Heavenly Intercessor
In Rom 8.34 we find
it is Christ Jesus, sat at the right hand of God, “who intercedes (εντυγχανει) for us”. What
exactly is this heavenly intercession? We might look to Heb 7.25, where Christ
intercedes as High Priest. The connection with Hebrews is emphasised by Martin
Hengel, who regards Rom 8.34 as an echo of priestly functions (M. Hengel, Studies
in Early Christology [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995], 152). He dismisses
the alternative view that Christ acts as defence counsel in a forensic setting
(“The Counsel stood not at the right hand of the judge, but rather at the right
side of the accused in front of the judge.” Ibid. 139. This argument is
slightly disingenuous, however, given that priests too do not sit at anybody’s
right hand). However, there is some evidence to suggest that this might be what
Paul has in mind. The legal proceedings of the heavenly court are evoked: “Who
will bring any charge against God’s elect? [. . .] Who is to condemn?” (8.33-4).
As Fitzmyer observes, εγκαλεσει (8.33) “is a forensic term” (Fitzmyer, Romans,
532). We may allow for a degree of cross-over between these possibilities, for
the theme of sacrifice in 8.32 suggests that priesthood may be in the
background. However, the strongest aspect of intercession here is Christ’s
protection of the elect from condemnation.
This role
of Christ connects with Jewish angelology. With Christ interceding on behalf of
those suffering violence (8.35-36), we may think of those angels who intercede
for the protection of Israel. The most obvious parallel is T. Levi 5.6,
where we encounter “the angel who intercedes (παριτουμενον) for the
race of Israel [. . .] for every evil spirit attacks it.” The link between
intercession and the protection from spirits perhaps matches up with Paul’s
assurances regarding angels, rulers, and powers in 8.38. However, possibly of
greater interest is the explicitly Christological deployment of the tradition
in T. Dan 6.2:
Draw near to God and
the angel who intercedes () for you; because he is a mediator between God and
men, for the peace of Israel and he will withstands the kingdom of the enemy.
This text reflects
the Christian or Jewish-Christian compilation of the Testaments of the
Twelve Patriarchs. As Hollander and de Jonge suggest, “At the background we
may suppose a primitive Christian angel-Christology.”
Another parallel
worth noting is with the Johannine Paraclete. This holds a forensic function
(the very word παρακλητος can mean ‘advocate’) (BDAG παρακλητος 623. IT has the technical meaning ‘lawyer’,
though this is not common. “In the few places where the word is found in
pre-Christian and extra-Christian lit. it has for the most part a more general
mng.: one who appears in another’s behalf, mediator, intercessor, helper.”);
it will ‘prove wrong’ or ‘convict’ the word that is so hostile to believers (John
16.7). In the gospel, the Paraclete is a figure other than Christ (14.16), but this
still is relevant to and resembles what Paul is saying. Both Christ and the
Spirit intercede on behalf of a tight-knit and embattled community (Rom 8.26,
34). Notably, however, in 1John 2.1 Christ actually is the Paraclete (“My
children I write these things to you that you may not sin. But even if someone
does sin, we have an advocate [παρακλητον εχομεν] before the Father,
Jesus Christ the righteous one). Here too, angelology helps us to reconstruct
the developing Christian beliefs. Though its origins are unclear, it is likely
that the Christian παρακλητος derived from the Hebrew מלץ, a word
applied to angels in the DSS. Such terms became “virtual titles” for
interceding angels, applicable to a courtroom and a teaching context. The idea
of heavenly intercession, then, implies some influence on Christ’s functions
from the wider sphere of Jewish angelology. (Guy Williams, The Spirit World in the
Letters of Paul the Apostle: A Critical Examination of the Role of Spiritual
Beings in the Authentic Pauline Epistles [Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur
des Alten und Neuen Testaments 231; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 2009],
196-97)
