sin and doom of death. (e) Sacrificial language is used, as in 1Co 5:7; Eph 5:2, and in the references to Christ’s blood. Not often, however, does Paul explicitly speak of the death in terms of the Levitical ritual, which would be less congenial to his mind than the prophetic conception of the Suffering Servant. Yet he does seem to regard the death of Christ as the culmination of all that the sacrifices of the Old Testament had imperfectly realized. Secondly, the subjective aspect of Christ’s work is emphasized quite as much as the objective. The death of Christ, being inwardly assimilated by faith, becomes to the believer the principle of ethical transformation, so that he may become worthy of the Divine favor which he now enjoys. As a result of his subjective identity with Christ through faith, the objective state of privilege is changed into actual liberation from sin (Gal 2:20; Gal 6:14; Rom 6:6, Rom 6:7; Col 3:3).

(4) The Resurrection and Exaltation:

The resurrection and exaltation of Christ are essential to His mediatorial work (1Co 15:17). It is not alone that the resurrection proves that the death of Christ was not the death of a sinner, but the vicarious death of the sinless Mediator of salvation (B. Weiss, I, 436), but that salvation cannot be realized except through communion with the living, glorified Christ, without which the subjective identity of the believer with Christ by which redemption is personally appropriated would not be possible (Gal 2:20; Rom 6:4, Rom 6:5; Phi 3:10; Col 3:1). The exaltation also makes possible His continuous heavenly intercession on our behalf (Rom 8:34), which is the climax of His mediatorial activities.

(5) The Cosmic Aspect of Christ’s Mediatorship:

In his later epistles (especially Colossians and Ephesians), Paul lays stress on Christ’s mediatorial activity in creation and providence, though the germs of his later teaching are found in the earlier epistles (1Co 8:6). He is resisting a kind of nascent Gnostic dualism, according to which God could communicate with the world only through a hierarchy of intermediate powers. Against this he proclaims Christ as the one and only Mediator between God and the universe, having, on the one hand, a unique relation to God (the image of the invisible God, Col 1:15; in whom the fullness of God dwells, Col 1:19; Col 2:9), and, on the other hand, a unique relation to the world, as its creative agent, its immanent principle of unity, and its ultimate goal (Col 1:15-17). Here the apostle shows affinity with the Logos-doctrine of Philo, though the differences are marked and fundamental. Corresponding to this wider view of Christ’s person, there is a wide view of the reconciliation wrought through Him. It even extends to the world beyond man, and restores the broken harmony of the universe (Col 1:20; Eph 1:10).

4. Epistle to the Hebrews:

The main thesis of Hebrews is the absoluteness and finality of the gospel and its superiority over Judaism. The finality of Christianity depends on the fact that it has a perfect Mediator, who is the substance of which the various Jewish forms of mediation were types and shadows. He illustrates this by a series of contrasts between Christ and the mediators of the old system (by the application of principles and exegetical methods which reveal the influence of the school of Philo). In each contrast, Christ’s superiority is based on His Sonship. (1) Christ is superior to the prophets as Mediator of revelation. The Old Testament revelation was fragmentary and multiform, while now God speaks, not through many agents, but through One, and that one a Son. As Son He is the perfectly adequate expression of the Father. The author takes us at once to the high transcendental sphere of Christ’s relations to God and the universe, in virtue of which He is God’s Mediator in creation, providence, revelation and redemption (Heb 1:1-3). (2) He is superior to the angels, through whose mediation the law was given (Heb 1:4-14). (3) He is superior to Moses, the human agent in the giving of the law (Heb 3:1-6). (4) He is greater than Aaron the high priest, the people’s representative before God. This leads to the central doctrine of the epistle, the high-priesthood of Jesus. The following are the salient points in the elaborate treatment of this subject:

(1) Christ’s Qualification for the High-Priesthood Is Twofold:

(a) His participation in all human experience (except sin), which guarantees His power of sympathy. Every high priest, as men’s representative before God, must be taken from among men (Heb 5:1). Hence, the author lays great stress on the human nature and experiences of Christ (compare Heb 2:10, Heb 2:17, Heb 2:18; Heb 4:15; Heb 5:7, Heb 5:8). (b) His Divine appointment. Every priest must have a call from God. So Christ has been appointed priest, not indeed in the Aaronic line, but after the order of Melchizedek (Heb 5:1-10).

(2) The Nature of His Priesthood, Its Superiority to the Levitical Priesthood.

