The Thompson Family (Northern Ireland).

‘The Relationship between the sacrifice of Christ and His Intercession and the Impact this has upon the Subject of Particular Redemption.’

Based Upon John Owen’s

“The Death of Death In The Death of Christ”

By Paul Thompson.

The intention of this paper is to examine the Relationship between the sacrifice of Christ and His intercession, considering also the impact that this union has upon the subject of Particular Redemption. The given area of study will be John Owen’s classic work ‘The Death of Death in The Death of Christ’, specific attention will be given to Book 1 Chapters 6, 7, 8.

Prolegomena.

Reformed Theology consistently presents Christ as being the Mediator of The Covenant of Grace and in that office functioning as a mediatorial Prophet, Priest and King in the accomplishment of redemption for the Elect of God. Though the work of Christ can be distinguished in these three ways, each office having its own particular variations, yet it remains the position of the Covenant Theologian to maintain a necessary integration of all three offices in the determined role and purpose of procuring redemption for the Elect. It is not our purpose to delineate how each office relates to the redemption of the elect, although even a cursory view of the offices of Christ would be immensely beneficial. However, our aforementioned subject necessitates that we do consider in particular the Sacerdotal (priestly) office of Christ.

In relation to this particular office of Christ we state first that Reformed Theology has always maintained alongside the three offices of Christ a distinct dual expression of Christ’s work in His Sacerdotal office (1) Christ’s work of Oblation (2) Christ’s work of intercession. At this point it may be beneficial to give a brief synopsis of both terms.

a) Oblation. By the Oblation of Christ we refer not only to His offering up of Himself as a sacrifice for sin on the cross, but also included is His entire humiliation in His obedience to the law of God. Oblation consists then of Christ’s death, humiliation and submission to the Law. The primary purpose of oblation is to restore communion with God (for man).

b) Intercession. By the Intercession of Christ we refer to Christ’s appearing in heaven at the right hand of the Father interceding for His people, but by intercession we also include every act of His exaltation from His resurrection to His sitting down as the right hand of God. The purpose of intercession is primarily to maintain communion with God (for man).

^{[Some reformed theologians include a third aspect of the priestly work, that of ‘Blessing’; this is certainly true of the Old Testament priest and is true also of Christ, but strictly in regards to the redemptive side of the Priest’s work there are two viz. sacrifice and offering, the third of ‘blessing’ is resultant of the first two].}

This dual distinction in the priestly work of Christ is also evident in the various reformed confessions formulated over the centuries. Of these the most memorable and notable, because of its precise and definitive nature is the answer given by the Westminster Divines to question 25 of the Shorter Catechism, How doth Christ execute the office of a priest? “Christ executeth the office of a priest, in His once offering up of Himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice (oblation), and reconcile us to God; and in making continual intercession for us.” Covenant theologians while maintaining this distinction of the oblatory and intercessory aspects of Christ’s priestly work take care not to divide or separate the two since there is a particular union between them both. Maintenance of the union between oblation and intercession is essential as any dissolution of it has very serious ramifications not only upon the major tenets of Covenant Theology but particularly upon the subjective and objective aspects of the atonement of Christ, especially as they relate to the extent of the atonement. In presenting the arguments for upholding the union of Christ’s oblation and intercession we will see that within the Arminian ‘General Ransom’ school of theology there necessarily is a disintegration of both these aspects of Christ’s sacerdotal work. The one (either Oblation or Intercession) necessarily complements the other.

Treatment of the Aforementioned Subject. The Relationship between the sacrifice of Christ and His Intercession and the Impact this has upon the Subject of Particular Redemption.

1) The Particular End In View.

