When we turn to Buddhism it would seem reasonable to regard the Buddha himself as a mediator, since he is seen sacrificing himself for others, even for animals. In former states of existence, it is said, he often gave himself as a substituted victim in place of doves and other innocent creatures, to satisfy hawks and beasts of prey. Then, having freed himself from the five
eat passions, he will help others to alike freedom
y his teaching. Still, there are two features of
Buddhism that render it inherently inconsistent with the idea of mediation. One is its protest against the Hindu caste system. Holding the equality of all men, it teaches that every one must suffer the consequences of his own deeds, either in the present life or in a future condition, and repudiates the possibility of a transference of responsibility or of an atoning sacrifice. The other feature is its virtual denial of God. But in pesetice the Buddha is deified, and then the Buddhist monk becomes a sort of priest, so that the notion of mediation comes round again from another quarter.
We may look for antecedents to the biblical doctrine of mediation in the religion of ancient Egypt, which was associated with a richly de- veloped hierarchical system, the priests enjoying high rank above the common people, and occupy- ing themselves with elaborate sacrificial perform- ances ; in the religion of Babylon, which, owing to the very early connexion between the Babylonians and Palestine (evidenced by the Tel el-Amarna tablets), must have been known in the latter country in primitive times; and in the Semitic religions of Canaan and Pheenicia, where, though, as Robertson Smith showed, the primitive notion
MEDIATOR, MEDIATION
of sacrifice suggested a common feast with the god, a communion, the piacular idea appeared later. Thus the prophets of Baal, in the time of Elijah, act as mediators, performing sacrificial functions on behalf of king and people.
ii. MEDIATION IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. — Mediation appears in various forms during the course of the OT history, in the specific regula- tions of the law, and in the teachings of the prophets.
1. Mediation in OT history.—In the oldest parts of the patriarchal history (JE) the head of the household officiates as the family priest, sacrific- ing and entering into covenants on behalf of his people, e.g. Abraham (Gn 1278 15%), Isaac (Gn 25%"), Jacob (Gn 338°), It is to be observed that the later narrative (P) does not describe patriarchal altars and sacrifices. Although the earlier narrative in its written form is assigned to the period of the monarchy, this primitive style of religious observances speaks for its own antiquity, and for the probability that traditions embodying old customs are here preserved. ‘Two incidents in particular, connected with the patri- archal narratives, bear especially on ancient views of mediation. Melchizeiels king of Salem, is introduced as a priest of God Most High (Gn 14"). He blesses Abraham, and receives a tenth of the spoil after the battle of the kings. This kingl priesthood of Melchizedek laid hold of the Jewis imagination, and reappeared in the Messianic ideal of Ps 110, to be recognized and elaborately discussed in its application to Jesus Christ by the author of He (6”-7). Then Abraham’s pleading for the cities of the plain shows us the patriarch as a typical mediator. In this wonderful picture of earnest prayer we see mediation in the form of intercession. No sacrifice is offered, but the patriarch pleads on behalf of the doomed cities with singular persistence, and yet with pro- found humility. The promise of deliverance if a sufficient number of righteous men can be found, introduces another element of mediation, what we might call the passive mediation of the goodness of one, on account of which favour is shown to others,—in this case corresponding to our Lord’s idea of His disciples as the salt of the earth (Mt 53), Moses appears as a mediator in various relations. First, as the deliverer of his people he comes from Jehovah with a mandate to Pharaoh (Ex 3). This is an instance of the descendin mediation, in which the mediator comes from God with a divine message. In the same way Moses appears as the lawgiver, receiving the law from Jehovah and giving it to the people. Kuenen maintains that the tradition about Moses as a law- giver shows that, even if not a single one of his laws are extant, he was prominent asa revealer of God’s will (Religion of Israel, i, 273). Moses appears repeatedly as the prophet through whom God communicates with Israel. Thus it is said (in the JE narrative), ‘And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend’ (Ex 33", see also Nu 1258), Then Moses also appears most conspicuously as the mediator in the other form of mediatorial work, the ascending mediation, representing the people to God in inter- cession. A striking instance of this mediation occurs in relation to the molten calf, when Moses beseeches God on behalf of the people (Ex 327), and even expresses a willingness to be himself blotted out of God’s book if only the people may be forgiven their sin (Ex 32%), appealing to the favour he has found with God as a ground for pleading the cause of the people he represents (Ex 33, see Schultz, OT Theol. i. 138). A special form of mediation comes in with the idea of the theocratic king, who is both the representative of