| <p> '''''of´is''''' -'''''is''''' . </ p> <p> General Titles of our Lord </p> <p> I. Christ's [[Mediation]] [[Expressed]] in the [[Specific]] [[Offices]] </p> <p> [[Historical]] [[Review]] of the [[Theory]] < /p> < p> II. The threefold Office in the Old [[Testament]] < /p> < p> The [[Failure]] of the Offices to [[Secure]] Their [[Desired]] Ends </p> <p> III. The [[Prophet]] < /p> < p> The [[Forecast]] of the [[True]] Prophet < /p> < p> IV. [[ Christ]] the Prophet </p> <p> 1. Christ's [ [Manner] ] of Teaching < /p> < p> 2. Christ as Prophet in His [[ Church]] </p> <p> V. The [[ Priesthood]] of Christ </p> <p> 1. [[Judaic]] Priesthood </p> <p> 2. [[Sacrificial]] Relations of Christ in the [[Gospels]] < /p> < p> 3. Christ's [[Ethical]] Teaching [[ Affected]] by Sacrificial [[Ideas]] </ p> <p> 4. [[Mutual]] Confirmations of the Synoptics < /p> < p> 5. The [[ Dual]] [[ Outgrowth]] of Sacrifice, the [[ Victim]] and [[Sacrificer]] </p> <p> 6. Christ's Priesthood in the [[Apostolic]] [[Ministry]] and [[Epistles]] </p> <p> 7. The [[Crowning]] [[Testimony]] of the [[Epistle]] to the Hebrews </p> < p> 8. Christ's [[Relation]] to [[Sin]] Expressed in Sacrificial Terms </ p> <p> VI. Christ's [[Kingly]] Office </p> <p> The [[Breakdown]] of the [[ Secular]] [[Monarchy]] </ p> <p> VII. The [[Messianic]] [[Basis]] of the threefold Office of the Lord < /p> < p> Literature < /p> General Titles of Our Lord < p> This term has been used by theologians to describe the various characters of our Lord's redemptive work. [[Many]] appellative and metaphorical titles are found in [[Scripture]] for Christ, designative of His [[ Divine]] and human natures and His work: [[ God]] (John 20:28 ); Lord (Matthew 22:43 , Matthew 22:14 ) ; Word (John 1:1 , John 1:14 ); [[Son]] of God (Matthew 3:17; Luke 1:35; Colossians 1:15; 1 John 5:20 ); [[ Firstborn]] from the dead (Colossians 1:18 ); Beginning of the [[Creation]] of God (Revelation 3:14 ); [[Image]] of God (2 Corinthians 4:4 ); [[Express]] Image of His [[Person]] ( Hebrews 1:3 the King James Version) ; [[Alpha]] and [[Omega]] ( Revelation 1: 8; Revelation 22:13 ); Son of Man (Matthew 8:20; John 1:51; Acts 7:56 ); Son of [[David]] ( Matthew 9:27; Matthew 21:9 ); [[ Last]] [[ Adam]] (1 Corinthians 15:45 , 1 Corinthians 15:47 ) ; [[Captain]] of [[Salvation]] (Hebrews 2:10 margin); [[Saviour ]] ( Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31 ); [[Redeemer]] (Isaiah 59:20; Titus 2:14 ); [[Author]] and [[Perfecter]] of [[ Faith]] (Hebrews 12:2 ); [[ Light]] of the [[ World]] (John 8:12 ); [[Lamb]] of God (John 1:29 , John 1:36 ); [[Creator]] of all things (John 1:3 , John 1:10 ); [[Mediator]] (1 Timothy 2:5 ); Prophet (Deuteronomy 18:15; Luke 24:19 ); [[Great]] High [[Priest]] (Hebrews 4:14 ); King (Luke 1:33; Revelation 17:14; Revelation 19:16 ); Way, [[Truth]] and Life (John 14:6 ). These and many others express the mediatorial office of the Lord. As mediator, He stands between God and Man, revealing the Father to man, and expressing the true relation of man to God. The term (Greek μεσίτης , <i> '''''mesı́tēs''''' < /i> ), moreover, signifies messenger, interpreter, advocate, surety or pledge in Galatians 3:19 , Galatians 3:20 , where a covenant is declared to be assured by the hand of one who intervenes. [[ Thus]] the covenant is confirmed and fulfilled by Him who secures that its stipulations should be carried out, and harmony is restored where before there had been difference and separation (1 Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 8:6; Hebrews 9:15; Hebrews 12: 24 ). Thus is expressed the purpose of God to redeem mankind by mediation. </p> I. Christ's Mediation Expressed in the Specific Offices <p> In presenting a systematic idea of this [[ Redemptive]] [[Work]] of Christ by Mediation, [[Christian]] thought gave to it a harmonious character by choosing the most general and familiar titles of the Lord as the most inclusive categories expressive of the mode of Redemption. These were prophetic, priestly and regal. < /p> < p> Historical Review of the Theory </p> <p> The first trace of this division is found in Eusebius, <i> Historia Ecclesiastica </i> , I, 3, and his <i> Demonstratio Evangelica </i> , IV, 15. It was accepted very largely in the [[Greek]] church, and continues to be used by [[Russian]] ecclesiastical writers. The [[Roman]] church has not so generally followed it, though it is found in the writings of many Roman theologians. The earlier reformers, especially Lutheran, ignored it. But Gerhard employed it and the [[Lutheran]] theologians followed his example, although some of these repudiated it, as Ernesti, Döderlein and Knapp. Calvin employed the division in his <i> Institutes </i> , II, 15. It was incorporated in the [[Heidelberg]] [[Catechism]] and has been adopted by most theologians of the [[Reformed]] church and by [[English]] and [[American]] divines. In [[Germany]] most theological writers, such as [[ De]] Wette, Schleiermacher, Tholuck, Nitzsch, Ebrard, adopt it, affirming it as expressive of the essential quality of the work of redemption, and the most complete presentment of its contents. The justification of this position is found in the important place occupied in the progress of revelation by those to whom were entrusted the duties of teaching and leading men in relation to God in the offices of priest, prophet and king. Even the modern development of Christian thought which extends the view of Divine dealing with man over the entire race and its religious history, not excluding those who would find in the most recent conditions of the world's life the outworking of the will of God in the purposes of human salvation, cannot discover any better form of expressing Christ's relation to man than in terms of the prophetic, the priestly and the governmental offices. The prophet is the instrument of teaching: the priest expresses the ethical relation of man to God; while the king furnishes the typical form of that exercise of sovereign authority and [[Providential]] direction which concerns the practical life of the race. </p> II. The threefold Office in the Old Testament <p> From the close relation which [[Jesus]] in both His person and work bore to the Old Testament dispensation, it is natural to turn to the preparatory history of the early [[Scriptures]] for the first notes of these mediatorial offices. That the development of the [[Jewish]] people and system ever moved toward Christ as an end and fulfillment is universally acknowledged. The vague and indeterminate conditions of both the religious and national life of [[Israel]] manifest a definite movement toward a clearer apprehension of man's relationship to God. Nothing is more clear in Israel's history than the gradual evolution of official service both of church and state, as expressed in the persons and duties of the prophet, the priest and the king. The early patriarch contained in himself the threefold dignity, and discharged the threefold duty. As the family became tribal, and the tribe national, these duties were divided. The order of the household was lost for a while in the chaos of the larger and less homogeneous society. The domestic altar was multiplied in many "high places. " [[ Professional]] interpreters of more or less religious value began to be seers, and here and there, prophets. The leadership of the people was occasional, ephemeral and uncertain. But the men of Divine calling appeared from time to time; the foundation work of [[ Moses]] was built on; the regular order of the worship of Yahweh, notwithstanding many lapses, steadily prevailed. Samuel gave dignity to his post as judge, and he again beheld the open vision of the Lord; he offered the appointed sacrifices; he established the kingly office; and although he was not permitted to see the family of David on the throne, like Moses he beheld afar off the promised land of a [[Divinely]] appointed kingdom. With the accession of the [[Davidic]] house, the three orders of God's service were completely developed. The king was seated on the throne, the priest was ministering at the one altar of the nation, the prophet with the Divine message was ever at hand to teach, to guide and to rebuke. </p> <p> The Failure of the Offices to Secure Their Desired Ends </p> <p> [[Notwithstanding]] this growth of the special institutions - prophet, priest and king - the religious and national condition was by no means satisfactory. The kingdom was divided; external foes threatened the existence of the nation; idolatry was not extinguished, and the prophets who were true to [[Yahweh]] were compelled to warn and rebuke the sins of the rulers and the people, and even to testify against the priests for their unfaithfulness to the truth and purity of the religion which they professed. The best hopes of Israel and the Divine promises seem Thus to be contradicted by the constant failure of the people to realize their best ideals. Hence, slowly arose a vague expectation of reform. The idea of the better condition which was coming grew ever more distinct, and settled down at length to Israel's Messianic hope, expressed in various forms, finally converging to the looking for of one who should in some mysterious way gather into himself the ideas which belonged especially to the three great offices. </p> III. The Prophet <p> In this article we are concerned only with the offices as they tend to their fulfillment in Christ. For the more general treatment of each office, reference must be made to the special articles. </p> <p> The Forecast of the True Prophet </p> <p> The first appearance of the idea of the special prophet of Yahweh is in Deuteronomy 18:15 . Moses had been sent by the people to hear the Lord's words on their behalf (Exodus 20:19; Deuteronomy 5:27 ); and this incident in the later passage of Deuteronomy 18:15-22 is connected with the promise of a prophet, while at the same time reference is made to the general fact of prophecy and the conditions of its validity and acceptance. Here we find the germ of the expectation of the Prophet, which occupied so large a place in the mind of Israel. In the act of the people sending Moses to receive the word, and Yahweh's promise to send a prophet whom they would accept, we see also the suggestion of a distinction between the first dispensation and the latter. The Divine promise was to the effect that what was given by Moses God would consummate in a prophetic revelation through a person. The conception of this personality is found in the second part of Isa (40 through 66). Isaiah's mission was vain, Isaiah 49:4 , but the coming one shall prevail, 49 through 53 ( <i> '''''passim''''' </i> ). But the success of this servant of Yahweh was not to be only as a prophet, but by taking on himself the penalty of sin (Isaiah 53:5 ), and by being made an offering for sin; and as [[Mighty]] [[Victor]] triumphing over all foes (Isaiah 53:10-12 ), the dignities of whose kingship are set forth in various parts of the prophetic writings. Thus the general effect of the course of the earlier revelation may be summed up in this prophetic ministry with which has been combined a priestly and a royal character. It was an ever-advancing manifestation of the nature and will of God, delivered by inspired men who spake at sundry times and in divers manners, but whose message was perfected and extended by Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1 ), who Thus became the Prophet of the Lord. </p> IV. Christ the Prophet <p> Christ's ministry illustrates the prophetic office in the most extensive and exalted sense of the term. He was designed and appointed by the Father (Isaiah 61:1 , Isaiah 61:2; compare Luke 4:16-21; Matthew 17:5 ). In 1 Corinthians 1:30 , Christ is declared to be made to us wisdom. His intimate knowledge of God (John 1:18; Matthew 11:27; John 16:15 ), the qualities of His teaching dependent upon His nature, both Divine and human (John 3:34 ); His authority (John 1:9 , John 1:17 , John 1:18; Luke 4:18-21 ); His knowledge of God (Mark 12:29; John 4:24; Matthew 11:25; John 17:11 , John 17:25; Matthew 18:35 ) - these all peculiarly fitted Christ to be the [[Revealer]] of God. [[Besides]] His doctrine of God, His ministry included the truth concerning Himself, His nature, claims, mission, the doctrine of the [[Holy]] Spirit, and the religious life of man. He taught as none other the foundation of religion, the facts on which it was based, the essence of Divine service, the nature of sin, the grace of God, the means of atonement, the laws of the kingdom of God and the future state. By the acknowledgment of even those who have denied His Divine nature and redemptive work, He has been recognized as the [[Supreme]] [[Moral]] Teacher of the world. His claim to be <i> the </i> Prophet is seen in that He is the source of the ever-extending revelation of the eternal. His own words and works He declared were only part of the fuller knowledge which would be furnished by the system which He established ( Luke 9:45; Luke 18:34; John 12:16; John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:12 , John 16:13 , John 16:14 ). </p> <p> 1. Christ's Manner of Teaching </p> <p> How remarkable was His method of teaching! Parable, proverb, absolute affirmation, suggestion, allusion to simple objects, practical life - these all made His teaching powerful, easily understood, living; sometimes His action was His word - and all with a commanding dignity and gracious winsomeness, that was felt by His hearers and has ever been recognized (Matthew 7:29 ). So perfect and exalted was the teaching of Jesus that many have supposed that revelation ceased with Him, and the immediate followers whom He especially inspired to be His witnesses and interpreters. [[Certainly]] in Him the prophetic ministry culminated. </p> <p> 2. Christ as Prophet in His Church </p> <p> An important aspect of Christ's prophetic office is that of His relation to the church as the source, through the instrumentality of His Spirit, of ever-enlarging knowledge of Divine truth which it has been able to gain. This is the real significance of the claim which some churches make to be the custodians and interpreters of the tradition of faith, with which has also gone theory of development - not as a human act but as a ministration of the Lord through His Spirit, which is granted to the church. Even those who hold that all Divine truth is to be found in the sacred Scriptures have yet maintained that God has much truth still to bring out of His word by the leading and direction of the [[Spirit]] of Jesus. The Scripture itself declares that Christ was the light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world (John 1:9 ). He Himself promised that the Spirit which He would give would guide His followers into all truth (John 16:13 ). The apostles claimed to receive their teaching and direction of the church from the Lord (1 Corinthians 11:23 ). The testimony of Jesus is definitely declared to be the spirit of prophecy (Revelation 19:10 ). Indeed, all the apostolic writings in almost every line affirm that what they teach is received from the Spirit, who is the Spirit of the Lord. </p> V. The Priesthood of Christ <p> 1. Judaic Priesthood </p> <p> For the history of the development of the priesthood of Israel on which our Lord's [[High-Priesthood]] is ideally based, reference must be made to the article especially dealing with that subject. The bearings of that institution upon the work of Jesus as Redeemer alone fall under this section. [[Judaism]] like all religions developed an extensive system of priestly service. As the moral sense of the people enlarged and became more distinct, the original simplicity of sacrifice, especially as a commensal act, in which the unity of the celebrants with each other and with God was expressed, was expanded into acts regularly performed by officials, in which worship, thanksgiving, covenant and priestly expiation and atonement were clearly and definitely expressed. The progress of sacrifice may be seen in the history of the Old Testament from [[Cain]] and Abel's (Genesis 4:3 , [[Genesis]] 4:4 ), Noah's (Genesis 8:20 ), Abraham's covenant (Genesis 15:9-18 ), etc., to the elaborate services of the [[Mosaic]] ritual set forth in Lev, the full development of which is found only in the later days of Israel. When Christ appeared, the entire sacerdotal system had become incorporated in the mind, customs and language of the people. They had learned more or less distinctly the truth of man's relation to God in its natural character, and especially in that aspect where man by his sin had separated himself from God and laid himself open to the penalty of law. The conception of priesthood had Thus grown in the consciousness of Israel, as the necessary instrument of mediation between man and God. [[Priestly]] acts were performed on behalf of the worshipper. The priest was to secure for man the Divine favor. This could only be gained by an act of expiation. [[Something]] must be done in order to set forth the sin of man, his acknowledgment of guilt, the satisfaction of the law, and the assurance of the Divine