As we begin there is a question that arises as we consider the oblation and intercession of Christ, particularly His oblation where we are confronted with the sufferings of the Godman, in His life and His death, His bloodshedding and His voluntary obedience to the Law of God. That question is, ‘for what purpose or end did all this take place?’ The conclusive answer must be, ‘all this is for nothing unless it be designed to accomplish a particular end.’ we affirm that the scripture teaches that Christ’s work in its entirety was a means to an end, namely the “Bringing of many sons unto glory” Hebrews Ch2:10 and the glorifying of the Father John Ch17v1-4, i.e. the Father glorified in the communication of eternal life to the elect.

John Owen assumes the reformed position as set forth in our introductory remarks concerning the distinction and complementation of the oblation and intercession of Christ, i.e. while distinct these two aspects are related, he says, “That though the oblation and intercession of Jesus Christ are distinct acts in themselves, and have distinct immediate products and issues assigned ofttimes unto them…yet they are not in any respect or regard to be divided or separated.” In his defence of the union between the two Owen sets out a number of propositions. These are:

i) That the end of both the oblation and the intercession of Christ is the same, i.e. God‘s glory and “the bringing of many sons to glory.” Heb Ch2:10.

a) - God’s Glory. All that God does is for the promotion of His own declarative Glory, this is true in Creation and redemption. But especially in Soteriology is the connection between redemption and God’s glory seen. Ephesians Ch1:6 He has predestinated His people “Unto the glory of His grace.” Christ has “received us to the glory of God” Romans Ch15:7, also 2 Cor Ch1:20; Eph Ch1:12; Rom Ch5:2; Phil Ch1:11; Ch2:11; Eph Ch1:14. In many ways this was the primary purpose of God in the atonement the Glory of Himself, the secondary role was the bringing of many sons to Glory Hebrews Ch2:10.

b) - The Bringing of many sons to Glory. Luke Ch19:10. This verse and many more show that it was not the purpose of Christ in His death to make salvation possible for men, but rather to make atonement definite for His elect. Pink states, “Christ came here to carry into effect God’s sovereign purpose of election, to save a people already “His” (Matt Ch1:21) by covenant settlement.” It’s important to note that Christ came not to seek and save ‘all the lost’ but those who ‘the lost.’ He died and He prays for ‘The Lost.’ A definitely defined object is in view, as mediator He has covenanted to save ‘The lost.’ other scriptures define this definite objective in the death and intercession of Christ, John Ch10:10-15 ‘The Sheep’; Acts Ch17;26 ‘The Church’; Matt Ch26:28 ‘The Many.’

ii) That those persons affected by the oblation and intercession of Christ are the same. Those for whom Christ prays are those for whom He has died and made atonement. Owen summarises this point precisely by saying, “That…in brief the object of the one is of no larger extent than the object of the other…” Thomas Watson emphasises this truth by stating that “Christ’s intercession extends to all the sins of the elect…” Also “Christ by his intercession answers all bills of indictment brought in against the elect.”

iii) That in relation to the former statement it must be said that the oblation of Christ is the foundation of His intercession, this must be the case as that which is bought by the oblation of Christ for a particular people must of necessity be applied to those same subjects by the intercession of Christ. If Christ has died for an individual then that individual is guaranteed and assured of the intercession of Christ. The intercession and oblation are together one means for producing the same effect.

His intercession is inseparably connected to the atonement. This is seen in John Ch17:24 where Christ specifically prays for the final glorification of His people. Yet it must be clearly understood that the final glorification of the entire body of the elect is seen in Rev Ch7:14 as something which has been procured and secured by the blood of Christ (Atonement -Oblation), note, “The glorified are in heaven because of the atoning blood. Therefore Christ’s prayer in John Ch17:24 for their glorification must be based on the atonement.” Thus the foundation of Christ’s intercession has a firm connection to His oblation. A further point to be considered is that the Intercession of Christ like His oblation has a firm connection to the Covenant of Grace. The prayer of Christ in John Ch17:24 for the glorification of the Elect is procured by His oblation (Rom Ch8:32), but we must also see glorification as something that is rooted in the covenantal purposes of God, see Rom Ch8:29; Eph Ch1:4-5. All that God intends to bestow upon His elect must be traced back to the Covenant of Grace in eternity past.