The priests of the Old Testament themselves needed atonement, for they were not sinless; Christ is holy, guileless, undefiled, and need not make atonement for His own sins. They were priests only for a time, and were many in number, for they were mortal; but He abideth forever, and His priesthood is eternal. They were dependent on the law of physical descent; He was a priest after the order of Melchizedek, whose priesthood did not depend on genealogy or pedigree, and who combined the functions of king with those of priest. In a word, their order was transient, temporary, shadowy; His belonged to the world of unchanging reality (Heb 7).

(3) The Realization of His High-Priesthood.

A high priest implies a sacrifice; hence, Christ must have somewhat to offer (Heb 8:3). In the Levitical system, the priest and the sacrifice are distinct from each other. But Christ offered not an external gift, but Himself. Much stress is laid on Christ’s voluntary obedience (Heb 5:8; Heb 10:7), progressively attained through suffering, and culminating in the absolute surrender of His life (blood) in death. His sacrifice harmonizes with the principle that apart from shedding of blood there is no remission (Heb 9:22), although the principle is lifted from the physical to the spiritual realm. In working this out, the author makes use of analogies drawn from three parts of the Levitical ritual. (a) Christ’s death was a sin offering. He has offered one final sacrifice for sins (Heb 10:12, Heb 10:18). As priest, he has made propitiation for the sins of the people (Heb 2:17); as victim He was once (for all) offered to bear the sins of many (Heb 9:28). (b) The Sinaitic covenant (Exo 24:8) is made use of. Christ is the mediator of a new (better) covenant (Heb 8:6; Heb 9:15; Heb 12:24), i.e. the agent interposing between God and man in the establishment of a new relationship analogous to Moses in the old covenant. Even the first covenant was dedicated with blood, and so the blood of the Son of God was the blood of the covenant (Heb 10:29; compare Mar 14:24). On the double meaning of the word diatheke (covenant, testament), the author bases a twofold argument for the necessity of Christ’s death (Heb 9:15 ff). (c) The ritual of the Day of Atonement furnishes another analogy. As the high priest once a year entered the most holy place of the earthly people, so Christ has entered once for all the true spiritual sanctuary in heaven, and there He presents Himself to God as the Mediator able to make intercession for us with the Father (Heb 9:12, Heb 9:24-26; compare Heb 7:25). He is a ministering priest in the true tabernacle, the immediate presence of God (Heb 8:2). Thus the ascension and session make possible the culmination of the mediatorial work of Christ in the eternal sacrifice and intercession within the veil.

(4) The Man-Ward Efficacy of His Mediatorship.

The effect of Christ’s death on man is described by the words cleanse, sanctify, perfect (Heb 9:14; Heb 10:10, Heb 10:14, Heb 10:29; Heb 13:12), words which have a ritualistic quite as much as an ethical sense, meaning the removal of the sense of guilt, dedication to God, and the securing of the privilege of full fellowship with Him. The ultimate blessing that comes to man through the work of Christ is the privilege of free, unrestricted access to God by the removal of the obstacle of guilt (Heb 4:16; Heb 10:19 ff).

5. The Johannine Writings:

(1) The Fourth Gospel.

Aspects of our Lord’s teaching unassimilated by the other disciples, and therefore but meagerly touched on in the Synoptics, find prominence in the Gospel of John, but colored by his own meditations. Great emphasis is laid on the idea of salvation by revelation mediated through Jesus Christ. The historical revelation of God in the person and teaching of Jesus is the main subject of the Gospel. But in the Prologue we have the eternal background of the historical manifestation in the doctrine of the Logos, who, as Son in eternal fellowship with the Father, His mediator in creation, and the immanent principle of revelation in the world, is fitted to become God’s Revealer in history (Joh 1:11-18). His work on earth is to dispense light and life, knowledge of God and salvation. Through Him God gives to the world eternal life (Joh 3:16). He is the Water of Life (Joh 4:14; Joh 7:37), the Bread of Life (Joh 6:48 ff), the Light of the World (Joh 8:12); it is by inward appropriation of Him that salvation is mediated to men (Joh 6:52 ff). He is the perfect revealer of God, hence, the only means of access to the Father (Joh 14:6, Joh 14:9). It is on salvation by illumination and communion, rather than on salvation by reconciliation and atonement that chief stress is laid. Sacrificial or propitiatory language is not used of Christ’s death. Yet emphasis is laid on the voluntary and vicarious character of His death. He lays down His life of Himself (Joh 10:18); The good shepherd layeth down his life for (= on behalf of) the sheep (Joh 10:11; compare Joh 15:13). Christ’s death was the supreme example of the law that self-sacrifice is necessary to the highest and most fruitful life (Joh 12:23 ff). In John 17 we have a unique instance of our Lord’s intercessory prayer.