forgiveness, the restored favor of God and finally the unity of man and God. </p> <p> 2. Sacrificial Relations of Christ in the Gospels </p> <p> That the work of Christ partook of the nature of priestly service is already indicated by references in the Gospels themselves. He was called "Jesus; for it is he that shall save his people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21 ). Salvation from sin, in the habit of thought at which the [[Jew]] had arrived, must have expressed itself most clearly in the symbolic signification of the sacrifices in the temple. Thus in the very name which our Lord received His priesthood is suggested. The frankincense of the Magi's offering is not without its mystical meaning (Matthew 2:11 ). Some may find in the Baptist's words, "baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire" (Matthew 3:11 ), a suggestion of priestly action, for the understanding of John's declaration must be found in the conventional ideas of the Jewish thought of the period, determined as they undoubtedly were by the history of priestly service in the past and the fully developed ritual of the temple. The baptizing of the proselyte was not necessarily a priestly act, as indeed we cannot be certain that the baptism was always necessary at the introduction of a proselyte into the Jewish church. But the association of circumcision with the initiation of the proselyte certainly introduced the priest, and the sprinkling of the congregation by the priest was a familiar part of his official duties. It is quite probable therefore that John's use of the expression carried with it something of the sacerdotal idea. </p> <p> 3. Christ's Ethical Teaching Affected by Sacrificial Ideas </p> <p> The spirit of our Lord's teaching, as seen in the [[Sermon]] on the Mount, etc., as it reflects the thought of the [[Galilean]] ministry, may be regarded as prophetic rather than priestly. Still the end of the teaching was righteousness, and it was impossible for a Jew to conceive of the securing of righteousness without some reference to priestly administration and influence. The contrast of the effect of Christ's teaching with that of the scribes (Matthew 7:29 ) keeps us in the vicinity of the law as applied through the sacerdotal service of which the scribes were the interpreters and teachers, and surely therefore a hint of our Lord's relation to priesthood may have found its way into the minds of His immediate hearers. He was careful to recognize the authority of the priest (Matthew 8:4 ). </p> <p> The doctrine of sacrifice emerges somewhat more distinctly in the reference to the cross, which our Lord associates with the thought of finding life by losing it (Matthew 16:24 , Matthew 16:25 ), and when the taking up the cross is interpreted by following Christ, and this hint is soon followed by Christ's distinct reference to His coming sufferings (Matthew 17:9 , Matthew 17:12 ), more definitely referred to in Matthew 17:22 , Matthew 17:23 . Now the object of the work of the Lord takes clearer form. The Son of Man is come to save that which was lost (Matthew 18:11 the American [[Revised]] Version, margin). As the time of the catastrophe drew nearer, the Lord became still more distinct in His references to His coming death ( Matthew 20:18 , Matthew 20:19 ), and at length declares that "the Son of man came ... to give his life a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:28 ). our Lord's quotations (Matthew 21:42; Matthew 23:39 ) concerning the rejected "corner stone," and the Blessed One "that cometh in the name of the Lord" (Psalm 118:22 , [[Psalm]] 118:26 ), are drawn from a psalm filled with the spirit of the priestly service of the temple, and in their reference to Himself again illustrate the ever-increasing recognition of His priesthood. He also uses the official term "Christ" (Messiah, the anointed one) more frequently (Matthew 24:5 , Matthew 24:23 , Matthew 24:14 ). On the eve of the betrayal and trial the crucifixion is clearly foretold (Matthew 26:2 ); and the death (Matthew 26:12 ). The full significance of the death is asserted at the institution of the Lord's Supper. The bread is "my body," the wine is "my blood of the new covenant," and it is declared to be "poured out for many unto remission of sins" (Matthew 26:26-28 margin). </p> <p> 4. Mutual Confirmations of the Synoptics </p> <p> A similar succession of ideas of our Lord's priestly work may be found in the other gospels (see Mark 1:8 , Mark 1:44; Mark 8:29; see below on the significance of the term Christ; Mark 8:31 , Mark 8:34; Mark 9:9 , Mark 9:10 ). The inability of the disciples to understand the life that was to follow death here is indicated - the truth of the gospel of death and resurrection so closely bound up with the conception of sacrifice, where the blood is the life which given becomes the condition of the new union with God, being Thus revealed by Christ as the initial doctrine to be continuously enlarged (Matthew 9:31; Matthew 10:21 , Matthew 10:33 , Matthew 10:14 , 45; Matthew 11:9; Matthew 12:10; Matthew 13:21 , Matthew 13:22; Matthew 14:8 , Matthew 14:22-25 , 61, 62). In Luke the priestly "atmosphere" is introduced in the earliest part of the narrative, the history of [[Zacharias]] and [[Elisabeth]] giving emphasis to the setting of John's own mission (Lk 1). The name Jesus (Luke 1:31 ); the special relation of the new kingdom to sin, necessarily connected with sacrifice in the mind of a priest, found in Zacharias' psalm (Luke 1:77 , Luke 1:78 ); the subtle suggestion of the [[Suffering]] One in the "also" of Luke 2:35 the King James Version (the American Standard Revised Version omits) shows that the third [[Gospel]] is quite in line with the two other Synoptics (see also Luke 3:3; Luke 5:14 ). The claim to forgive sins must have suggested the sacrificial symbol of remission (Luke 5:24; Luke 9:23; Luke 13:35; Luke 14:27; Luke 18:31; Luke 20:14; Luke 22:19 , Luke 22:20; Luke 24:7 , Luke 24:26 , Luke 24:46 , Luke 24:47 ). In the [[Fourth]] Gospel, we have the word of the Baptist, "Behold, the Lamb of God" (John 1:29 , John 1:36 ), where Christ's relation to sin is distinctly expressed (see [[Lamb Of God]] ) - the baptism in the Spirit (John 1:33 ). It is highly probable that the apostle John was the "other" of the two disciples, (John 1:40 ) and, having heard the Baptist's words, is the only evangelist who records them, Thus introducing from his personal knowledge the sacrificial idea earlier into his history than the Synoptics. Christ declares that He will give His life for the life of the world (John 6:51 ). The entire passage (6:47-65) is suffused with the conception of "life for life," one of the elements constituting the conception of the sacrificial act. In John 8:28 (compare John 3:14; John 12:32 ) Christ predicts His crucifixion. The [[Good]] [[Shepherd]] gives His life for the sheep (John 10:15 ). In John 10:17 , John 10:18 , Christ claims the power to lay down His life and to take it again. He is the sacrifice and the Sacrificer. </p> <p> 5. The Dual Outgrowth of Sacrifice, the Victim and Sacrificer </p> <p> Here appears for the first time the double relation of Christ to the sacrificial idea, worked out in the later thought of the church into the full significance of our Lord's priestly office. In John 11:25 , John 11:26 Christ is the source of life, and life after death. It is hardly possible that this conception should not have, even if remotely suggested, some reference to the significance of sacrifice; for in the sacrifices the Divine claim for the blood, as specially to be set apart as the Divine portion, was ever present. God ever claimed the blood as His; for to Him the life was forfeited by sin. And moreover He alone possesses life and gives it. Of that forfeit and that Divine sovereignty of life, sacrifice is the expression. This is fully realized and made actual in Christ's life and death for man, in which man shares by His unity with Christ. Man at once receives the penalty of sin in dying with Christ, and rises again into the new life which our Lord opened, and of which He is the ceaseless energy and power through the spirit of God. The emergence of this idea is illustrated by the evangelist in the sayings of Caiaphas, where as the high priest of the nation he gives, though unconsciously, a significant expression to the truth that it was "expedient" that Jesus 'should die for the nation and for the children of God everywhere scattered' ( John 11:47-52 ). Here the symbolic significance of sacrifice is practically realized: death in the place of another and the giving of life to those for whom the sacrifice was offered. The vitalizing power of Christ's death is asserted in the discourse following the visit of the [[Greeks]] (John 12:24-33 ). The idea of life from the dying seed is associated with the conception of the power of attraction and union by the cross. The natural law of life through death is Thus in harmony with the gift of life through sacrifice involving death. That sacrifice may be found much more widely than merely in death, is shown by the law of service illustrated in the washing of the disciples' feet (John 13:14-17 ); and this is declared to spring out of love (John 15:13 ). For the priestly ideas of our Lord's prayer (Jn 17) see [[Intercession]]; [[Intercession Of Christ]]; [[Prayers Of Jesus]] . </p> <p> 6. Christ's Priesthood in the Apostolic Ministry and Epistles </p> <p> Christ's priestly office finds illustration in the Acts of the Apostles, in the apostolic declaration of Christ's Messianic office, not only Lord, but also Christ the [[Anointed]] One (Acts 2:36 ). Peter's reference to the stone which completed the temple, the service of which was essentially sacrificial, as the [[Symbol]] of Christ, the [[Crown]] of that [[Spiritual]] [[Temple]] (Acts 4:11 ); Philip's application of the passage in Isa of the sheep led to the slaughter (Isaiah 53:7 , Isaiah 53:8 ) to our Lord (Acts 8:32 , Acts 8:35 ); Peter's discourse to Cornelius, culminating in the remission of sins through Christ (Acts 10:43 ) - all indicates the steady growth in the apostolic ministry of the conception of our Lord's priestly office. The idea takes its most distinct form in Paul's sermon at [[Antioch]] (Acts 13:38 , Acts 13:39 ). The necessity of Christ's death and resurrection was the essence of Paul's message (Acts 17:3 ). And in the address to the elders, the church is declared to have been purchased by God with His own blood (Acts 20:28 ). </p> <p> As the epistles express the more elaborated thought of the apostolic ministry, the sacrifice of our Lord naturally finds more definite exposition, and inasmuch as He was both active and passive in the offering of Himself, the conception of sacrifice branches into the twofold division, the object offered, and the person offering. It must never be forgotten, however, that the thought of Christ's sacrifice even when Thus separated into its two great divisions necessarily involves in each conception the suggestion of the other: God setting Him forth as a propitiation through faith in His blood (Romans 3:25 ). He was delivered for our offenses and raised for our justification (Romans 4:25 ). Through Him we have access to the conditions of justification and peace (Romans 5:2 ). Christ died for the ungodly, and we are justified by His blood (Romans 5:8 , Romans 5:9 ). The conception of life both as forfeit from man and gift by God, expressed by sacrifice, runs through the reasoning of Rom 8 (see especially Romans 8:11 , Romans 8:32-34 , where Christ who died for man rises from the dead, and becomes the intercessor; the victim and the High Priest are Thus united in the Lord, and Thus He becomes full expression and supplier of the love of God which is the perfect life). In 1 Corinthians 1:23 [[Paul]] affirms the preaching of the cross as the center of his message. The subject of his teaching was not merely Christ, but Christ and Him crucified ( 1 Corinthians 2:2 ). In 1 Corinthians 5:7 Christ is declared to be the Passover, and sacrificed for us ( 1 Corinthians 10:16-18 ). The manifestation of the death of the Lord by the bread and wine is given in the account of the institution of the [[Supper]] (1 Corinthians 11:26 ). In 1 Corinthians 15:3 Christ is said expressly to have died for our sins. Christ's sacrifice lies at the basis of all the thought of the [[Galatian]] epistle ( 1 Corinthians 1:4; 2:20; 1 Corinthians 3:13 ). </p> <p> In Eph we have the definite statement of redemption through the blood of Christ (Ephesians 1:7 ). Christ's humiliation to the cross is given in Philippians 2:8; community with Christ's death, one of the important elements of sacrifice, in Philippians 3:10 , Philippians 3:11 . Forgiveness, the essence of redemption, is declared to be through the blood of Christ (Colossians 1:14 ). [[Peace]] is secured through the blood of the cross, and reconciliation (Colossians 1:20 ); the presentation of us in Christ's flesh through death, holy and unblamable and unreprovable to God (Colossians 1:22 ). The community of sacrifice sets forth the oneness of believers with Christ (Colossians 3:1-4 ). Christ is declared to be the one Mediator between God and man, who gave Himself a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:5 , 1 Timothy 2:6 ). </p> <p> 7. The Crowning Testimony of the Epistle to the Hebrews </p> <p> The chief source of the priestly conception of our Lord is the Epistle to the Hebrews. Christ is declared to have by Himself purged our sins (Hebrews 1:3 ); to taste of death for every man (Hebrews 2:9 ); that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest to make reconciliation for the sins of the people (Hebrews 2:17; compare Hebrews 3:1 ); the community of sacrifice (Hebrews 3:14 ); our great High Priest has passed into the heavens (Hebrews 4:14 ); His pitifulness (Philippians 4:15 ); the authority and power of Christ's priesthood fully set forth (Hebrews 5:1-14 ). Christ was made a High Priest after the order of [[Melchizedek]] (Hebrews 5:6 ). The priesthood of Christ being of the order of Melchizedek is more excellent than the [[Aaronic]] priesthood (Heb 7). Christ's priesthood being eternal, that of the Aaronic is abolished (Hebrews 8:1-13 ). Christ's high-priesthood is made effectual by His own blood; and He entered once for all into the holy place, and has become the Mediator of a New [[Covenant]] (Hebrews 9:11-15 ). Christ is forever the representative of man in heaven (Hebrews 9:24-28 ). Christ by the sacrifice of Himself forever takes away sin, and has consecrated the new and living way to God (Heb 10). He is the Mediator of the New Covenant (Hebrews 12:24 ). The entire Epistle is steeped in the conception of Christ's priesthood. </p> <p> In 1 Peter 1:2 the sacrificial element appears in the "sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." The sufferings of the Lord were prophesied, the spirit of the Anointed One signifying what the prophets desired to know ( 1 Peter 1:11 ); the redemption by the precious blood of Christ is of "a lamb without blemish and without spot" (1 Peter 1:19 ); the priesthood of believers was <i> through </i> Christ ( 1 Peter 2:5 ), who carried up our sins in his body to the tree (1 Peter 2:24 the Revised Version, margin). </p> <p> In the Johannine writings we have the cleansing from sin by the blood of Jesus Christ (1 John 1:7 ). Christ is said to have laid down His life for us (1 John 3:16 ). The sacrifice as well as the teaching of Christ is insisted on in the coming by blood as well as by water (1 John 5:6 ). </p> <p> The appearance of Christ in Revelation 1:13 is high-priestly; His robe is the <i> '''''talar''''' </i> , the high-priestly garment. The sacrificial place of Christ is indicated by "a Lamb ... as though it had been slain" (Revelation 5:6 , Revelation 5:9 , Revelation 5:12 ). The repeated title of Christ throughout the [[Apocalypse]] is The Lamb. </p> <p> 8. Christ's Relation to Sin Expressed in Sacrificial Terms </p> <p> This review of the Scripture teaching on priesthood clearly indicates the development of thought which led to the affirmation of our Lord's priestly office. He came to put away sin. The doctrine of sin was intimately associated with the priestly service of the temple. The sacrifices were in some cases sin offerings, and in these there ever appeared, by the function of the blood which is the life, the fatal loss of life by sin, the punishment of which was the withdrawal of the Divine gift of life. The life was always in the sacrifice reserved for God. It was natural therefore when Christ appeared that His work in taking away sin should have been interpreted in the light of sacrificial thought. We find the idea steadily developed in the New Testament. He was the sacrifice, the Lamb of God. The question as to who offered the sacrifice was answered - H imself. Then He became in the conception of apostolic teaching, especially emphasized in the Epistle to the He, the priest as well as the sacrifice. This was at length completely defined in theology of the church, and has generally been accepted as setting forth an important aspect of our Lord's redemptive work. </p> VI. Christ's Kingly Office <p> The Breakdown of the Secular Monarchy </p> <p> The association of rule with the redemption of mankind was early found in Divine revelation. It is in the <i> [[Protevangelium]] </i> of Genesis 3:15; the covenant with [[Abraham]] contains it (Genesis 22:17 , Genesis 22:18 ); the blessing of [[Jacob]] reflects it (Genesis 49:10 ). After the successive attempts to establish a visible and earthly monarchy, its settlement in the family of David was associated with Divine premonitions of continued and gracious royalty (2 Samuel 7:18-29; 2 Samuel 23:1-7; Psalm 2:1-12; 45; 72; Psalm 110:1-7 ). The failure of the earthly monarchy and the fatal experiences of the kingdom turned the thought of the devout, especially guided by prophetic testimony, to a coming king who should restore the glory of the Davidic house and the people of Israel. Here and there the conception appears of the more extended reign of the Coming One, and the royal authority finds a growing place in the prophetic Scriptures (Isaiah 2:1-4; Isaiah 9:6 , Isaiah 9:7; Isaiah 11:1-10; Isaiah 42:1-4; Isaiah 52:13-15; Isaiah 53:12; 60; Jeremiah 23:5 , Jeremiah 23:6; Jeremiah 30:18-24; Daniel 2:44; Daniel 7:9-14 , Daniel 7:27; Micah 5:1-4; Zechariah 3:1-10 ). The postexilic conception of the king became one of the supreme and most active ideas in the Jewish mind. The reign of the [[Messiah]] was to be earthly, and all nations were to be subject to the Jew. The [[Jews]] of [[Palestine]] seem to have retained the more patriotic and the more material form of the idea (see 1 Macc 14:41), while the [[Egyptian]] and dispersed Jews began to regard the more spiritual character of the coming Messiah. References to the future blessedness of Israel under the restored royalty do not appear so largely in the [[Apocrypha]] writings which it must be remembered reflect chiefly their Egyptian-Jewish sources. Still there are some passages of interest (Baruch 4:21-5:9; [[Tobit]] 13; [[Ecclesiasticus]] 35:18, 19; 36:11-16; 47:11, 22). In the New Testament we have references to the strong ex pectation of the restored royalty and kingdom (John 1:49; John 6:15; John 12:12-15; Acts 1:6 ). Christ's kingship was speedily recognized by those who saw His works of power, and acknowledged His authority. He Himself clearly claimed this authority (Matthew 22:43-45; John 18:36 , John 18:37 ). It was however not a kingdom based upon material and external power and rule, but on the foundation of truth and righteousness. The [[Kingdom]] of [[Heaven]] or of God is familiar to every reader of the words of Jesus. It was Thus He described the new order which He had come to establish, of which He was to be the Lord and Administrator; not an earthly dominion after the fashion of this world's kingdoms; it was to be the rule of mind and of spirit. It was to be extended by ethical forces, and the principle of its authority was centered in Christ Himself. It was to be developed on earth but perfected in the future and eternal life. Some divines have distinguished Christ's regal power as that of nature, that of grace, that of glory. Many believe that there is to be a personal visible reign of Christ upon the earth. Some hold that this will be produced by His advent prior to an age of millennial glory. Other views regard the advent as the close of earthly conditions and the final judgment. </p> VII. The Messianic Basis of the threefold Office of the Lord <p> That the developments of Jewish thought centered round what may conveniently be called the idea of the Messiah is plain to any student of the Old Testament and other Jewish writings. They sprang from the ethical and theological ideas of this people, interpreted by and expressed in their political and religious forms, and continually nurtured by their experiences in the varied course of their national life. The essence of Messianic belief was a personal deliverer. Jewish history had always been marked by the appearance and the exploits of a great man. The capacity of the production of exceptional and creative individuals has been the characteristic of the race in all its ages. A judge, a lawgiver, a teacher, a seer, a king - each had helped, or even saved the people in some critical period. Each had added to the knowledge of God, whether received or rejected by the people. The issues of such service had remained, enshrined in a growing liturgy, or made permanent in a finally centralized and unified ritual, recorded in chronicle and lyric. The hope of Israel at one time did not take the completely personal form; indeed, it is probably easy to exaggerate the Messianic element as we look back from the perfect realization of it, in the Christian revelation and history. [[Much]] that has been called Messianic has been the result of reading into the Old Testament what has been derived from Christian thought and experience. Zephaniah has been described as a picture of Israel's restoration and triumph. [[Yet]] apparently it has no reference to the personal element. Still the "Messiah" begins to appear in the prophetic writings (see above), especially in the royal elements of His office. It is at this point that the meaning of the term is to be considered. "Yahweh's anointed" is found as applied to a king, and is familiar in this use in the Old Testament. But anointing belonged to the priesthood and to the prophetic order, if not actually, at least metaphorically, as sett ing apart (see 1 Kings 19:16; Psalm 105:15; Isaiah 61:1 ). And the word Messiah (Christ) the Anointed, came to be used for that conception of a person, perhaps first employed definitely (Daniel 9:24-26 ), who should be the [[Deliverer]] of the Jews and even still more widely, a Redeemer. In the age immediately preceding the Christian, the idea had taken possession not only of the Jews, but also of the [[Samaritans]] (John 4:25 ); and was not altogether unknown in [[Gentile]] thought; e.g. [[Sib]] Or, iii.97; [[Virgil]] <i> Ecl </i> . iv. It involves certainly the prophetic and royal offices and, in the idea of a Suffering Servant, was closely allied to the objects of the sacrificial order. </p> <p> The claim of Jesus to be the Christ, and the recognition of this claim by His followers and apostles, gave a new meaning to the teaching of the Old Testament, and the writings lying outside the canon, but which were familiar to the people. [[Especially]] was the suffering and death of the Lord and its relation to sin the occasion of a new [[Understanding]] of the Mosaic and later-developed sacrificial system. Jesus as the [[Offerer]] of Himself perfected the function of the priest, as He became the Lamb of God who t aketh away the sins of the world. He Thus completed the threefold ministry of the Messiah as the Prophet who reveals, the Priest who offers and intercedes, the King who rules. In Him the offices are commingled. He rules by His sacrifice and His teaching; He reveals by His [[Kingship]] and His offering. The offices spring from both His person and His work, and are united in the final issue of the salvation of the world. See also [[Exaltation Of Christ]]; [[Intercession Of Christ]] . </p> Literature <p> Euseb., <i> HE </i> , I,3; Aug., <i> De civ. Dei </i> , x. 6; Catech. [[Council]] of Trent; Calvin, <i> Instit </i> ., II, 15; Heidelb. Catech. Ans. 31 and Reformed Liturg; [[Thanksgiving]] aft. Inft. Bapt.; J. Gerhard, <i> [[Loci]] Theolog </i> ; Spener, <i> Catechism </i> ; Ernesti, <i> De officio [[Christi]] triplici </i> ; Knapp, <i> [[Theology]] </i> , section 107; Ebrard, <i> [[Herzog]] Realencyc </i> ., under the word. Further discussion is found in the standard theologies, as [[Pye]] Smith, <i> First [[Lines]] </i> , and <i> Scrip. Teatim. to the Messiah </i> ; Hodge, Shedd, Weiss, <i> [[Biblical]] Theol. of the New Testament </i> , [[Van]] Oosterzee, <i> Christian [[Dogmatics]] </i> . See also Higginson, <i> Ecce [[Messias]] </i> ; Moule's brief but suggestive statement in <i> Outlines of Christian [[Doctrine]] </i> ; Ritschl, <i> A [[Critical]] History of the Christian Doctrine of [[Justification]] and [[Reconciliation]] </i> , especially Introduction; Dorner, <i> The Development of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ </i> . </p> | | <p> <b> OFFICES OF CHRIST. </ b> —As the specific offices of Christ are handled in this work under their several heads, the treatment in the present article will be general. </p> <p> Etymologically the word ‘office’ is from < i> officium < /i> , the shorter form of < i> opificium < /i> , the root