William G. T. Shedd (1820-1894) wrote the following, referencing 1 John 2:2 where Jesus is a (present) ιλασμος for sins vis-a-vis his present role as intercessor:
The Septuagint idea of “propitiation,”
rather than the Hebrew idea of “covering over,” is prominent in the New
Testament and consequently passed into the soteriology of the primitive church
and from this into both the Romish and the Protestant soteriology. The
difference between the two is not essential, since both terms are objective;
but there is a difference. Hebrew kāppar denotes that the sacrificial victim
produces an effect upon sin. It covers it up. But the corresponding Septuagint
term hilaskomai denotes that the sacrificial victim produces an effect upon
God. It propitiates his holy displeasure. When St. John (1 John 2:2; 4:10)
asserts that “Jesus Christ is the righteous propitiation (hilasmos) for our
sins” and that God “sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins,” the
implication is that the divine nature is capable of being conciled by some
propitiating act. This propitiating act under the old dispensation was,
typically and provisionally, the offering of a lamb or goat as emblematic of
the future offering of the Lamb of God; and under the new dispensation it is
the actual offering of the body of Jesus Christ, who takes the sinner’s place
and performs for him the propitiating and reconciling act. (William G. T.
Shedd, Dogmatic Theology: Complete and Unabridged, Volumes 1-3 [Reformed
Retrieval, 2021], 612-13, emphasis added)
Further Reading