These three propositions clearly set forth that there is an end in view in regards to both the oblation and intercession of Christ, that end being the accomplishment of redemption for a designated people. Considering this in the light of scripture we can deduce several reasons as to why the maintenance of a indissoluble relationship between oblation and intercession is absolutely essential. I will give these below.

i) Scripture declares that this union between both acts of the sacerdotal office is perpetual and inseparable. This inseparable union is especially seen in passages such as Isaiah Ch53:11-12. Here the actual justification of individuals which is the immediate fruit of His intercession follows His bearing their iniquities (oblation). Isaiah Ch53:12 evidently demonstrates the integration of both oblation and intercession, v12, “He hath poured out His soul unto death…and He bare the sins of many, (oblation) and made intercession for the transgressors.” Notice that the objects of Christ’s oblation are the same as the objects of His intercession, there is no alteration. Isaiah Ch53:5 makes reference to the healing virtue of Christ’s stripes, “By His stripes are we healed.” obviously here the application of all that Christ prays for is the immediate fruit of His sufferings and oblation. Owen says of this, “Our total healing is the fruit and procurement of His stripes.” See Romans Ch4:25, “Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.” the teaching of the apostle was that Christ suffered and died for our transgression of the Law, but He was raised that we might be pardoned. Applying this reasoning to the theory which maintains Christ died for all, the conclusion is either (a) surely all must be saved, as the death of Christ was specifically for the purpose of justification. or (b) Christ has failed in the design of His death and resurrection, since all men are not justified. With Paul we base justification firmly upon the oblation and intercession of Christ. In Ch8:31-35 Paul asks a series of questions, one of those questions is v33, “Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect?” Paul concludes v33 with the statement “It is God that justifieth.” This seems in itself is a conclusive argument as to why no one can accuse or charge the justified man with condemnation. Yet Paul takes his argument further, presenting the Christian’s assurance doctrine as resting upon further truth, namely the two cardinal facets of Christ’s work that we have been focusing upon ‘Oblation’ and ‘Intercession’, see v34, “Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died (oblation), yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh (intercession) for us.”

Certainly assurance is a major theme in Roman’s Ch8:31-34, and is worthy of study, but in keeping with our proposition to establish the reasons for holding to the union of ‘Oblation’ and ‘Intercession’ demonstrating the impact that it has upon particular redemption, we cannot but miss the manifest application of both the intercession and oblation by the same subject to the same object (Christ and the elect). The extent in both cases is the same and unchangeable so, unchangeable because of the context of Paul’s argumentation which presents an obvious eternal dimension, i.e. predestination (v28-30). The extent of both oblation and intercession has been set by an immutable decree. Owen rebuffs the opponents of this view by showing how ludicrous it is to hold to a view that presents an imbalance in the extent of the intercession as opposed to that of oblation and vice versa, “Here is an equal extent of the one and the other; those persons who are concerned in the one are all of them concerned in the other. That He died for all and intercedeth only for some will scarcely be squared to this text…”

ii) Sacrifice and Intercession are both acts of the one Sacerdotal (Priestly) office.

This is a necessary requirement of the one who will be High Priest between God and man. Neither one of these works can be wanting in the office of Priest. We find that Christ is revealed in the scriptures as one who fulfils both of these offices. 1 John Ch2:1-2 makes it abundantly clear that the priest who would represent man in the presence of God must be ‘an advocate’ - intercession, he must also be the ‘propitiation for our sins’ - sacrifice. The priesthood of Christ evidently consists of these two parts. Careful attention must be given to Hebrews Ch9:12, “Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.” From this passage we learn that by His blood shedding and sacrifice He earned the right to enter the holy place, there to accomplish the remaining part of His office. Notice Hebrews Ch4:14, “Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God…” That is where Christ is presently, in Heaven where He continues to exercise His perpetual ministry of intercession for us. Heb Ch7:24, 25 “He ever liveth to make intercession for them.” Rom Ch8:24 ‘sitting at the right hand…making intercession for us.’ Christ’s entrance into heaven came not by the virtue of His being God (deity), but He entered heaven upon the merit of His own blood, having satisfied the justice of God (Heb Ch9:12).

In relation to the exercising of these two works, it must be held that if Christ exercises one of them for any one individual, then it is necessary that He exercise the other also as one complements the other in the work of redemption. Owen says of this, “He will not exercise any act or duty of His priestly function in their behalf for whom He is not a priest, and for whom He is a priest He must perform both seeing He is faithful in the discharge of His function to the utmost in the behalf of the sinners for whom He undertakes.”

Like Owen John Murray reflects his sentiments, “This fact is correlative with another feature that bears closely upon the efficacy of our Lord‘s intercession. It is that of the unity and co-extensiveness of His high priestly accomplishments and activities. The intercessory aspect of the priestly function must never be divorced from the propitiatory. The Intercession is based upon the atonement…[in scripture] where intercession is expressly mentioned, this correlation and dependence are clearly implied”

In respect of their intended objects, both intercession and oblation are equal in extent, they therefore cannot be segregated. It is here that the arguments of those opposed to the Calvinistic position begin to appear as being ludicrous. According to the reasoning of the general ransom argument Christ died for all men, making atonement for them, yet does not intercede for all men (John Ch17:9), Christ is presented as “but half a priest.” Those who deny the unison of oblation and intercession are shut in to accepting that Christ is not heard of His father as He intercedes for those for whom He died, this is a blasphemy as the scriptures reveal that, “...Thou (Father) hearest me always” John Ch11:42.

John Ch17:9 clearly indicates that there is a specific object in the intercession of Christ John Gill says of this, “Saying that He would not take the name of some into His lips, supposes that He would take the names of others; that is [to] pray and intercede for them.” Gill like Owen also argues that Christ’s intercession [speaking] on behalf of others is firmly based upon His oblation. In a very unique way Gill defends his position from Hebrews Ch11:4, “He being dead yet speaketh.” Using Abel’s sacrifice as being a type of Christ’s oblation, so Abel’s speaking after his death signals His speaking after, or out of His death (sacrifice). Granting that typology cannot afford a perfect replica of Christ and His work, yet there is merit in seeing that as Abel’s voice had a voice so also in a superlative sense does the sacrifice of Christ. Christ’s blood cries out on behalf of and for those for whom it was shed. Again Gill states, “Such virtue is there in His blood, and in His intercession founded upon it.” The object of His intercession is the same object of His oblation in relation to extent.

- Arminian Objection in Relation to John 17:9. Those of such persuasion had great difficulty in harmonising the intercession of Christ in John Ch17 and His praying while on the cross. It is true that Christ prayed for His enemies, “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do” while on the cross. The Arminian will immediately impose an argument upon the Calvinistic understanding of John Ch17:9, “I pray not for the world” stating that Christ obviously prays for each and every man without distinction. Such a vile contortion of the words and work of Christ is put to flight when we understand that in John Ch17:9 Christ was praying as the mediator and that the words of Luke Ch23:34 “Father forgive them for they know not what they do” proceeded from the perfect humanity of Christ. They fact that He prays for His enemies shows that He was a perfect man, as Pink states, showing Himself “subject to that holy law which required each one to love his neighbour as himself…” There are those prayers that are seen time and time again to proceed forth from the mouth of the Godman, petitions that proceed according to the dictates of Christ’s humanity: see Matt Ch26:39, “…Oh my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me…” here Christ prays for the cup of suffering and wrath to be turned away. Interpreting this petition in the same way the Arminian treats John Ch17:9 we are let to see that in the intercession of the Mediator there is confliction with the will of the Father, is this so? Absolutely not! The will of the mediator is in perfect unison with the Father. But when we understand that in Matt Ch26:39 Christ is praying according to the dictation of His humanity this absurdity is removed. What we see in Matt ch26:39 is the same reaction that would be expected had it been you or I who had that cup of the wrath of God placed before us, viz, an aversion from within our soul!

Christ does exhort believers to ‘pray for their enemies,’ (Matt Ch5:44) a duty which is to be executed by all Christians. Yet Christ in John Ch17 was praying for something which no man could pray for, something that only the mediator could pray for, i.e. the efficacious redemption of the elect. John Murray says in connection with this, “The intercession exemplified in John Ch17 was an essential part of His messianic (mediatorial) undertaking and the appropriate expression of His concern for the fulfilment of His Father’s will respecting His own.” Wilhelmus A Brakel also distinguishes between Christ’s praying as mediator and His praying in His humiliation, “Christ falls on His knees there and prays with strong crying and tears (Heb Ch5:7)…that was His engagement in His humiliation. His intercession, however, consists in His appearance in the sanctuary before the countenance of His Father with His blood, “That speaketh better things than that of Abel” Heb Ch12:24...whereby on the basis of the covenant, He demands the fulfilment of all the promises for His elect both in this life (John Ch17:15-17) and in the life to come (John Ch17;24).”

iii) The Nature of Christ’s Intercession proves that Christ’s Oblation and Intercession are one.

Christ’s intercession is a continual presenting of His oblation on behalf of all those for whom He suffered. We understand the intercession of Christ not merely to be ‘vocal’ as Owen puts it, ‘with cries, tears and supplications.’ The nature of Christ’s intercession is such that it is made real by His appearing in heaven. Paul says that Christ “Is not entered into the holy places made with hands, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us” Hebrews Ch9:24. Christ ‘appears’ in heaven ‘for us’ (On our behalf). His intercession is an ‘appearing’, in heaven He is a visible demonstration of His oblation and sufferings for the people for whom He now prays. How then can the extent of one be of a larger extent than the other? asks Owen. How could Christ offer His oblation for some and not His intercession, when His intercession is but the extension of His oblation in the presence of God.

iv) That Both The End or Aim of Christ’s Intercession and Oblation is the same.

Owen argues that if the death (oblation) of Christ procured all blessings that would be conferred upon the elect by His intercession, then it remains that the end of both oblation and intercession are identical, that they are both means tending to the same end. Understanding that all that Christ prayed for in His intercession was promised to Him in the Covenant of Redemption. Christ in His Covenant engagement would procure these promised blessings by virtue of His death and sufferings (oblation). His intercession being founded upon the promises of the covenant is His praying for the bestowal of what He would earn (procure/purchase) by His death. The subjects of this bestowal were the elect, surely it cannot be that Christ prays for others outside of those whom He intended to bestow these blessings upon. The extent of Christ’s praying is again seen to rest upon the extent of those for whom He died.

v) Separation of what Christ hath put together prohibited.

Men may choose to distinguish between the oblation and intercession of Christ, and granted there is much profit to be had in the following through of individual subject study. But men do not have the permission to separate both. John Ch17 clearly designates the unity that is to be maintained between the two. In this verse Christ prays on the basis of His work, “the work which thou gavest me to do.” We are shown in 1 Corinthians Ch15:17, “And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain…” that there is a connection between both intercession and oblation. Christ’s resurrection is an essential part of His work on behalf of believers, His resurrection signified His legal release by God the Father due to satisfaction being made to the Law, “Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant.” The point to note is that Christ was raised to ascend into heaven to continue interceding for us. Without the entering in of the High Priest to the holy place redemption could not be obtained for us, as that was His purpose for entering heaven, “To obtain eternal redemption for us.” Heb Ch9:12. So 1 Cor Ch15:17 clearly demonstrates the unity that is to be maintained in these two aspects. Francis Turretin has this to say, “Having finished his sacrifice on earth upon the cross, Christ must intercede in heaven. Hence Paul testifies if he were on earth, he should not be a priest (Heb. 8:4) because he ought not to exercise his service in an earthly temple (one made with hands), but in the heavenly.”

vi) Disintegration of the Oblation and Intercession of Christ.

Separation of both elements of Christ’s work has an adverse effect upon the doctrine of assurance. The main foundation of assurance flows out of the union between the oblation and intercession of Christ. A proper understanding of this union will leave before us the truth that all which Christ has procured for me in His death will effectually be bestowed and applied by His intercession. Of this we are assured, Christ has risen to make intercession for us at God’s right hand. No one can lay anything to the charge of God’s elect because of this says Paul, Romans Ch33-34.

As Christ stands as the advocate of His people, He stands as one having already obtained the satisfaction and acceptance of God. Christ’s pleading to the Father is not Christ trying to persuade His Father to somehow accept those for whom He prays…Christ pleads to His Father, the Father having already accepted them on the basis of His work.

Luke Ch22v31-34 is a key passage that sets for the foundation of assurance being that of Christ’s work. Peter is told by Christ that Satan has desired to sift him as wheat, he forewarned Peter of a coming trial, yet in v32 Christ comforts Peter by reminding him, “I have prayed for thee…” Interestingly Christ introduces His intercession as a reason as to why Peter will not finally fall away and be seized by Satan. Christ does not say “Peter I have died for thee” words that no doubt would have brought great comfort to the apostles soul. However, by reminding Peter that He was praying for him, He was showing Peter that he had already died for him, for Christ only prays for those for whom He died. Oh what benefit is to be had in understanding this vital union between oblation and intercession.

2) Objections to the Complementary Union of Oblation and Intercession are clearly futile.

Clearly both aspects of Christ’s mediatorial office are correlative in a superlative sense and of equal extent in respect to their objects and stated ends. However, many are the objections that are presented in opposition to our assertions, objections that at least need to be removed by the application of truth.

Of the most prominent objections is the application of a universal extent to Christ’s praying and death (The General ransom). This theory states that Christ prays and died for all men without distinction. However, if this be so why is it that not all enjoy the benefits procured by Christ’s death nor have them applied by His intercession? Surely this requires an answer! If Christ prays for all and died for all, then why do all men not believe? Is Christ’s intercession a ‘Mock Intercession’ as Owen states, does He pray for them knowing that they will not believe! Surely such a view cannot be reconcilable even with the plain testimony of scripture John Ch17:9 , “I pray for them, I pray not for the world, but for them which thou gavest me; for they are thine.” Since Christ does not intercede for all, it shows that He did not die for all. How do we know that Christ doesn't intercede for all?

1. Christ's prayers are always answered (John Ch11:22, 42).

2. Not everybody is saved.

3. Therefore Christ is not interceding for all.

To summarise. I trust that from looking at John Owen’s position, the complementary relationship between the oblation and intercession of Christ has been made clear. I have set down in summarised form the salient aspects of our conclusion.

- That the end of both the oblation and the intercession of Christ is the same, i.e. “the bringing of many sons to glory.”

- That those persons affected by the oblation and intercession of Christ are the same. Those for whom Christ prays are those for whom He has died and made atonement.

- That in relation to the former statement it must be said that the oblation of Christ is the foundation of His intercession, this must be the case as that which is bought by the oblation of Christ for a particular people must of necessity be applied to those same subjects by the intercession of Christ. If Christ has died for an individual then that individual is guaranteed and assured of the intercession of Christ.

- The union between both oblation and intercession one that is perpetual. This can be established from Isaiah Ch53v12b and Romans Ch8v34, note from both these passages that it is the same person that unites both works, it is Christ that died, it is Christ that intercedes. We affirm this in the next proposition

- The sacerdotal works of oblation and intercession are joined in the one priestly office, ultimately the union and relationship between both rests in a person i.e. Christ. In this point we see the importance of the person of Christ as being the central figure of study. Of Christ alone can it be said that He is a ‘…faithful high priest in things pertaining to God...” Hebrews Ch2:17

- Intercession must be viewed alongside of oblation as any disintegration of them will result in the failure of the end in view, that being the redemption of the elect.

In our concluding remarks it may be asked, ‘how is it that Christ prays and died for us and not for the world?’ Arthur Pink puts it another way, “That others more accomplished, with more pleasing dispositions, who daily put us to shame in many ways, left out and we taken in! The finite mind yea the renewed mind, can discover no answer!” All that we can offer by way of explanation is, it was the Sovereign Grace of a Sovereign God. With Pink we finish by saying,

^{“Let the world call it selfishness in us if they will, but let us express in praise to God our profoundest gratitude and seek to live as becometh His elect ones.”

Appendix.
1) Confessional Material relating to the Historical Reformed view of the Sacerdotal office of Christ.
(This compilation is non-exhaustive).
i) Heidelberg Catechism (1563). Question 31. Why is he called "Christ", that is anointed?

Answer: Because he is ordained of God the Father, and anointed with the Holy Ghost, to be our chief Prophet and Teacher, who has fully revealed to us the secret counsel and will of God concerning our redemption; and to be our only High Priest, who by the one sacrifice of his body, has redeemed us, and makes continual intercession with the Father for us; and also to be our eternal King, who governs us by his word and Spirit, and who defends and preserves us in that salvation, he has purchased for us.

ii) Belgic Confession (1561). Articles Twenty One and Twenty Six.

iii) Westminster Confession of Faith (1647). Chapter VIII section 8. “To all those for whom Christ has purchased redemption, He does certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same; making intercession for them, and revealing unto them, in and by the word, the mysteries of salvation; effectually persuading them by His Spirit to believe and obey, and governing their hearts by His word and Spirit; overcoming all their enemies by His almighty power and wisdom, in such manner, and ways, as are most consonant to His wonderful and unsearchable dispensation.”

iv) Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647). “Question 25. How doth Christ execute the office of a priest?
A. Christ executeth the office of a priest, in his once offering up of himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice, and reconcile us to God, and in making continual intercession for us.

v) Westminster Larger Catechism (1648). “Question 44: How does Christ execute the office of a priest?
Answer: Christ executes 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.

vi) Waldensian Confession (1655). Article Nineteen. “That Jesus Christ is our true and only mediator, not only redeeming us, but also interceding for us, and that by virtue of His merits and intercession we have access unto the Father…”

vii) Irish Articles of Religion (1615). Of Christ, the mediator of the second Covenant. Article 30. “Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in all things, sin only excepted, from which he was clearly void, both in his life and in his nature. He came as a Lamb without spot to take away the sins of the world by the sacrifice of himself once made, and sin (as Saint John saith) was not in him. He fulfilled the law for us perfectly: For our sakes he endured most grievous torments immediately in his soul, and most painful sufferings in his body. He was crucified, and died to reconcile his Father unto us, and to be a sacrifice not only for original guilt, but also for all our actual transgressions. He was buried and descended into hell, and the third day rose from the dead, and took again his body, with flesh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfection of man's nature: wherewith he ascended into Heaven, and there sitteth at the right hand of his Father, until he return to judge all men at the last day.”}

viii) Baptist Confession (1689). Chapter 8: Of Christ the Mediator section 4. “This office the Lord Jesus did most willingly undertake, which that he might discharge he was made under the law, and did perfectly fulfil it, and underwent the punishment due to us, which we should have borne and suffered, being made sin and a curse for us; enduring most grievous sorrows in his soul, and most painful sufferings in his body; was crucified, and died, and remained in the state of the dead, yet saw no corruption: on the third day he arose from the dead with the same body in which he suffered, with which he also ascended into heaven, and there sitteth at the right hand of his Father making intercession, and shall return to judge men and angels at the end of the world.”