meaning of which is ‘a doing of a work’ (Gr. πρᾶξις). The meaning of < i> officium < /i> being wide enough to include any service or kindness, a more precise connotation is supplied by < i> munus < /i> , the technical term employed by writers like Calvin to describe the capital functions discharged by Christ. In the [[ Bible]] the word is nowhere used of Christ’s work, though it occurs in other connexions in OT (פְּק֖רָּה) and in NT (διακονία, Romans 11:13 [ Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 ‘ministry’] , πρᾶξις, Romans 12:4). The < i> idea < /i> , however, abounds in connexion with the [[ Jewish]] [[ Messiah]] and the Christ of the Gospel. Under the OT dispensation the three principal offices were those of prophet, priest, and king; and ‘the innermost pulse, so to speak, of the history of prophecy is to be found in the effort to interweave these three offices together, and to contemplate them in the Messianic image instead of in their distribution among several persons’ (Dorner, < i> System of Christ. Doct. < /i> iii. 388). Jesus, being the Messiah, fulfilled these three offices, as the supreme prophet, arch-priest, and [[ Divine]] king. So repeatedly does He appear in these capacities in the NT, that it would be superfluous to enumerate <i> loci </ i> . < /p> <p> Passing to theology, we may find beginnings of the official conception of Christ in the < i> Testaments of the Twelve [[ Patriarchs]] </i> , Eusebius, [[ Gregory]] of Nyssa, etc. [[ Thomas]] Aquinas departs from the triple division of the offices, and makes them coincide with the two states of humiliation and exaltation; the high-priestly office, to which the prophetic is merely introductory, coinciding with the state of humiliation, while the kingly is to be reserved for the state of exaltation (Dorner, < i> op. cit. </ i> iii. 391). Discussions as to the relations of Christ’s two natures (Eutychians and Nestorians) involved different views as to the way in which He performed official functions. But it was the Reformation, magnifying the sufficiency of Christ in every capacity, that was most fruitful in the exposition of His offices. </p> <p> ‘The theologians of the Lutheran Church,’ writes Hagenbach, ‘further developed the <i> locus de persona [[ Christi]] </ i> by distinguishing between three different genera of the < i> communicatio idiomatum < /i> , which were brought into connexion with the two states of Christ’s exaltation and humiliation ( < i> status exaltationis et exinanitionis < /i> ). To this they added the theory of the three offices of Christ, viz. the prophetical, priestly, and kingly offices. These definitions owed their origin in part to temporary controversies within the Lutheran Church, such as the controversy between the theologians of [[ Giessen]] and those of Tübingen, at the commencement of the 17th cent., concerning the κένωσις and κρύψις of the Divine attributes, and the controversy carried on by aepinus in a previous century respecting the <i> descensus Christi ad inferos </i> ’ ( <i> Compend, of Hist. of [[ Doctrines]] </i> , Buch’s translation p. 317) . Those of [[ Tübingen]] said that Christ in His humiliation possessed omnipotence, omnipresence, etc., but that these attributes were concealed; whereas those of Giessen said that Christ laid these prerogatives aside, aepinus said that Christ’s. soul suffered the punishments of hell while His body lay in the grave, whereas Calvin said that the only hell suffered by Christ was anguish of soul. The Lutherans, again, held that Christ’s visit to hell was a part of His exaltation. Such controversies had a reflex influence upon ways of stating how Christ exercised His offices. Our subject is admirably treated by Calvin in the second book of his <i> Institutes </i> , Christ’s priesthood being magnified as against Romish usurpations ( ch. xv.) . Arminius is especially full and interesting in the present connexion. ‘Two things,’ he writes, ‘were necessary on Christ’s part: that He should undertake some offices for the sake of men to obtain eternal salvation for them, and that God should bestow upon Him dominion or lordship over all things’ ( <i> [[ Private]] [[ Disputations]] </i> , Nichols’s translation ii. p. 380) . Both these things were comprehended under the title of [[Saviour]] and Mediator. In respect of Christ’s priesthood, the preparation consisted in imposition of office, sanctification by the Spirit, obedience, sufferings and death, and resurrection; and the discharge of the office consisted in His offering His body and blood. <i> [[ Re]] </i> Christ’s prophetic office, Arminius raised the question as to whether He received knowledge from the [[ Logos]] as well as from the [[ Holy]] Spirit. The functions of Christ’s kingly office were legislation, giving of remission of sins and of grace, and judgment. The results of Christ’s official work are the gathering of the Church, the obedience of His people, the actual remission of sins, resurrection from the dead, and life eternal. The means of Christ’s rule are His Church, Word, and Holy Spirit. To all this the corollary is that no one is admitted even subordinately to participation in Christ’s proper offices; therefore no pope can be tolerated. </p> <p> The <i> [[ Westminster]] [[Confession]] of Faith </i> contains a chapter (viii.) ‘Of Christ the Mediator,’ from which we give the third Section. ‘The Lord Jesus, in His human nature thus united to the Divine, was sanctified and anointed with the Holy Spirit above measure; having in Him all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge; in whom it pleased the Father that all fulness should dwell: to the end that being holy, harmless, undefiled, and full of grace and truth, He might be thoroughly furnished to execute the office of a [[ Mediator]] and Surety. Which office He took not unto Himself, but was thereunto called by His Father; who put all power and judgment into His hand, and gave Him commandment to execute the same.’ Along with this may be taken the answers to questions 43–45 in the < i> Larger [[Catechism]] < /i> . ‘Christ executeth the office of a prophet in His revealing to the Church in all ayes, by His Spirit and word, in divers ways of administration, the whole will of God, in all things concerning their edification and salvation. ’ ‘Christ executeth the office of a priest in His once offering Himself a sacrifice without spot to God, to be a reconciliation for the sins of His people; and in making continual intercession for them. ’ ‘Christ executeth the office of a king in calling out of the world a people to Himself, and giving them officers, laws, and censures, by which He visibly governs them; in bestowing saving grace upon His elect, rewarding their obedience, and correcting them for their sing, preserving and supporting them under all their temptations and sufferings, restraining and overcoming all their enemies, and powerfully ordering all things for His own glory and their good; and also in taking vengeance on the rest, who know not God, and obey not the gospel.’ </p> <p> In our day it is less common than formerly to speak of the official character of Christ; and this for several reasons. Definite doctrine as to the Person and work of our Lord is unacceptable in many quarters, and a reaction from the terminology of the schools is common. [[ Questions]] as to the metaphysical nature of Christ are thought to be too abstract. That Jesus should embody a fulfilment of OT prophecy as to the Messiah is of remote interest to many. The richness of Christ’s humanity has been so energetically unfolded, that there is an aversion to contemplate Him in any aspect which might be suspected of dehumanizing Him by representing Him more in the light of a formal functionary than of a loving Son of Man and Elder Brother. Ritschl, <i> e.g. </i> , attacks the word ‘office’ as unsuitable, because office is a special calling with a view to realizing a legal or moral community upon conditions of law (see Corner, <i> op. cit. </i> p. 383). </p> <p> As against such objections we would submit that the theological category in question possesses too much historic and intrinsic worth to be discarded. Historically it has its roots in Scripture, and controversially it has served to clarify doctrine and to safeguard certain aspects of Christ’s Person and work. But, above all, Christ in His official character meets the entire needs of sinful man . On account of that moral evil which blinds the soul to the knowledge and perception of God, we need a Mediator to reveal God and to enlighten the conscience; and here Christ, as the Light of the world, appears in His prophetic office. Next, the effect of light is to disclose the fact of sin and awaken the sense of guilt and the fear of judgment; and here Christ , by putting away sin, by affording access to God, and by blessing us from God, discharges the priestly office. Lastly, by creating an eternal society in which we may live as His loving subjects, serving Him willingly according to His laws, He acts as a Divine king. Nor is there any subordinate office performed by Christ which may not be classified under one or other of these constitutive three. </p> <p> Literature.—Hodge, <i> Syst. Theol. </i> ii. 459 ff.; Martensen, <i> Chr. Dogmat. </i> 295–329; Maopherson, <i> Chr. Dogmat. </i> 328 f. ; Litton, <i> Dogmatic [[ Theology]] </i> , 222; Denney, <i> Stud. in Theol. </i> 137 ff., 163 ff. ; art. ‘Jesu Christi dreifaches Ant’ in <i> PRE </i> [Note: RE Real-Encyklopädie fur protest. Theologic und Kirche. ] 3 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred] and the Lit. there given. </p> <p> [[ Robert]] M. Adamson. </p> |
| <p> (as Prophet, Priest, and King). </p> <p> I. [[Origin]] and History of this Division. — Eusebius, in his [[Church]] History (i, b), and also in his Demonstratio Evangelica (4:15), is the first who appears to have considered the mediatorial work of [[Christ]] as consisting in the three offices. The division became common in the [[Greek]] Church, and it is still usual in the [[Russian]] Church. In the [[Latin]] Church it has not passed so generally into use, although Bellarmin and many others allow it. Luther, Melanchthon, and the other early [[Lutheran]] theologians do not use the distinction. It was introduced into Lutheran theology by Gerhard (q.v.) in his [[Loci]] Theologicae was admitted by Spener into his Catechism, and remained prevalent among Lutheran theologians until the time of Ernesti, who wrote against it under the title [[De]] oficio [[Christi]] triplici, and was followed by Zacharia, Doderlein, Knapp, and others (see Knapp, Theology, § 107). In the [[Reformed]] Church it was adopted by Calvin (Inst. 2:15), was admitted into the [[Heidelberg]] Catechism, and was generally followed by the dogmatic writers of the Reformed churches, both on the [[Continent]] and in England. The modern theology of [[Germany]] (as the works of De Wette, Schleiermacher, Thoeluck, Nitzsch, Liebner, Ebrard, etc.) generally adhere to it, regarding it as an essential, and not merely accidental and formal division of the mediatorial work, as the only one which exhausts it. It is used by many of the best [[English]] theologians. We give here a modification of Ebrard's article on the topic in Herzog's Real-Encyklopadie, 6:607 sq. </p> <p> II. [[Biblical]] View. - The prophecies of the O.T. designate the [[Redeemer]] as the perfect and model prophet , as the servant of [[God]] to whom the attributes of prophecy, priesthood, and royalty alike belong; as the kingly seed of David, or the second, perfect David; and finally as the priest-king. He, moreover, in spirit, calls himself, in the Gospels, "prophet," and "son of David." In the [[Epistle]] to the Hebrews he is represented as the only true and eternal high-priest. This threefold aspect of his mission is united in the conception of the [[Anointed]] or Messiah; for as [[Elisha]] was by [[Elijah]] anointed a prophet (1 Kings 19: 16), so was the promised "servant of God" to be anointed by the [[Spirit]] of the Lord; and as the kings of [[Israel]] were anointed (1 Samuel 10:1; 1 Samuel 16:13; 1 Kings 1:13; 1 Kings 19:15, etc. ), so was Christ anointed king of righteousness (Hebrews 1:8-9). And as it was ordained by the law that the high priest should be anointed to his office (Exodus 28:41; Exodus 29:7; Exodus 30:30; Leviticus 4:3 ; Leviticus 6: 22; Leviticus 7:36), so Christ was made high-priest "not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life" (Hebrews 7:16). The conception of the [[Messiah]] or Anointed thus divides itself into the three aspects of prophet, priest, and king. </p> <p> The first prophecy bearing on the subject is in Deuteronomy 18:15. The people, afraid of hearing the commandments of God, sent up [[Moses]] to hear them (Exodus 20:19; Deuteronomy 5:27). The Lord "heard" the people (Deuteronomy 5:28), and promised (as they had sent up Moses to hear Him) that He would send them a prophet whom they could and should hear. The God who revealed his law in the midst of thunder and lightning, so that the people durst not approach him, would afterwards approach the people through a prophet. On Mount [[Sinai]] the people had to send Moses up to God, and God promised, in the future, to send down a prophet to the people. [[Thus]] the difference between the Law and the [[Gospel]] is sketched in its dawning outline. </p> <p> The latter part of Isaiah (chapters 40-66) is related, though not in the most direct way, to the prophecy in Deuteronomy. In Isaiah, not "the prophet," but the "servant of God," is the predominant conception. Isaiah "labors in vain" (Isaiah 49:4); a coming servant of God, however, will accomplish both Isaiah's task in Israel and the mission of the people of Israel to the [[Gentiles]] together and perfectly (Isaiah 49:6); and this because he is more than a prophet; because he takes upon himself the penalty of our sins (Isaiah 53: 5)- מוּסִר שְׁלוֹמֵנוּ, "the chastisement of our peace," i.e. the punishment whose fulfillment secures our exemption. He brings a sin- offering, אָשָׁם (Isaiah 53:10). The prophecy does not merely indicate that the prophet's mission should entail death on the servant of God, as was the case with [[Paul]] (Colossians 1 :24; 2 Timothy 1:11), but that he should die as an expiatory sacrifice. And in Isaiah 49:7, he appears as "King of kings," for "kings and princes" are to bow down before him. </p> <p> Thus we find in Deuteronomy 5:18 apromise of the "prophet," and in Isaiah 49- 53 a promise of "a servant of God," of whom prophetic preaching, priestly self-offering, and crowning with kingly power are predicated. But regal dominion is not merely assigned to the future Redeemer as the predicate, or as the issue of his destiny, but, on the contrary, the very root of the [[Messianic]] prophecies lies in the promise of "one of the seed of David," whose "throne should endure forever." [[Redemption]] from future servitude was promised to the seed of [[Abraham]] (Genesis 15). Through Moses, Joshua, and David, this promise, in its outward and material sense, was gradually fulfilled. It was for this reason that [[David]] determined to build a temple to the Lord, that the "Eternal might dwell with his people." But such a union of God, "who is a spirit," with a material place and edifice, did not agree with the divine plan of salvation (compare John 4: 23-24). Israel was to acknowledge that the temporal redemption, obtained through David, was not yet the true redemption, but a mere faint foreshadowing thereof. This was indicated by the prophecy in the seventh chapter of 2 Samuel, in which it was shown that not David himself, but David's seed after his death, was to build the Lord a house, and that the Lord would assure the throne of his kingdom forever. Even here no mention is made of an individual, but merely of a successor of David (2 Samuel 7: 12-15). David at the same time understood that his sinful race was not fit to build the Lord a temple, and to rule on his eternal throne, as he said, "Thou hast spoken also of thy servant's house for a great while to come. Anzd is this the manner of manm, O Lord God? (2 Samuel 7:19; comp. 1 Chronicles 17:17). The allusion in Psalms 2:6- 7, to this prediction is unmistakable, and Psalms 110 is a poetic explanation of the passage 2 Samuel 7:19. So Christ himself (Matthew 22: 42) explains it. </p> <p> [[Solomon]] also was aware that the prediction of [[Nathan]] would not have its final fulfillment in his material temple (1 Kings 8:26-27). After the death of Solomon, prophecy pointed more and more directly towards a certain, particular, future descendant of David, entirely distinct from his then existing posterity (comp. Isaiah 7:14; Isaiah 9:6, with Isaiah 10:21). From the chastised house of David, the fallen trunk, a fresh branch was to spring (Isaiah 11:1), and to rule over the nations through a reign of peace and righteousness. [[Yet]] that he was not to be an ordinary earthly king, nor a [[Levitical]] priest, but a king-priest according to the order of Melchizedek, had already been shown in Psalms 110:4, and is more fully developed in Zechariah 6:12-13, with distinct reference to 2 Samuel 7, Psalms 110, and Isaiah 11: 2. The [[Manifestation]] in N.T. — The carnal Israel awaited a worldly, earthly Messiah, who should establish a worldly kingdom. "The Prophet" (ὁ προφήτης, John 6:14) appeared to them to be distinct fron the Messiah, a sort of precursor of the latter (comp. Mark 8:27, and John 1:21); but the faithful, enlightened by the spirit of God, thought otherwise. To them had [[Jesus]] already been announced by John the [[Baptist]] (Matthew 3:3; comp. with Matthew 12:18, Luke 3:4) as the "servant of God" promised by Isaiah, in whom the prophetic, priestly, and kingly offices should be united; and the Lord himself appears in these three aspects in his life, his passion, and his death. </p> <p> When he goes about teaching that the "kingdom of God" has come, and confirming his words by miracles, he does a prophet's work, and therefore the people themselves recognize him as the "prophet" (Luke 7:16; Luke 9 :8; John 4:19; John 7:40). But he not only spoke as a prophet, but he was and is The Prophet, the revealer of the Father in the absolute sense. The key to this perception is given us in the passage Hebrews 1:1 : "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son," etc., i.e. he has manifested the fullness of his essence and of his will in a personal revelation in Him who from all eternity has been the one God and consubstantial with the Father. [[Therefore]] he is in John 1:1, called the Word, in whom God ἐν ἀρχῇ expressed his essence to himself (πρὸς τὸν θεόν ), "by whom all things were made; without whom was not any thing made that was made; in whom was life; and the life was the light of men." Christ, as the Word become man, is then no longer a prophet merely in word and action, but is one in his very essence. His whole being and essence is the revelation of the Father (John 14:9). </p> <p> The Epistle to the Hebrews represents Christ as a priest, nay, even as the eternal high-priest (Hebrews 7). He is the eternal high-priest because of his having offered the only eternally valid sacrifice, the final sacrifice which renders all others henceforth superfluous himself. His being in other parts of the [[Scriptures]] considered more as the hostia (victim) than as the priest, is merely a formal, not a material difference. Christ, on the one hand, absolutely satisfied the demands of God's law upon man (namely, to be sinless, holy, and filled with the love of God), and thus rendered the obedientia activa which we do not render; and, on the other hand, he assumed the penalty which the law inflicted on the sinner, "Thou shalt die the death," on himself; he who owed nothing suffering for those who are debtors. (See [[Atonement]]); (See [[Obedience]]). </p> <p> He thus, by substitution, took upon himself our debt and its penalty, and became an expiatory offering for us. For the fundamental principle of all offerings for sin under the old dispensation was this very substitution of one to suffer death for another; who could have been the mediating priest between Christ and the Father? He himself, the sinless, holy, the λόγος —προφήτης, who had ever been with the Father, was the priest who, in eternal high-priestly purity, gave himself as an offering. His actions and his sufferings cannot be divided. He did not make an offering of himself suddenly, ex abrupto, with no connection with his previous life. On the contrary, his priestly, holy life brought him to his death. Thus was his offering a priestly one. </p> <p> From the death of Christ the crown of thorns is inseparable. So from the crown of thorns the crown of kingly dignity and power is inseparable. When, in the days of his humiliation, he was recognized and proclaimed as the promised "Son of David," the expected "Messiah-king," he accepted the title (Matthew 9:27; Matthew 18:30; Matthew 15:22; Matthew 12:23; Matthew 21:9). But the fulfillment of his kingly mission took place in a manner entirely opposite to that which the people had expected. His kingly mission culminated at the very moment when he declared unto [[Pilate]] that he was king, and thereupon received the crown of thorns (John 18:37; John 19:2 , comp. with John 18:12-15 and John 18:21). Here the kingly office became closely connected with the priestly. As a reward for this royal abnegation he was crowned with the crown of glory (Hebrews 2:9; Philippians 2:9-10), became head of the Church (Ephesians 1:22), and Lord over all (Ephesians 1:21). And all who come to him by faith are given to him as his own (John 17:6 ), and he claims for them a share in his glory (John 17:22; John 17:24; John 17:26). The [[Christian]] Church is thus fully justified in considering the prayer in John 17 as a true high-priestly prayer of the priestly king and kingly priest (Psalms 110:4) for his people, and not merely as the intercession of a prophet for his disciples. </p> <p> Finally, redemption by Christ is best understood under this threefold aspect of his entire work. He who in his own person was the revelation of God, the λόγος of God to man, has by word and action, and by his advent, revealed to man, in his state of error, ignorance, and sin, the law of God to man, and the mercy of God to the sinner. He who in his own person was the son of man, clothed with priestly holiness, and making of himself a pure offering unto God, has, as a member of a race which is subject to the consequences of sin, preserved his holiness under circumstances which caused the curse of human sin to fall on the head of him, the sinless, and has thereby submitted himself to the judgment of God in our stead, i.e. has given himself as an expiatory offering. He who in his own person was the kingly chief of mankind, has, in order as priest to sacrifice himself, foregone this kingly power and worn the crown of thorns, but thereby has attained the crown of glory, the dominion over the Church he has redeemed, in which and for which he now reigns over heaven and earth. </p> <p> We find, in all the N.T. account, that in Christ's teachings he was not exclusively a prophet, in his passion he was not exclusively a high-priest, nor was he a king only after his resurrection. On the contrary, the three offices cannot be thus mechanically set off from each other. The [[Scripture]] certainly ascribes to Christ a munus propheticum immediatum (direct prophetical office) only during his visible life in the state of humiliation (viz. a prophetia personae, by which his whole being was in itself a revelation of God, and a prophetia oficii, in words and doctrines). But it teaches also that, as [[Prophet]] and Revealer, the exalted Christ continues to operate (munus propheticum mediatum, mediate prophetic office) by his Word, which he gave once for all, as well as by his Spirit, through which he continues to enlighten the hearts of believers. In the munus sacerdotale (priestly office) we distinguish (scripturally) the once-offered oblation from the yet continuing intercession; and in the former, the obedientia and satisfactio activa, the offering of a holy life, from the obedientia and satisfactio passiva, the assumption of the undeserved expiatory suffering. Finally, the Scripture teaches that Christ, in his state of humiliation, was already king (rex fuit, or rex natus erat), as in John 18:37. He disclaims only the "exercise" of kingly power, not the fact. We distinguish also the inherent regal glory and power of Christ from his exercise of them — the dignitas regia from the officium — and in the latter also we distinguish the regnum gratiae, the governing of his people by his spirit, from the regnum gloriae, the dominion over all. here is, in fact, no concrete point in the existence and activity of Christ, whether in the state of humiliation or of glorification, in which the three offices are not found constantly connected. Thus Christ remains in all respects, inseparably, the [[Revealer]] of the Father to man, the [[Intercessor]] for. man with God, and the [[Chief]] and King of his people. See Knapp, Christian Theology, § 107; Nitzsch, [[System]] der christlichen Lehre, § 132; Herzog, Real-Encyklopä die, 6:607; [[Pye]] Smith, First [[Lines]] of Clristian Theology, Luke 5, ch. 4, § 2. </p> | | <p> Are generally considered as threefold. </p> <p> 1. A prophet to enlighten and instruct, John 6: 14 . John 3: 2 . </p> <p> 2. A priest to make atonement for his people, Isaiah 53:1- 12 : Hebrews 7:1- 28 : </p> <p> 3. A king to reign in, and rule over them, Zechariah 11:9 . Psalms 2:6 . </p> <p> See articles INTERCESSION, MEDIATOR, &c. </p> |