(2) The Epistles.

In 1 John we find more explicit statements with regard to the connection between the death of Christ and sin. The blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin (1Jo 1:7); He was manifested to take away sins (1Jo 3:5); If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, i.e. a pleader who will mediate with God on our behalf, the ground of His intercessory efficacy being that He is the propitiation for our sins (1Jo 2:2; 1Jo 4:10, a term which links the Johannine doctrine to that of Paul, though 1 John represents Christ Himself, and not merely His death on the cross, as the propitiation). This latter term shows that an objective value is attached to the atonement, as in some way neutralizing or making amends for sin in the eyes of God, yet in such a way as not to contradict the principles of righteousness (compare Jesus Christ the righteous, 1Jo 2:1).

(3) The Apocalypse.

The Apocalypse presents both aspects of Christ’s mediation. On the one hand, He is associated with God in the government of the world and in judgment (Rev 3:21; Rev 7:10; Rev 6:16), holds the keys of death and Hades (Rev 1:18), is the Lord of lords and King of kings (Rev 17:14; Rev 19:16), and is the Mediator of creation (Rev 3:14). On the other hand, by His sacrificial act He represents men before God. The most characteristic expression of this is the title the Lamb (29 t). By His blood the guilty are cleansed and made saints, purchased unto God (Rev 5:9; Rev 7:14). The lamb is the symbol of the sacrificial love which is the heart of God’s sovereignty (Rev 5:6). It is not clear whether the allusion in this title is to the paschal lamb or to the Suffering Servant pictured as a lamb led to the slaughter (Isa 53:7), or to both. In any case it contains the idea of Christ’s redemptive sacrifice, which is declared to be an essential part of God’s eternal counsel (Rev 13:8 margin, the Lamb that hath been slain from the foundation of the world).

V. Conclusion.

Our inquiry will have shown how central and prominent is the idea of mediation throughout the Scriptures. We might even say it supplies the key to the unity of the Bible. In the Old Testament the principle is given in divers portions and in divers manners, but in the New Testament it converges in the doctrine of the person and work of the One final Mediator, the Son of God. Amid all the rich diversity of the various parts of the New Testament, there is one fundamental conception common to all, that of Christ as at once the interpreter of God to men and the door of access for men to God. Especially is Christ’s self-sacrifice presented as the effective cause of our salvation, as a means of removing the guilt and sin which stand as a barrier in the way of God’s purpose concerning man and of man’s fellowship with God. There is a tendency in some influential writers of today to speak disparagingly of the doctrine of the one Mediator, on the ground that it injures the direct relationship of man with God (e.g. R. Eucken, Truth of Religion, 583 ff). Here we can reply only that the doctrine properly defined is attested in universal Christian experience, and that, so far from standing in the way of our personal approach to God, it is a simple historical fact that apart from the work of Jesus we would not enjoy that free access to Him which is now our privilege.

Literature.

Besides the commentaries, such works on Old Testament Theology as those of Oehler, Schultz, A.B. Davidson, and on New Testament Theology by B. Weiss, Beyschlag, Holtzmann, W.B. Stevens, Weinel; Wendt, The Teaching of Jesus; A.B. Bruce, Paul’s Conception of Christianity and The Epistle to the Hebrews; J. Denney, The Death of Christ; Du Bose, The Gospel in the Gospels, The Gospel according to Paul, High-Priesthood and Sacrifice. For the idea of mediation in Jewish religion, Oesterley, The Jewish Doctrine of Mediation; Toy, Judaism and Christianity. Much material on the Biblical doctrine may be found in such works as Dorner, System of Christian Doctrine; Ritschl, Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versohnung, 3 volumes (Volumes I and III, English translation); Dale, The Atonement; McLeod Campbell, The Nature of the Atonement; F.D. Maurice, The Doctrine of Sacrifice; Moberly, Atonement and Personality; J. Scott Lidgett, The Spiritual Principle of the Atonement; G.B. Stevens, Christian Doctrine of Salvation; articles in HDB, DCG, and in this Encyclopedia on Mediation; Mediator; Atonement; Messiah; Propitiation; Prophets; Priests; Ransom; Reconciliation; Sacrifice; Salvation, etc.

Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles