Salvation

Means the safety or preservation of any thing that has been or is in danger; but it is more particularly used by us to denote our deliverance from sin and hell, and the final enjoyment of God in a future state, through the mediation of Jesus Christ.

See articles ATONEMENT, PROPITIATION, RECONCILIATION, REDEMPTION and SANCTIFICATION.

A blessed word of a most blessed doctrine founded in the Lord Jesus Christ, who is JEHOVAH’S salvation to the ends of the earth. (Isa. xlix. 6.) I refer the reader to the article Redeemer for the several features of salvation. And in addition to what is there said, I would just beg to observe that the thing itself meets poor lost souls so many ways, and answereth to their wants in such a variety of purposes, that it is always blessed to meditate upon it.

The term salvation implies somewhat more than a state of recovery from a state in which before the sinner was lost, but it includes every thing that is blessed in that state of recovery. The lost soul is not only brought out of bondage and the shadow of death, but brought into the liberty of the sons of God. So that in salvation is meant a release from all evil, and an introduction into all that is good. A right and interest in all temporal, spiritual and eternal blessings, is the sure consequence. Everlasting life, with all its preliminaries, for it hath the promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come." And what endears salvation yet more, is the consideration of the almighty and all - loving author of it, and by whom it was accomplished. What he is in himself, in the glories of his person, his greatness, fitness, suitability, and all - sufficiency; what he is in his work, and what he hath done for his redeemed, the salvation he hath wrought beyond all conception of value in its completeness, and beyond all reach of extent in its efficacy, beinglike himself, everlasting and eternal; and what he is in his relations to his people, being their everlasting Father, Brother, Husband, Friend all these things, included as they all are in salvation, give the happy partakers of it "a joy unspeakable and full of glory; so that every individual finds cause to join in the hymn of the church, and say: "I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation: he is a rock, his work is perfect, just and right is he." (Isa. lxi. 10.)

imports, in general, some great deliverance from any evil or danger. Thus, the conducting the Israelites through the Red Sea, and delivering them out of the hands of the Egyptians, is called a great salvation. But salvation, by way of eminence, is applied to that wonderful deliverance which our blessed Saviour procured for mankind, by saving them from the punishment of their sins; and in the New Testament is the same as our redemption by Christ. This is that salvation referred to by St. Paul: “How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation?” The salvation which Christ purchased, and the Gospel tenders to every creature, comprehends the greatest blessings which God can bestow; a deliverance from the most dreadful evils that mankind can suffer. It contains all that can make the nature of man perfect or his life happy, and secures him from whatever can render his condition miserable. The blessings of it are inexpressible, and beyond imagination. “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.” For, to be saved as Christ saves, is to have all our innumerable sins and transgressions forgiven and blotted out; all those heavy loads of guilt which oppressed our souls perfectly removed from our minds. It is to be reconciled to God, and restored to his favour, so that he will be no longer angry, terrible, and retributive, but a most kind, compassionate, and tender Father. It is to be at peace with him and with our consciences; to have a title to his peculiar love, care, and protection, all our days; to be rescued from the bondage and dominion of sin, and the tyranny of the devil. It is to be translated from the power of darkness, into the kingdom of Christ; so that sin shall reign no longer in our mortal bodies, but we shall be enabled to serve God in newness of life. It is to be placed in a state of true freedom and liberty, to be no longer under the control of blind passions, and hurried on by our impetuous lusts to do what our reason condemns. It is to have a new principle of life infused into our souls; to have the Holy Spirit resident in our hearts, whose comfortable influence must ever cheer and refresh us, and by whose counsels, we may be always advised, directed, and governed. It is to be transformed into the image of God; and to be made like him in wisdom, righteousness, and all other perfections of which man’s nature is capable.

Finally, to be saved as Christ came to save mankind, is to be translated, after this life is ended, into a state of eternal felicity, never more to die or suffer, never more to know pain and sickness, grief and sorrow, labour and weariness, disquiet, or vexation, but to live in perfect peace, freedom, and liberty, and to enjoy the greatest good after the most perfect manner for ever. It is to have our bodies raised again, and reunited to our souls; so that they shall be no longer gross, earthly, corruptible bodies, but spiritual, heavenly, immortal ones, fashioned like unto Christ’s glorious body, in which he now sits at the right hand of God. It is to live in the city of the great King, the heavenly Jerusalem, where the glory of the Lord fills the place with perpetual light and bliss. It is to spend eternity in the most noble and hallowed employments, in viewing and contemplating the wonderful works of God, admiring the wisdom of his providence, adoring his infinite love to the sons of men, reflecting on our own inexpressible happiness, and singing everlasting hymns of praise, joy, and triumph to God and our Lord Jesus Christ for vouchsafing all these blessings. It is to dwell for ever in a place, where no objects of pity or compassion, of anger or envy, of hatred or distrust, are to be found; but where all will increase the happiness of each other, by mutual love and kindness. It is to converse with the most perfect society, to be restored to the fellowship of our friends and relations who have died in the faith of Christ, and to be with Jesus Christ, to behold his glory, to live for ever in seeing and enjoying the great God, in “whose presence is fulness of joy, and at whose right hand are pleasures for evermore.” This is the salvation that Christ has purchased for us; and which his Gospel offers to all mankind.

Means, strictly, deliverance; and so it is used of temporal deliverance, victory, in Gen 14:13 1Sa 14:45 . But as the spiritual deliverance from sin and death, through the Redeemer, Mat 1:21, is a far greater salvation, so this word has come to be used mostly only in this moral and spiritual sense; and implies not only this deliverance, but also the consequences of it, namely, eternal life and happiness in the kingdom of out Lord, 2Co 7:10 Zep 1:13 . It is most justly described as a "great salvation," Heb 2:3 .\par The Hebrews rarely use concrete terms, as they are called, but often abstract terms. Thus, instead of saying, God saves them and protects them, they say, God is their salvation. So, a voice of salvation, tidings of salvation, the rock of salvation, the shield of salvation, a horn of salvation, a word of salvation, etc., are equivalent to a voice declaring deliverance; the joy that attends escape from a great danger; a rock where any one takes refuge, and is in safety; a buckler that secures from the attack of an enemy; a horn or ray of glory, of happiness and salvation, etc. Thus, to work great salvation in Israel signifies to deliver Israel from some imminent danger, to obtain a great victory over enemies.\par The "garments of salvation," Isa 61:10, refer to the splendid robes worn on festival days. The expression is used figuratively to denote the reception of a signal favor from God, such as deliverance from great danger.\par

The doctrine of salvation in the N.T. derives its name from a word which was engrained in the history and language of Israel from the period of the deliverance of the people out of Egypt up to the time of their restoration from captivity. The word yasha (ישׁע), to save, which generally answers to the Greek σώζω, has given a name not only to Joshua, but to Jesus, who should save his people from their sins. Our translators have rendered yasha by the words save, help, preserve, rescue, defend, and deliver.

Yasha is used of the deliverance of Israel from the Egyptians (Exo 14:30; Isa 43:3), and from other enemies (Num 10:9; Deu 20:4). The reference to this fact in 1Sa 10:19 is very striking: ’Ye have this day rejected your God, who himself saved you out of all your adversities and your tribulations.’

This salvation was often effected through the instrumentality of man. Thus the Lord said to Gideon, ’Go in this thy might, and thou shalt save Israel from the h and of the Midianites: have not I sent thee?’ (Jdg 6:14). Again, He says to Samuel concerning Saul, ’Thou shalt anoint him to be captain over my people Israel, that he may save my people out of the h and of the Philistines’ (1Sa 9:16). Yet in such cases it was to be clearly understood that the work was God’s, not man’s; accordingly, Gideon’s company was reduced in number, ’lest Israel vaunt themselves against me, saying, My own h and hath saved me’ (Jdg 7:2). Actuated by this conviction, Jonathan reminded his armour-bearer that ’There is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few’ (1Sa 14:6); and Saul, when appealing to the name of God, describes Him as the Lord who saveth Israel (1Sa 14:39) in 2Ki 13:5 we read that ’the Lord gave Israel a saviour, so that they went out from under the h and of the Syrians.’ With this passage may be compared the words of Isaiah with regard to Egypt, ’They shall cry unto the Lord because of the oppressors, and he shall send them a saviour, and a great one, and he shall deliver them’ (Isa 19:20).

Over and above the national salvation depicted in these and many similar passages, there are numerous references in the O.T. to the fact that God exercises a saving care over individuals, especially over those who in their helplessness and trouble need and claim his protection. Eliphaz says of God, ’He saveth the po or from the sword, from their mouth, and from the h and of the mighty’ (Job 5:15); ’He shall save the humble person’ (22:29). The Psalmist says, ’He saves the meek’ (Psa 76:9), the needy (72:4, 13), the contrite (34:18), the righteous (Pro 28:18), but not the wicked (Psa 18:41).

The principle up on which this salvation from trouble is extended to man is simply the merciful disposition of God (Psa 109:26) and his own honour (Isa 37:35). He saves for his own Name’s sake. He says emphatically, ’I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour’ (Isa 43:11); ’Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else’ (Isa 45:22).

There is nothing in the word yashawhich indicates the mode or which limits the extent of salvation. It evidently includes divinely bestowed deliverance from every class of spiritual and temporal evil to which mortal man is subjected in Psa 24:5, and elsewhere, it is set forth in connection with righteousness; in Psa 25:5, with truth; in Psa 40:10, with faithfulness; in Psa 51:12; with joy; in Psa 68:19-20, with spiritual gifts; in Psa 69:13, with the hearing of prayer; and in Psa 79:9, with the forgiveness of sins.

The Messiah was to be the embodiment of the Divine help and salvation. his coming is thus proclaimed, ’Behold, thy salvation cometh; behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him’ (Isa 62:11); ’Behold, thy king cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation’ [The word here is passive, and perhaps refers to the resurrection of Christ.] (Zec 9:9); ’Behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you’ (Isa 35:4).

It is to be noticed that Chayah (חיה), to save alive or make alive, is used several times in the O.T., e.g. Gen 12:12; Eze 3:18; Eze 13:18-19; Eze 18:27 in these and other passages preservation in life is what is generally referred to. Compare 1Pe 3:18, which may be rendered ’being kept alive in the spirit.’

Teaching of the NT on Salvation

The Greek representative of yashain the N.T. is σώξω. We find it used of both temporal and spiritual deliverances, though the latter sense strongly predominates. ’To be saved’ and ’to be made whole’ are sometimes taken as renderings for the same word. Over and over again in this physical sense Christ ’saved others,’ though He could not--the Jews supposed --’save Himself.’ There are also some passages in the Epistles which appear to refer to temporal salvation, whilst others are open to two interpretations.

The references in the N.T. to the ’great salvation’ wrought by Christ are very constant and most remarkable. Sometimes this salvation is identified with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mar 10:26; Luk 13:23); sometimes it is regarded as a present salvation (Luk 19:9; 2Co 6:2); in other passages it is postponed till the Great Day (1Co 3:15), which is the day of the Lord Jesus Christ (1Co 5:5). It is everywhere set fort has attainable only through Him (Joh 10:9; Act 4:12). It follows on repentance (1Co 7:10), on belief (Mar 16:16), on receiving the love of the truth (2Th 2:10), on public confession of Christ’s resurrection (Rom 10:9) in some passages salvation is deliverance from sins (Mat 1:21); in others it appears to mean a continuous preservation from surrounding evil (2Ti 4:18; Heb 5:9); whilst in a third class of passages it is deliverance from the wrath to come (Rom 5:9; Rom 13:11; 1Th 5:8; Heb 9:28).

The being saved is brought several times into contrast with the being lost. It is a present loss or perdition from which Christ comes to seek and to save in the first place. He is never represented as saving from final perdition those who deliberately reject his saving work here. his mission was essentially remedial and restorative. So long as He was up on earth He restored health to the sick, sight to the blind, and cleanness to the leper; now that He has died, risen, and ascended into heaven, He restores the moral being of those who trust Him, not only by healing their backslidings and pardoning their offences, but also by giving them spiritual health, and power to live unto God. Hereafter will come the restoration of the body and of the whole physical fabric of things connected with the body, together with the full development of spiritual life.

This may be seen in various connections in scripture.

1. It has reference primarily to the judgement of God to which man is obnoxious by reason of sin. This is illustrated by the destruction of the firstborn (the strength) of Egypt when the destroying angel passed through the land. The Israelites were saved only through being sheltered by the blood of the passover lamb. Salvation is based on God’s righteousness having been maintained and declared in the death of Christ, and hence is for the believer in Christ. Luk 1:77.

2. Intimately connected with the above is the question of salvation from enemies carnal or spiritual. With Israel it was the former, as the Egyptians and the Canaanites. With Christians it is the latter, as sin, death, the world and the power of Satan. Salvation in this sense is by the power of God. Luk 1:71.

3. It has reference further to the actual physical condition of Christians which is met by the redemption of the body. In this sense salvation is hoped for. During the interval the Christian has to work out into result his own salvation (it was in the case of the Philippians their ’own salvation’ in contrast to the care exercised over them by Paul when present with them). Php 2:12-13: cf. Heb 7:25.

Deliverance from sin and penalty, realized in a future state

Jesus Christ Coming To Save

Mat_1:20-21; Mat_18:11-14; Luk_9:54-56; Luk_15:3-32; Luk_19:9-10; Joh_3:16-17; Joh_12:44-47; 1Ti_1:15.

Salvation Belonging To The LORD

Psa_3:8.

Salvation Coming To The Gentiles

Act_15:6-11; Act_28:25-28; Rom_9:30-33; Rom_11:1-32; Gal_3:6-14.

The LORD Being The Only Savior

Psa_62:1-2; Psa_62:6-7; Isa_43:11-12; Hos_13:4; Act_4:9-12.

The LORD Being The Savior/Salvation

Exo_15:2; 2Sa_22:3; 2Sa_22:47; 2Sa_22:50-51; Job_13:16; Psa_18:2; Psa_18:46; Psa_25:5; Psa_27:1; Psa_28:7-8; Psa_62:1-2; Psa_62:6-7; Psa_68:19; Psa_89:26; Psa_118:14-15; Isa_12:2-3; Isa_33:2; Isa_43:3; Isa_43:11-12; Isa_49:26; Isa_60:15-16; Isa_63:7-8; Hos_13:4; Hab_3:18; Zec_9:9; Luk_2:11; Act_5:30-31; Act_13:22-23; Eph_5:22-23; Php_3:20-21; 1Ti_1:1; 1Ti_2:3; Tit_2:13; Tit_3:3-6; Heb_2:9-10; 2Pe_1:1; 2Pe_1:11; 2Pe_3:18; 1Jn_4:14; Jud_1:25.

The LORD Giving Salvation

2Sa_22:33-36; Psa_18:31-35; Psa_144:9-11; Isa_61:10.

The LORD Saving

2Sa_22:3; Psa_37:40; Psa_71:1-3; Psa_138:6-7; Isa_25:8-9; Isa_33:22; Isa_43:12; Isa_45:22; Isa_59:1; Jer_17:14; Jer_30:1-11; Mat_1:20-21; Luk_1:68-71; 1Th_5:9-10; Tit_3:3-5; Jam_4:10-12.

The Salvation Of Israel

Psa_14:7; Psa_53:6; Jer_3:23; Rom_11:1-32.

The Salvation Of The LORD

Psa_98:2; Isa_46:9-13; Isa_51:3-8; Isa_56:1; Luk_3:4-6; Act_28:28.

The Salvation Of The Righteous

Psa_37:39.

Those That Are Saved

1Co_1:18.

What Cannot Save

Deu_32:37-38; Jdg_10:11-14; Isa_45:20; Isa_46:6-7; Isa_47:13; Jer_2:28; Jer_11:12; Hos_13:4-11.

What Saves

Luk_7:50; Luk_18:42; Rom_8:24-25; 1Co_15:1-2; Eph_2:5; Eph_2:8-10; Tit_2:11; Jam_1:20-21; Jam_5:15; 1Pe_3:20-21.

Where Salvation Comes From

Psa_62:1-2.

Where Salvation Is

Psa_118:15.

Who Salvation Is Far From

Psa_119:155.

Who Shall Be Saved

2Sa_22:4-7; 2Sa_22:21-28; Job_5:8-16; Psa_7:10; Psa_17:6-7; Psa_18:3; Psa_20:6; Psa_34:6; Psa_34:18; Psa_37:40; Psa_55:16; Psa_107:8-13; Psa_107:17-19; Psa_145:18-19; Psa_149:4; Pro_20:22; Pro_28:18; Dan_6:23; Mat_10:16-22; Mat_24:8-13; Mar_13:12-13; Mar_16:16-19; Act_2:21; Act_15:6-11; Act_16:31; Rom_5:6-11; Rom_9:27; Rom_10:9-10; Rom_10:12-13; Rom_11:26; 1Co_1:21; 1Co_15:1-2; 1Ti_2:12-15; 2Ti_2:10-11; Heb_7:22-25; Heb_9:28.

Who Shall Save A Soul

Jam_5:20.

Who Shall Save Their Life

Mar_8:31-35; Luk_9:22-25; Luk_17:33; Joh_12:25.

Who Will See The Salvation Of GOD

Psa_50:16-23; Psa_91:9-16.

SALVATION.—The Gospel usage of this word is closely connected with that of OT.

The corresponding Heb. words are derivatives of ישׁע and נצל. Of the former, the Niphal and Hiphil are found in the verb; of noun forms יַשַׁע; or יָשַׁע, יֽשׁוּעָה, תְּשׁוּעָה, מוֹשָׁעוֹת and some proper names, of which the most important is יְהוֹשׁוּעַ ‘Jehovah is salvation.’ The root נצל occurs in the Niphal and Hiphil of the verb; its only noun-derivative is the ἅταξ λεγομενον, הַצָלָה, Est 4:14. The fundamental meaning of ישׁע appears to be ‘enlargement,’ whence the notion of ‘deliverance’ naturally springs, the same association of ideas being observed in the use of ‘compression,’ ‘confinement’ as figures for ‘distress.’ So far as the verbal forms of both roots are concerned, the idea of ‘saving’ is entirely negative, that of deliverance from some evil, no reflexion being passed upon favourable, positive consequences. A negative sense is very clear in such passages as Psa 28:9; Psa 69:35, where the positive results of the saving act are named as something additional. From other words denoting deliverance ‘to save’ is distinguished by the constant presence of two elements, that of a delivering agent, and that of an active interposition on his part for the removal of actual evil or peril. For mere ‘preservation’ or mere ‘escape’ other words are used: ‘healing’ also is expressed by different terms; of. Gen 45:7; Gen 47:25, Exo 1:17, Jer 48:6, Eze 3:18, Psa 6:5; Psa 41:3, Job 2:6. The evil from which salvation takes place varies; in most cases it is the oppression of Israel by its enemies; sometimes, though not frequently, it appears in the acute form of individual or national death (Psa 68:19-20). While the noun-forms frequently have the same negative meaning as the verb, they pass over more readily into the positive sense, so that the act of deliverance becomes the point of departure for the bestowal of favour, blessing, and prosperity. Thus יְשׁוּעָה and תְּשׁוּעָה come to mean ‘victory’ (1Sa 14:45, 2Sa 19:2, 2Ki 5:1, Isa 60:18). ‘Salvation’ becomes synonymous with other positive terms like ‘righteousness,’ ‘blessing,’ ‘light’ (Isa 45:8; Isa 46:13; Isa 49:6; Isa 61:10; Isa 62:1, Psa 24:5; Psa 106:4). In the Prophets and the Psalter it obtains an eschatological (Messianic) sense, and stands as one of the terms for the great final deliverance and the final blessedness to follow (Isa 12:2 f., Isa 45:17; Isa 45:22; Isa 49:8; Isa 51:6; Isa 51:8; Isa 52:7; Isa 56:1, Jer 23:6; Jer 33:16, Mic 7:7, Hab 3:8; Hab 3:18, Psa 14:7; Psa 35:4; Psa 74:12; Psa 85:8; Psa 98:2-3; Psa 109:27; Psa 118:15; Psa 118:21.) The religious importance of the conception in the OT springs not so much from the nature of the evil removed, or from the nature of the blessedness bestowed, as rather from the fact that salvation, of whatever nature, is a work of Jehovah for His people, a Divine prerogative; hence the frequently recurring statements that salvation belongs to Jehovah, is of Jehovah, that Jehovah is salvation, the Saviour of Israel (1Sa 14:39, 2Sa 22:3, 2Ch 20:17, Isa 12:2-3; Isa 33:22, Psa 3:8; Psa 62:2; Psa 118:14; Psa 118:21). In so far as salvation is valued not merely from the point of view of its benefits for man, but as a pledge of the Divine favour, the idea becomes spiritualized in principle. Besides, in so far as all national developments in the history of Israel have a religious and moral background, it is felt that every act of salvation must have for its antecedent a change in the people’s spiritual condition (Isa 33:22; Isa 33:24). In a few passages the conception is directly transferred from the national-political to the purely religious sphere, sin being named as the evil from which Israel or the individual is saved (Eze 36:29, Psa 51:14).

The LXX Septuagint renders the Heb. verbs by σώζειν, the nouns by σωτηρία. and σωτήριον. These words, however, are likewise used to render Heb. terms of a different shade of meaning, and thus to a large extent the nice distinction of the original between ‘salvation ‘specifically so-called and such more general terms is obscured. Thus σώζειν stands for מלט Niphal, Piel, and Hiphil, frequently in the Passive for mere ‘escape,’ also for forms of פלט and חיה. On the other hand, σώζειν never bears in the LXX Septuagint the specific sense of ‘healing’ (Jer 17:14).

In the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphical writings the usage does not vary much from that of the OT; cf. Sir 51:12 (ἐξ ἀτωλείας), Wis 16:7, Jdt 9:11, Enoch 48:7 (of ‘the Son of Man’; ‘in his name are they being saved, and he is the God of their life’) 50:3 (eschatological-negative, mere salvation without glory) 63:8, 4 Ezr 6:25, 7:131, 9:8, 12:34, 13:26, 8:39 (the righteous shall he satisfied with salvation in connexion with the Messiah), Ps-Sol 6:2, 10:8, 12:6, 18:6, Bar 4:22; Bar 4:24; Bar 4:29, Test. Jud 1:22, Test. Daniel 5, Test. Napht. 8, Jub 23:29, 1Ma 4:30; 1Ma 9:9, 4Ma 11:7; 4Ma 15:3 (‘piety which saves unto eternal life’) 4Ma 15:27. In most of these passages the conception is eschatological-positive, and in many of them it has reference to the issue of the Last Judgment, wherein lies a transition from the OT to the NT usage. There is also an advance in this, that in a couple of instances the act of salvation is connected with the Messiah.

In the Gospels σώζειν occurs 54 times (not counting Luk 17:33, where ζωογονήσει is better attested than σώσει of the Textus Receptus , nor Mat 18:11, a verse omitted by the best authorities). The noun σωτηρία occurs 5 times (not counting αἰώνιος σωτηρία in the rejected shorter conclusion of Mk.)—Luk 1:69; Luk 1:71; Luk 1:77; Luk 19:9, Joh 4:22. τὸ σωτήριον is found twice—Luk 2:30; Luk 3:6. Of the instances of this use of the verb 14 relate to the deliverance from disease or demoniacal possession—Mat 9:21-22 bis, Mar 5:23; Mar 5:28; Mar 5:34; Mar 6:56; Mar 10:32, Luk 8:36; Luk 8:48; Luk 8:50; Luk 17:19; Luk 18:42, Joh 11:12; in 20 instances the reference is to the rescue of physical life from some impending peril or instant death—Mat 8:25; Mat 14:30; Mat 16:25; Mat 27:40; Mat 27:42 bis., Mat 27:49, Mar 3:4; Mar 8:35; Mar 15:30-31 bis. Luk 6:9; Luk 9:24; Luk 9:56; Luk 23:35 bis. Luk 23:37; Luk 23:39, Joh 12:27; in the remainder of cases, 20 times, the reference is to religious salvation technically so called—Mat 1:21; Mat 10:22; Mat 19:25; Mat 24:13; Mat 24:22, Mar 8:35; Mar 10:26; Mar 13:13; Mar 13:20; Mar 16:16, Luk 7:50; Luk 8:12; Luk 9:24; Luk 13:23; Luk 18:26; Luk 19:10, Joh 3:17; Joh 5:34; Joh 10:9; Joh 12:47. The noun σωτηρία is used twice in the OT sense of deliverance from the enemies of Israel—Luk 1:69; Luk 1:71; Luke , 3 times in the more specifically religious sense—Luk 1:77; Luk 19:9, Joh 4:22. τὸ σωτήριον in Luk 2:30 has the same distinctly religious associations; in Luk 3:6 it stands in a quotation from Isa 40:5, where the meaning is eschatological from the OT point of view.

1. First we examine the passages relating to the deliverance from diseases or demoniacal possession. The question is whether the import of σώζειν here is exhausted by the notion of ‘healing.’ The Greek word has this meaning, being connected with σῶς (σάος), ‘whole,’ ‘sound,’ therefore σώζειν = ‘to render whole, sound.’ The Authorized Version accordingly renders in most of these cases ‘to make whole’ or ‘be whole,’ in two ‘to heal’ (Mar 5:23, Luk 8:36), in one ‘to do well’ (Joh 11:12), and only once ‘to save’ (Luk 18:42). In one instance it offers ‘to save’ as a marginal reading for ‘to make whole’ (Mar 10:52). Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 everywhere follows the rendering of Authorized Version except that it makes the two passages where the latter has ‘to heal’ and the one passage where it has ‘to save’ uniform with the others; further, that it renders in Joh 11:12 ‘to recover,’ and that it offers in all passages except Mar 6:56 the marginal alternative ‘to save.’ It should be noticed that on other occasions the Evangelists use, and make Jesus use, different words, whose import is restricted to ‘healing’ in the medical sense, and that not only where the object is some disease or disability, but also with a personal object; so θεραπεὑειν (Mat 4:23-24; Mat 8:7; Mat 8:16; Mat 9:35; Mat 10:1; Mat 10:8; Mat 12:10; Mat 12:15; Mat 14:14; Mat 15:30; Mat 17:16; Mat 17:18; Mat 19:2; Mat 21:14, Mar 1:34; Mar 3:2; Mar 3:10; Mar 3:15; Mar 6:5; Mar 6:13, Luk 4:23; Luk 4:40; Luk 5:15; Luk 6:7; Luk 6:18; Luk 7:21; Luk 8:2; Luk 8:43; Luk 9:1; Luk 9:6; Luk 10:9; Luk 13:14; Luk 14:3, Joh 5:10) and ἱᾶσθαι (Luk 6:19; Luk 9:2; Luk 9:11; Luk 9:42; Luk 14:4; Luk 22:51, Joh 4:47). The question is not, of course, whether the element of ‘healing’ as a connotated idea should be entirely eliminated from σώζειν. Not only would this have been impossible to a Greek speaker or writer in cases where the saving act as a matter of fact consisted in or involved healing, but it is also excluded by the observation that Jesus more than once referred to His saving work as the work of a physician, and in the instruction to His disciples spoke also of it as ‘healing’ (Mat 9:12; Mat 10:1; Mat 10:8; Mat 13:15, Mar 2:17, Luk 4:18; Luk 5:31; Luk 9:1-2; Luk 10:9). The only point at issue is whether the Evangelists are aware of a difference between statements where ‘healing’ is designated as such, and other statements where ‘healing’ is implied, but where for a certain purpose it is characterized as ‘saving.’

The data above cited show that this last question must be answered in the affirmative. In view of the fact that Aramaic lies behind the Greek form of the words of Jesus or the Evangelists, we shall also have to assume a clearly marked difference between the two sets of cases. The additional element which the use of σώζειν introduces into the situation is that of deliverance from the sphere or power of death. In Mar 3:4, Luk 6:9, while speaking of His healing work, our Lord contrasts σώζειν with ἀποκτείνειν, which implies that He regarded it as the opposite of ‘killing,’ i.e. as rescuing from death and restoring to life. According to Mar 5:23, the purpose of ‘being saved ‘is ‘to live.’ In Luk 7:3 διασώζειν, the use of the preposition marks the process as a transition from death to life. It is true that in some instances the disease or infirmity from which Jesus saves is not fatal in itself, e.g. the withered hand (Mar 3:4), the issue of blood (Mar 5:28), certainly some of the diseases of Mar 6:56, blindness (Mar 10:52). Still even here the act of saving is viewed not from a medical point of view, but from the religious point of view, according to which all disease and infirmity lie on the side of death, so that it belongs to the function of one who delivers from death to work deliverance from these consequences of sin and precursors of death likewise.

This is further continued by the general interpretation Jesus puts upon His healing miracles as prophecies and pledges of the approaching Kingdom, in which all sin and death shall be done away with. With regard to the casting out of demons, the correctness of this view is vouched for by the explicit statement (Mat 12:28 = Luk 11:20). But it applies equally well to the other miracles of healing. Jesus did not look upon these as works of philanthropy merely, or as signs authenticating His mission primarily. While the latter was one of the purposes for which they were intended—and this is brought out prominently in the Fourth Gospel—in the Synoptics, where Jesus’ teaching is centred in the Kingdom-idea, the miracles are before all else signs of the actual approach of the Kingdom,—proofs that the saving power of God, which calls the Kingdom into being, is already in motion, and therefore so many instances of σώζειν. Jesus’ saving power is simply the Kingdom-power applied to the individual under the influence of sin and death. Thus only can we naturally explain the fact that, where ‘salvation’ has a direct religious reference, both in our Lord’s own and in the later Apostolic teaching, the close connexion between it and the ideas of death and life is unmistakable. If this religious usage is at all dependent on the physical aspect of our Lord’s saving activity, it can be only through the common element of victory over sin and death. Jesus Himself has sufficiently indicated the connexion between the two, both in the Synoptical sayings and in the Johannine discourses. In the former the physical evils, which the saving Kingdom-power removes, have a moral and spiritual background. Hence Jesus makes such physical salvation the occasion for suggesting and working the profounder change by which the bonds of sin are loosed, and the rule of God set up in the inner life of man. The external and the internal are significantly placed side by side as co-ordinated halves of an identical work (Mar 2:9). And in the Fourth Gospel we are explicitly told that the physical acts are intended to point to corresponding spiritual transactions; the healing of the blind, the raising of the dead, are symbolic of Jesus’ saving work in the spiritual sphere (Joh 5:14; Joh 5:19-29; Joh 9:3; Joh 9:39; Joh 12:25-26). On three occasions our Lord has brought out the spiritual significance of the physical salvation by calling special attention to its dependence on the exercise of faith: the woman with the issue of blood (Mar 5:34 = Mat 9:22 = Luk 8:48), the blind man near Jericho (Mar 10:52 = Luk 18:42), one of the lepers (Luk 17:19). The words ‘thy faith has saved thee’ are on these occasions the same as were used in such a case of purely spiritual salvation as is recorded Luk 7:50. They were intended as a suggestion that faith, which had yielded such results in the physical sphere, could be made equally fruitful in the sphere of spiritual salvation. Thus the external and internal are linked together by the common factor of faith.

That σώζειν has to do with the contrast of life and death becomes plain also from those instances of its natural use where deliverance from evil other than disease or demon-possession is referred to, for here everywhere the evil is that of physical death (Mat 8:25; Mat 14:30; Mat 16:25; Mat 27:40; Mat 27:42; Mat 27:9, Mar 8:35; Mar 15:30-31, Luk 9:24; Luk 9:56; Luk 23:35; Luk 23:37; Luk 23:39, Joh 12:27).

2. In connexion with the directly religions use in the Gospels several questions emerge. (1) Is the saving act, when belonging to the spiritual sphere, still viewed as a translation from death into life, and what is the meaning of death and life as related to salvation in this sphere? (2) Is the deliverance conceived eschatologically, as something to be experienced in the Last Day, or is it treated as an experience already attainable in this present life? (3) Is the conception negative or positive, or both negative and positive, i.e. does it express merely the removal of spiritual evil, or also the bestowal of positive spiritual blessings, especially the gift of life in a positive, pregnant sense?

(1) The answer to the first question is that spiritual salvation still revolves around the contrast between life and death, and that in a twofold sense. Both as subjective and as objective states, death and life come under consideration here. In other words: Jesus saves from spiritual death as a condition of the soul, and He saves from eternal death as a punishment awaiting the sinner. As the object of His saving activity, our Lord names τὸ ἀπολωλός ‘that which has become lost and now is lost’ (Mat 10:6; Mat 15:24; Mat 18:12-14, Luk 15:4; Luk 15:6; Luk 15:8; Luk 15:24; Luk 19:10). From the figures used it appears that the Gr. ἀπόλλυσθαι has in this connexion the sense ‘miss,’ ‘be missing,’ not primarily the sense ‘destroy,’ ‘be destroyed.’ The ‘lost’ are like sheep gone astray upon the mountains, like the coin slipped out of the hand of its owner, like the prodigal who lias left the father’s home. A lost condition means estrangement from God, a missing of all the religious and moral relations man is designed to sustain towards his Maker. But this lost condition is further identified by Jesus with spiritual death, for of the prodigal the father declares: ‘This thy brother was dead and is alive again, and was lost and is found’ (Luk 15:24; Luk 15:32). Elsewhere also the state of sin is described as a state of death (Mat 8:22, Luk 20:38). Salvation of ‘the lost,’ therefore, is salvation from spiritual death. As such it includes both forgiveness of sin and moral-religious renewal. To the woman who had anointed Him Jesus said: ‘Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace,’ and this obviously repeats in another form the preceding statement, ‘Thy sins are forgiven’ (Luk 7:48; Luk 7:50). In the case of Zaeehaeus also assurance of pardon is undoubtedly implied when Jesus declares ‘salvation’ to have come to his house (Luk 19:9). Here, however, the salvation manifests itself also in the moral transformation of the publican, issuing directly into repentance and good works. The prodigal is pardoned and restored to the privileges of sonship. But salvation is not confined to deliverance from this subjective spiritual death, just as the conception of being ‘lost’ is not exhausted by estrangement from God. ἀπόλλυσθαι is used in a retributive sense in eonnexion with the judgment of God to which the sinner is subject; it involves exposure to objective death as a result of condemnation. With reference to this the two senses of the verb, ‘to be missing’ and ‘to be destroyed,’ are used side by side. From the point of view of man the judgment may bring a ‘losing’ or a ‘finding,’ ‘keeping’ of the soul or life (Mat 10:39; Mat 16:25, Mar 8:35, Luk 9:24-25; Luk 17:33, Joh 12:25). From the point of view of God as Judge it may bring ‘destruction.’ This is the ἀπώλεια, which is spoken of in Mat 5:30; Mat 7:13; Mat 10:28; Mat 18:14, Luk 13:3; Luk 13:5, Joh 3:15-16; Joh 6:39; Joh 10:28; Joh 17:12; Joh 18:9. The two aspects of ἀπόλλυσθαι—the subjective spiritual ‘being lost’ and the objective retributive ‘being lost’ or ‘perishing’—are joined together in Mat 18:10-14, where first the sinning one is compared to a sheep gone astray and to be sought, and then, to give the motive for this search after the subjectively lost, Jesus adds: ‘Even so it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish’ (ἀπόληται); that which is already lost in the one sense must be diligently sought, lest it should be lost in the deeper, absolute sense. And the deliverance from this final ἀπώλεια, as well as the deliverance from the other lost condition, is σώζεσθαι, σωτηρία. Thus in Mar 16:16 ‘to be saved’ is the opposite of ‘to be condemned’; in Joh 3:16-17 of ‘to be judged’ and ‘to perish,’ in Joh 10:9-10 of ‘to be destroyed,’ in Joh 12:47 of ‘to be judged.’ This ἀπώλεια, however, not less than the other ‘being lost,’ is equivalent to death. It is a losing of the life (ψυχή, Mat 10:39; Mat 16:25, Mar 8:35, Luk 9:24-25, Joh 12:25); its opposite is ‘to have eternal life’ (Joh 3:16; Joh 10:28), or ‘to be raised up at the last day’ (Joh 6:39). Thus it appears that salvation in its speeilie religious sense is still viewed throughout as a deliverance from death and an introduction into the sphere of life.

(2) The second question was whether ‘salvation’ is conceived eschatologically or as something experienced already in this present life. It has been answered in principle by the above, for present salvation coincides with deliverance from subjective spiritual death; eschatological salvation coincides with deliverance from objective death in the Judgment. In a number of the passages already considered the reference to the present is very plain. To the woman who anointed Him Jesus addressed the words, ‘Thy faith has saved thee.’ Of Zacchaeus He declared: ‘To-day is salvation come to this house’; and in the following statement—‘The Son of Man came to seek and to save that which was lost,’—the ‘saving’ must belong to the same time as the ‘seeking,’ i.e. to the present time of our Lord’s earthly ministry. In Joh 12:47 the saving of the world for which Jesus has come is a present thing as distinct from the judging of the world for which He has not come, but which is reserved for the future. In Mat 1:21 the sins of the people being the evil from which Jesus saves, the salvation is viewed as a present one. In other passages the eschatological reference is equally obvious. ‘He that endures to the end shall be saved’ (Mat 10:22; Mat 24:13). Mat 16:25, Mar 8:35, Luk 9:24 speak of the finding or saving of life in the future Judgment as conditioned by the willingness to sacrifice one’s life here. This is clear from the context (Mar 8:38 in Mk., Mat 16:27 in Mt. = Luk 9:26 in Lk).

The point of the saying is not, as often interpreted, that for one kind of life, physical life, given up, another kind of life, spiritual life, will be received in return; in which case the future tenses might be purely logical, and no eschatological reference implied. The meaning is that for life, in its general sense, sacrificed by accepting physical death, life in the same general sense will be received in reward through the escape from death, when Jesus comes to judge and to render every man according to his deeds. As Zahn observes, the distinction between two kinds of ‘life’ or ‘soul’ is scarcely in harmony with the Hebrew point of view, according to which the ‘life’ or the ‘soul’ is frequently called ‘the only one’ (Com. on Matthew, in loco).

Eschatological is also the reference in the question of the disciples recorded in Mat 19:25, Mar 10:26, Luk 18:26. ‘Then who can be saved?’ The question was called forth by Jesus’ declaration, that the rich would with great difficulty enter into the Kingdom of God, which was in turn called forth by the question of the rich young man, ‘What shall I do, that I may inherit eternal life?’ Here ‘to be saved’ = ‘to enter the Kingdom’ = ‘to inherit eternal life,’ and the qualification of life as eternal, as well as the further context,—St. Peter’s question about future rewards, and our Lord’s answer to this,—prove that the whole discussion is eschatological in its scope. Mat 24:22 || Mar 13:20 ‘Except these days had been shortened, no flesh would have been saved,’ is best understood as follows: The temptation in these last times will be so severe, that, if their duration had not been kept within certain limits, all men, even the elect, would have fallen away, and so no flesh would have been ultimately saved in the Day of Judgment.

This interpretation seems to be required by the fact that the shortening of the days is for the sake of the elect. The mere preservation of physical life could have no special bearing upon the destiny of the elect, since, even when killed in the body, they would be sure to inherit the Kingdom; the whole representation concerning the possibility of none being saved, and the elect falling away and the shortening of the days, is, of course, conceived from the human point of view (cf. Zahn, Com. on Matthew, in loco).

In the remainder of the passages there are no means of determining whether ‘salvation’ be future or present. For Mat 18:11 (Textus Receptus only) the reference to the present is supported by Luk 19:10. In Luk 8:12 ‘that they may not believe and be saved,’ the eschatological sense would be quite plausible, but the other view is slightly favoured by the general import of the parables dealing with the present invisible aspect of the Kingdom. In general, the representation of the Kingdom as both present and future creates a presumption in favour of the view that our Lord regarded salvation as both a present and an eschatological experience. The form σωζόμενοι, ‘those who are being saved,’ in Luk 13:23, probably reflects the two-sidedness of the process, as belonging to both present and future, and therefore unfinished in this life. In the case of the Johannine sayings (Joh 3:16-17; Joh 4:22; Joh 5:34; Joh 10:9) we shall have to assume, in harmony with the generalization of the conception of ‘life,’ ‘eternal life,’in the discourses of this Gospel—which makes out of it a conception indifferent to the distinction between present and future—that the same will be true of the synonymous conception of salvation. The future in Joh 10:9 is purely logical in its force.

(3) The third question concerned what may be gathered from the Gospels in regard to the positive or negative context of the idea of religious salvation. The negative aspect—escape from death—stands in the foreground in Mat 24:22, Mar 13:20: if the days had not been shortened, not even the elect would have escaped the fate of death in the Judgment; similarly in Mat 16:25, Mar 8:35, Luk 9:24: he who will sacrifice his life here shall escape the loss of life in the Judgment. Probably Mat 10:22; Mat 24:13 should be interpreted on the same principle: the enduring now will save from greater calamity in the Last Day. On the other hand, in Mat 19:25, Mar 10:26, Luk 18:26, where ‘salvation’ is equivalent to entrance of the Kingdom and inheriting of eternal life, the emphasis rests on the positive side. In the Johannine passages the positive content of the idea is very marked. According to Joh 3:16-17, ‘to have eternal life’ and ‘to be saved’ are synonymous. In Joh 5:34 also the preceding context revolves around the idea of life (Joh 5:21-29), and in the sequel the same idea is again brought forward (Joh 5:39). Again, in Joh 10:9-10 ‘salvation’ and ‘life’ appear in close conjunction; Joh 12:47 receives its interpretation from Joh 3:17. The same difference as is observable with reference to eschatological salvation may be observed where present salvation is spoken of. Sometimes the conception is negative (Mat 1:21, Luk 7:50), sometimes positive as well as negative (Luk 19:10); the salvation which came to Zacchaeus’ house certainly included more than pardon, since it issued in renewal of life. The facts, therefore, do not bear out the contention of B. Weiss, who maintains that σώζεσθαι has everywhere a purely negative meaning.

In the saying of Luk 19:10 Jesus declares ‘saving’ to be the highest category under which His Messianic activity is to be subsumed. He came to save, i.e. His entrance into the world was for this specific purpose (cf. Mar 10:45). The connexion between Him and salvation consists not merely in this, that as a preacher of the gospel He proclaims it. Everywhere the supposition is that salvation is in some way bound to His Person. For the Johan nine discourses this needs no proof. But it is no less true for the Synoptics. Because He lodged with Zacchaeus, salvation entered the latter’s house. The rich young man was not saved, because he refused to follow Jesus. The saving acts in the physical sphere are suspended on faith, and this faith involves trust in Jesus,—in Jesus, to be sure, as the instrument of God, but none the less so that on Jesus’ Person together with God the act of faith terminates. It is psychologically inconceivable that in those who were helped by the miracles of Jesus, faith should not have assumed the form of personal trust in Him. Faith in God and faith in Jesus here inevitably coalesce. On the occasion of the storm, Jesus rebukes the disciples for their lack of confidence in His presence with them as a guarantee of absolute safety (Mat 8:26). Similarly Peter, when walking upon the water, calls upon Jesus to perform the saving act. From the close connexion in which these transactions stand to the specific religious salvation, it may be safely inferred that in the latter also Jesus occupies a necessary place. This is confirmed by Luk 7:50, where the woman’s faith, which is declared to have saved her, consists in the attitude of trust she had assumed towards Jesus; the love shown the Lord is here the result of the forgiveness of sins (Luk 7:47), and inasmuch as this love terminated on Jesus, the faith which conditioned the forgiveness must likewise have had Him for its object. Similarly in the discourse at Caesarea Philippi, ‘salvation’ in the Last Day is made dependent on following of Jesus and sacrifice of life for Jesus’ sake and the gospel’s sake, and the corresponding acknowledgment by Jesus in the Judgment (Mar 8:34-35; Mar 8:38 || Mt. and Lk.).

It is not true, as is being frequently asserted of late, that in the gospel preached by Jesus there is no place for His own Person, it being merely a gospel about God. Though not frequently in so many words, yet in acts we find our Lord seeking to cultivate a relationship of faith between the disciple and Himself and, in Himself, with God. If only once in the Synoptics we read explicitly of faith in Jesus (Mat 8:10), and that in a passage where the authenticity of the words εἰς ἐμς is doubtful, this is counterbalanced by the fact that not more than once God Himself is specified as the object of faith (Mar 11:22). Jesus, conscious of being the Messiah, the Judge at the Last Day, who would finally dispose of the destiny of all mankind, could not help ascribing a central soteriological position to Himself. Such a figure as He was in His own view, could not be kept outside of the saving transaction, which in a certain sense forestalls the Last Judgment. The absence of more direct affirmations.of this principle is simply the result of Jesus’ method of not directly proclaiming at first His Messianic dignity, but rather allowing it to be gradually inferred from the impression made by His Person and the witness of His works. On the basis of our present Gospels, apart from critical reconstructions of the teaching of Jesus, no other view is possible than that our Lord represented salvation as in some way bound to and wrapped up in His Person. He did not represent salvation as something unconditioned, flowing simply from the love of God, which would overleap every necessity of mediation. The parable of the Prodigal Son, so often quoted to the contrary, furnishes, when rightly read, the clearest demonstration of this, for it was spoken to describe not God’s attitude towards sinners in the abstract, but the historic approach of God to lost men in the appearance of His Son Jesus. It was the attitude of Jesus towards publicans and sinners that drew forth the parable, and therefore it describes God’s attitude towards them as bound to that assumed by Jesus (cf. Ernst Cremer, ‘Die Gleichnisse Lukas 15 und das Kreuz’ in Beitr. z. Förder. Christl. Theol. 1904, Heft 4). The gospel is not a mere announcement of the love of God unpreceded and unattended by any action on His part; it is the glad message of the love of God in action, of what God does in Jesus to give His love effect in actual, substantial salvation. The unfolding of what the Person of Jesus as the bearer and worker of salvation contains could not be fully given by our Lord before His saving work had actually transpired, but had to be left to Apostolic teaching.

3. Humanly considered, salvation is dependent on faith. This is not merely explicitly announced (Mar 16:16, Luk 8:12, Joh 3:16-17), it is likewise presupposed or expressed in connexion with the healing acts of Jesus. It is a striking fact that in the Synoptics nearly the whole of our Lord’s teaching on faith attaches itself to the performance of miracles. This is because miracles embody that saving aspect of the Kingdom to which faith is the subjective counterpart. The miracles, almost without exception, have two features in common. Firstly, they are transactions in which the result depends absolutely on the forth-putting of the Divine supernatural powers, where no human effort could possibly contribute anything towards its accomplishment. And, secondly, the miracles are healing miracles, in which the gracious love of God approaches man for his salvation. Faith is the spiritual attitude called for by this twofold clement in God’s saving work. It is the recognition of the Divine power and grace,—not, of course, in a purely intellectual way, but practically so as to carry with it the movement of the whole inner life. How faith stands related to the saving power of God is most clearly illustrated in the narrative of Mar 9:17-24. “When the disciples could not heal the child with the dumb spirit, Jesus exclaimed, ‘O unbelieving generation!’ The father says, after describing the severity of the case: ‘But if thou canst do anything, have compassion on us and help us.’ To this Jesus replies: ‘What, if thou canst! all things are possible to him that believeth.’ Faith is omnipotent. To speak, with reference to it, of an ‘if thou canst’ is an absurdity. Thus to faith is ascribed what can be affirmed of God alone. And elsewhere also this same principle is emphasized by our Lord (Mat 21:21-22, Mar 11:22-23, Luk 17:6). The explanation lies in this, that faith is nothing else than that act whereby man lays hold of, appropriates, the endless power of God. This line of reasoning, however, is not applicable to the miracles only. The miracles, as has been shown, illustrate the saving work of God in general. All salvation partakes, humanly speaking, of the nature of the impossible: it can be accomplished by God alone (Mat 19:25-26, Mar 10:26-27, Luk 18:26-27). All genuine saving faith is as profoundly conscious of its utter dependence on God for deliverance from sin and death as the recipients of our Lord’s miraculous cures were convinced that God alone could heal their bodies from disease. Faith, however, is more than belief, more than a conviction regarding the necessity and sufficiency of the Divine power. It also involves trust, the reliance upon God’s willingness and readiness to save. Jesus never encouraged the exercise of faith as a mere theoretical belief in supernatural power. The performance of a sign from heaven, such as men might have witnessed without trust in God or Himself, He persistently refused. He who truly believes, realizes that God is loving, merciful, forgiving, glad to receive sinners. Faith transfers to God in the matter of salvation what human parents experience in themselves with reference to their own children, the desire to help and supply (Mat 7:7-11). This reliance of faith is not confined to the critical moments of life; it is to be the abiding, characteristic disposition of the disciple with reference to his salvation as a whole. Faith, in those on whom the wonderful cures were wrought, may have manifested itself at first as a momentary act, but, as shown above, Jesus frequently called the attention of such people to what faith had done for them, thus suggesting that it was permanently available as an instrument of salvation.

4. In proper names, the conception of ‘saving’ occurs twice in the Gospels, namely, in the name Jesus, and in the exclamation Hosanna. A reflexion upon the meaning of the name Joshua is found also in Sir 46:1, and in Philo, who explains it by σωτηρία κυρίου (de Mut. Nom. 21). The meaning of Mat 1:21 is not that Jesus will bear this name symbolically in illustration of the fact that ‘Jehovah is salvation,’ but rather that in Him Jehovah saves, or even, He is Jehovah who saves; for thus only can we satisfactorily explain the joining together of the two statements, ‘Thou shalt call his name Jesus,’ and ‘for it is he that shall save his people from their sins.’ It has been held that in the cry ‘Hosanna,’ raised by the people at Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem, and by the children in the Temple (Mat 21:9; Mat 21:15 ||), the original idea of ‘saving’ inherent in this word as an appeal to God to bestow salvation (Psa 118:25 ‘Save now, we beseech thee, Jehovah’), was no longer felt by the Evangelists, and the word meant with them simply a general shout of applause to the Messianic King, equivalent to ‘Vivat’ or the German ‘Hoch.’ Dalman (Die Worte Jesu, i. 180), who takes this view, couples with it the inference that the writer of the First Gospel was not a Hebraist, consequently not the Apostle Matthew, because no Hebraist could have thus misinterpreted a familiar form. He finds the same misunderstanding in Mk. Both Evangelists, according to him, make the people use the shout in the sense which it bore to the early Church, ignorant of the Hebrew meaning. Dalman therefore assumes that what the people actually exclaimed was the simple ‘Hosanna,’ and that both ‘to the Son of David’ and ‘in the highest’ are unhistorical embellishments dependent on the Greek misinterpretation of the word. Zahn, on the other hand (Com. on Matthew, in loco), takes the view that to the common people of Jesus’ time, already the old meaning of the Hebrew form may have become obliterated, so that they already used it as a shout of applause for Jesus, in which case the Evangelists would be accurate in their report of the occurrence. But Zahn does not explain what meaning, on this view, the people could have attached to the words ἑν τοῖς ὑψίστοις, which in a shout addressed to Jesus would remain meaningless. In view of this, only two explanations seem possible. Either we may adhere to the older opinion that ὡσαννα is consciously addressed to God, ‘save now,’ and that τῷ υἱῷ Δαυειδ introduces Jesus as the object of the salvation invoked from God (הוֹשִׁיעַ, as Dalman himself observes, being sometimes construed with ל of the object—Psa 72:4; Psa 116:6), and that ἐν τοῖς ὑψίστοις designates heaven as the place from which God is called upon to bless the Son of David. That for the expression of the latter idea ἐξ ὑψίστων would have been absolutely necessary can hardly be maintained. Or we may make a distinction between the two hosannas, assuming that the former is addressed to the Son of David, the latter to God, and both not as invocations, but as ascriptions of praise. This is suggested by Lk.’s version (Luk 19:38), which resolves the ὡσαννὰ ἐν τοῖς ὑψίστοις into the paraphrase ἑν οὐρανῷ εἰρήνη, καὶ δόξα ἐν ὑψιστοις. This would be a modification of Zahn’s view, preferable because it does not leave the ἑν ὑψίστοις unexplained.

5. To the foregoing may be added a rapid survey of the usage of σὡζειν and σωτηρία in the remainder of the NT. ‘Salvation’ in connexion with healing, but at the same time projected into the specific religious sphere, reappears in Act 4:9; Act 4:12; Act 14:9. That the idea in the Apostolic teaching largely revolves around the contrast between life and death, is made abundantly plain by the following passages: Act 3:15; Act 5:30; Act 13:46-47, Rom 1:16-17, 1Co 5:5, 2Co 2:15-16; 2Co 7:10, Php 3:20, 2Ti 1:10, Tit 3:5, Heb 5:7, Jas 5:15; Jas 5:20, 1Pe 3:20-21. Where the saving act is referred to a definite point of time, this is most frequently the eschatological future (Rom 13:11, 1Co 3:15; 1Co 5:5, Php 1:28, 1Th 5:8, 2Th 2:13, Heb 1:14; Heb 2:10; Heb 9:28, Jas 5:20, 1Pe 1:5; 1Pe 1:9-10; 1Pe 4:18). Instances where salvation is made a matter of the past or present are Eph 2:5; Eph 2:8, 1Ti 2:4, 2Ti 1:9, Tit 3:5, Jas 1:21 (?), 1Pe 3:21, Jud 1:21. In many connexions, however, it is not possible to determine whether the usage is eschatological or not (Rom 1:16; Rom 10:1, 2Co 7:10, Eph 1:13, Heb 2:3, Jas 2:16). For this peculiar indetermination of the idea the following passages are of interest: Act 2:47, 1Co 1:18; 1Co 15:2, 2Co 2:15, in all of which the present participle σωζόμενοι, ‘those who are being saved,’ is found (cf. with the past participle σεσωσμένοι, ‘those who have been and are saved,’ Eph 2:5). The negative aspect of the deliverance is on the whole not more prominent than the positive: Act 2:40 (from this crooked generation, i.e. from the judgment which will befall it), Rom 5:9 (from the eschatological wrath of God), Jas 5:20 (from death), Jud 1:23 (from the fire); and, on the other hand, Act 13:46-47 (eternal life), 2Co 2:15 (unto life), Php 3:20 (Saviour through the resurrection), Tit 3:5 (palingenesia), Heb 1:4 (inherit salvation), Heb 2:3 (so great a salvation), Heb 5:9 (eternal salvation), 1Pe 1:4-5 (inheritance = salvation), Rev 12:10 (salvation parallel with power and Kingdom), Rev 19:1 (salvation parallel with glory and power). In 2Ti 1:10 the negative and the positive side are named together: ‘our Saviour, who abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.’ Salvation from sin specifically appears in Rom 11:26 in a quotation from the LXX Septuagint of Isa 59:20.

6. It ought to be observed that σωτηρία in the NT relates to what is dogmatically called ‘the application of redemption’ in distinction from ‘the impetration of redemption,’ or the objective work of Christ. This is the natural result of its original eschatological significance, for what takes place in the end lies on the line of the subjective transformation of the believer.

The view has recently been advocated by Wendland (ZNTW [Note: NTW Zeitschrift für die Neutest. Wissen. schaft.] v. [1904] 351) that the original background of the conception of σώζεσθαι is the rule and influence of evil spirits, of which death and disease would be only the peripheral manifestations. The facts cited above do not bear out this hypothesis, or even favour it. In the Gospels there is only one passage which applies σώζειν to the casting out of a demon (Luk 8:36). In all other cases of deliverance from demoniacal possession other expressions are used. It would be far more correct to say that sin and death lie at the centre, demoniacal influence, in the periphery of the conception. On the other hand, it creates an equally wrong distribution of the emphasis to conceive of our Lord’s σώζειν as in its primary aspect a species of ‘healing,’ and of Jesus Himself as chiefly a spiritual physician. Against Harnack, who in his work, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christenthums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten, goes too far in this direction, Wagner (ZNTW [Note: NTW Zeitschrift für die Neutest. Wissen. schaft.] vi. [1905] 234, 235) well observes, that the NT writers do not, like the later Church Fathers, who stood under the influence of the Stoic philosophy, view sin as a disease of the soul, but as a species of death, and that Jesus is to them far more than a physician, viz. One who leads from death to life.

Literature.—Cremer, Lex. svv. σώζειν and σωτηρία; the various handbooks on OT and NT Theology; Klaiber, Die NT Lehre von der Sünde und Erlosung, 1836; Titius, Die NT Lehre von der Seligkeit, 4 parts, 1895–1900; Klöpper, Der Brief d. ap. Paul. a.d. Philipper, on 1:19, 28 (note) and 3:20, Der Brief a.d. Epheser on 2:5 and 5:23; Anrich, Das antike Mysterienwesen, 1894, p. 47 ff.; Wobbermin, Religionsgesch. Studien, 105 ff.; Harnack, Reden und Aufsätze, 1899, 1900, i. pp. 301–311; Soltan, Die Geburtsgesch. Jesu Christi, 1902; Wendland, ‘Σωτήρ: Eine religionsgesch. Untersuchung’ in ZNTW [Note: NTW Zeitschrift für die Neutest. Wissen. schaft.] v. [1904] p. 335 ff.; Wagner, ‘Ueber σωζειν und seine Derivata im NT,’ ib. vi. [1905] p. 205 ff.; Jeremias, Babylonisches im NT, 1905, pp. 27–46.

Geerhardus Vos.

By: Joseph Jacobs, Emil G. Hirsch

Etymological Meanings.

The usual rendering in the English versions for the Hebrew words , , derivatives of the stem , which in the verb occurs only in the "nif'al" and "hif'il" forms. Other Hebrew terms translated by the corresponding forms of the English "save" and its synonyms are: (1) . This word, meaning in the "ḳal" "to live," acquires in the "pi'el" and "hif'il" the signification "to keep alive," "to save alive" (Gen. xii. 12, xix. 19, xlv. 7; Ex. i. 17, 18: Num. xxii. 33; I Sam. xxvii. 11). Ezekiel employs it to express the condition of the repentant sinner who, having escaped the penalty of sin (death), continues safe in life. (2) = "to deliver" (II Sam. xix. 9; A. V. "save "). (3) , in the "pi'el" (I Sam. xix. 11; II Sam. xix. 5; Job xx. 20). (4) = "to keep," "to spare" (Job ii. 6). (5) = "to redeem" (see Go'el). (6) = "to release."

Hosanna.

The underlying idea of all these words, save the last two, is help extended and made effective in times of need and danger, and protection from evil. "Padah" means "to free by paying ransom." "Ga'al" denotes the assumption of an obligation incumbent originally on another or in favor of another. "Yasha'" primitively means "to be or make wide." Evil and danger are always regarded as narrowing conditions or effects. From the "narrow" place the sufferer cries out. When help has come he is in a "wide" place (Ps. cxviii. 5). In battle enemies beset, surround, hem in (ib. verses 10, 11). Success in the combat relieves and removes the pressure. Hence "yasha'" and its derivatives express "victory." This is the import of the Hebrew in such passageś as Judges xv. 12; I Sam. ii. 1, xiv. 45; II Sam. xxii. 51; and Isa. xlix. 8. Combined with "rinnah," the word "yeshu'ah" signifies the jubilant cry of the victors (Ps. cxviii. 15). The passionate appeal "Hoshi'ah-nna" (ib. verse 25; = "Hosanna") ought to be rendered "Give victory," a translation all the more assured by the certainty that the psalm is Maccabean. He who leads to victory in battle, therefore, is the "moshia'" = "savior" (e.g., Othniel, in Judges iii. 9; Ehud, ib. iii. 15; Gideon, ib. vi. 36, 37; and the verb in Judges vii. 3; I Sam. xxv. 26; Ps. xliv. 4; Job xxvi. 2). But, according to the ancient concept, God Himself is the leader in battle ("Ish Milḥainah"; Ex. xv. 3). This throws light on the original bearing of the terms "savior" and "salvation" when applied to the Deity (comp. Isa. xxv. 9, xlv. 20). Language has preserved this notion in the epithet "Elohe yish'enu," which, idiomatically construed, means "our victorious God" (I Chron. xvi. 35; Ps. lxxix. 9; "thy victorious God," Isa. xvii. 10; comp. the similar construction "magen yish'aka" = "thy victorious shield," II Sam. xxii. 36; in the first three passages the A. V. has "God of our salvation" or "God of thy salvation"). Perhaps the king as the head of the army was greeted with the salutation "Hoshi'ah" = "Hosanna," corresponding to (II Kings x. 19; Neh. ii. 3). This would appear from II Kings vi. 26, the woman's apostrophe carrying with it all the greater irony if it repeated the usual greeting of respect, and the king's answer being, like that of Naomi (Ruth i. 20, 21), a clever turn of the terminology of the address. This would explain also the greeting extended to Jesus (see Hosanna) and the Messianic construction of the psalm. He was hailed thereby as "the king."

From this idea of "victory," those of help in trouble and rescue from evil are logical derivatives; but it is not impossible that even in this secondary usage of the term "salvation" the primary notion of a successful combat is operative. Evils are caused by demons: victory over them results in escape, a grateful help. Thus man is saved from trouble (Ps. xxxiv. 7, Hebr.; Isa. xxxiii. 2; Jer. xiv. 8, xxx. 7), from enemies (I Sam. iv. 3, vii. 8), from violence ("lion," Ps. xxii. 22; "men of blood,"ib. lix. 3, Hebr.), from reproach (ib. lvii. 4 [A. V. 3]), from death (ib. vi. 5, 6), from a great calamity (Jer. xxx. 7), from sin, by paying the ransom ("yifdeh"; Ps. cxxx. 8), and from uncleanness (Ezek. xxxvi. 29).

Post-Exilic Views.

The great catastrophe in Israel's history was the Exile. The prophetic doctrine concerning the remnant and the restoration readily transformed expressions for "victory" and "help" into technical terms. "Salvation" now connoted the survival (= victory) of the remnant, the return of the "saved" from exile; and God, in this new sense of the preserver of the remnant and the restorer of the new Israel, was recognized and proclaimed as the "savior" (Isa. xliii. 11; xlv. 15, 21; Zech. viii. 7). The prediction of Hosea (xiii. 4) was illustrated in the events that had come to pass, as was the assurance given by another prophet (Jer. xxx. 10, 11). In the happenings of the day Israel had learned that the Holy of Israel was the savior (Isa. xliii. 3, xlix. 26, lx. 16). Babylon had none to save her (ib. xlvii. 15).

In the Psalms "salvation," by a similar train of thought, expresses the triumph of the "poor" and of the "meek" (Ps. xii. 6). God is the "rock of salvation"; contrary to fickle man, He will not deceive (ib. lxii. 3, 7, Hebr.). By God's salvation the poor are lifted up (ib. lxix. 30). This salvation will be proclaimed from day to day (ib. xcvi. 2; comp. xcviii. 2). God is a stronghold of salvation for His anointed (ib. xxviii. 8). Under the scepter of the "anointed king" or Messiah this salvation (restoration), with all it implies of happiness, joy, security, splendor of Israel, and universal peace, would be realized. With God's judgment (which also is God's victory [], for a trial is always a combat) God's salvation approaches; and finally salvation is established in Zion for Israel, God's splendor (Isa. xlvi. 13). In this sense, then, the Messiah is a savior; his kingdom, one of salvation.

Relation to Messiah.

"Salvation" and "redemption" ("ge'ulah"), as applied in the Messianic conception, are identical. As God is the "Moshia'," so He is also the "Go'el" (Isa. xliv. 23, xlviii. 20, lii. 9, lxiii. 9; Ps. lxxiv. 2). This savior or redeemer is Yhwh (Isa. xliv. 24, xlvii. 4, xlviii. 17, lxiii. 16; Deutero-Isaiah prefers the latter term). The remnant are the "ge'ulim," redeemed of Yhwh (Isa. lxii. 12; Ps. cvii. 2). The primary idea underlying the term "ga'al," like that basic to "padah," the derivatives of which are also employed to designate those that are saved for and in this Messianic kingdom (Isa. li. 11; Zech. x. 8; Ps. xxv. 22; cxxx. 7, 8; comp. Isa. i. 27), is related to that of "yasha'" only in so far as both connote an act that results in freedom or ease to its beneficiary. The slave, for instance, might be redeemed from bondage as was Israel (Deut. xiii. 6, xxi. 8; II Sam. vii. 23; Neh. i. 10; Mic. vi. 4). The Exile was a period of captivity. By bringing home the dispersed, God was their redeemer; and in consequence Israel was saved. In ancient Israel the go'el was one upon whom had fallen the obligation to pay the honors due to a deceased kinsman; for with no son born to him a man was deprived of the filial tribute, and his name was in danger of obliteration; therefore it was the duty of the go'el, the next of kin, to raise up his name (see Levirate Marriage).

In case of murder the go'el was the Avenger of Blood. Thus even in these primitive conceptions the go'el may be said to have been a redeemer, saving men from extinction of name; also saving spirits from restlessly wandering about because deprived of funereal honors, and, in the case of the murdered, because the wrong remained unrequited ("blood for blood"). In no other sense than "avenger" may "go'el" be understood in Job xix. 25 (A. V. "redeemer"). This passage is construed by many theologians as proof of the belief in immortality, and as indicating a presentiment of Paulinian soteriology. The context, even with the corrupt Masoretic text unemendated, refutes this interpretation. The speaker is merely uttering his unshaken belief that the wrongs done him will find their avenger. Emendated the passage would read, "I know my avenger is even now alive, and later will avenge ["yiḳom"] upon [for] my dust." In the next verse "mi-besari" (A. V. "from my flesh") is rightly understood as "away from [outside] my family," the thought being that even if the members of his family ("flesh"; designated also as "skin") prove derelict to their duty, he has seen one, and not a stranger, that will assume the obligation.

The Jewish Messianic doctrine of salvation does not center in personal immortality, nor in the theologized application of the solidarity of the clan. The Jewish savior was not a go'el in the sense that he took upon himself the blood-guiltiness of sin incurred by another. Moreover, the avenger requited murder by killing another and not himself: he did not die for others, but he caused death in behalf of others. The go'el never was the vicarious victim. It was he who demanded blood, but never gave his own as a ransom. In this theology of salvation "go'el" is mistaken for "kofer" (see Atonement). For the later development of the eschatological implications of salvation see Eschatology.

(Latin: salvare, to save)

In scriptural language, the transference from straitened circumstances and other evils into a state of freedom and security. As sin is the greatest evil, Scripture uses the word mainly in the sense of redemption and liberation from sin and its consequences. In Saint Paul’s Epistles "salvation" usually denotes deliverance from final wrath, as distinguished from "reconciliation" which denotes liberation from present wrath.

(Greek soteria; Hebrew yeshu’ah).Salvation has in Scriptural language the general meaning of liberation from straitened circumstances or from other evils, and of a translation into a state of freedom and security (1 Samuel 11:13; 14:45; 2 Samuel 23:10; 2 Kings 13:17). At times it expresses God’s help against Israel’s enemies, at other times, the Divine blessing bestowed on the produce of the soil (Isaiah 45:8). As sin is the greatest evil, being the root and source of all evil, Sacred Scripture uses the word "salvation" mainly in the sense of liberation of the human race or of individual man from sin and its consequences. We shall first consider the salvation of the human race, and then salvation as it is verified in the individual man. I. SALVATION OF THE HUMAN RACEWe need not dwell upon the possibility of the salvation of mankind or upon its appropriateness. Nor need we remind the reader that after God had freely determined to save the human race, He might have done so by pardoning man’s sins without having recourse to the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity. Still, the Incarnation of the Word was the most fitting means for the salvation of man, and was even necessary, in case God claimed full satisfaction for the injury done to him by sin (see INCARNATION). Though the office of Saviour is really one, it is virtually multiple: there must be an atonement for sin and damnation, an establishment of the truth so as to overcome human ignorance and error, a perennial source of spiritual strength aiding man in his struggle against darkness and concupiscence. There can be no doubt that Jesus Christ really fulfilled these three functions, that He therefore really saved mankind from sin and its consequences. As teacher He established the reign of truth; as king He supplied strength to His subjects; as priest He stood between heaven and earth, reconciling sinful man with his angry God.A. Christ as TeacherProphets had foretold Christ as a teacher of Divine truth: "Behold, I have given him for a witness to the people, for a leader and a master to the Gentiles" (Isaiah 55:4). Christ himself claims the title of teacher repeatedly during the course of His public life: "You can call me Master, and Lord; and you say well, for so I am" (John 13:13; cf. Matthew 23:10; John 3:31). The Gospels inform us that nearly the whole of Christ’s public life was devoted to teaching (see JESUS CHRIST). There can be no doubt as to the supereminence of Christ’s teaching; even as man, He is an eyewitness to all He reveals; His truthfulness is God’s own veracity; His authority is Divine; His words are the utterance of a Divine person; He can internally illumine and move the minds of His hearers; He is the eternal and infinite wisdom of God Incarnate Who cannot deceive and cannot be deceived.B. Christ as KingThe royal character of Christ was foretold by the Prophets, announced by the angels, claimed by Christ Himself (Psalm 2:6; Isaiah 9:6-7; Ezekiel 34:23; Jeremiah 23:3-5; Luke 1:32-33; John 18:37). His royal functions are the foundation, the expansion and the final consummation of the kingdom of God among men. The first and last of these acts are personal and visible acts of the king, but the intermediate function is carried out either invisibly, or by Christ’s visible agents. The practical working of the kingly office of Christ is described in the treatises on the sources of revelation; on grace, on the Church, on the sacraments, and on the last things.C. Christ as PriestThe ordinary priest, is made God’s own by an accidental unction, Christ is constituted God’s own Son by the substantial unction with the Divine nature; the ordinary priest is made holy, though not impeccable, by his consecration, while Christ is separated from all sin and sinners by the hypostatic union; the ordinary priest draws nigh unto God in a very imperfect manner, but Christ is seated at the right hand of the power of God. The Levitical priesthood was temporal, earthly, and carnal in its origin, in its relations to God, in its working, in its power; Christ’s priesthood is eternal, heavenly, and spiritual. The victims offered by the ancient priests were either lifeless things or, at best, irrational animals distinct from the person of the offerer; Christ offers a victim included in the person of the offerer. His living human flesh, animated by His rational soul, a real and worthy substitute for mankind, on whose behalf Christ offers the sacrifice. The Aaronic priest inflicted an irreparable death on the victim which his sacrificial intention changed into a religious rite or symbol; in Christ’s sacrifice the immutation of the victim is brought about by an internal act of His will (John 10:17), and the victim’s death is the source of a new life to himself and to mankind. Besides, Christ’s sacrifice, being that of a Divine person, carries its own acceptance with it; it is as much of a gift of God to man, as a sacrifice of man to God.Hence follows the perfection of the salvation wrought by Christ for mankind. On His part Christ offered to God a satisfaction for man’s sin not only sufficient but superabundant (Romans 5:15-20); on God’s part supposing, what is contained in the very idea of man’s redemption through Christ, that God agreed to accept the work of the Redeemer for the sins of man, He was bound by His promise and His justice to grant the remission of sin to the extent and in the manner intended by Christ. In this way our salvation has won back for us the essential prerogative of the state of original justice, i.e., sanctifying grace while it will restore the minor prerogatives of the Resurrection. At the same time, it does not at once blot out individual sin, but only procures the means thereto, and these means are not restricted only to the predestined or to the faithful, but extend to all men (1 John 2:2; 1 Timothy 2:1-4). Moreover salvation makes us coheirs of Christ (Romans 8:14-17), a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9; cf. Exodus 19:6), sons of God, temples of the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 3:16), and other Christs--Christianus alter Christus; it perfects the angelical orders, raises the dignity of the material world, and restores all things in Christ (Ephesians 1:9-10). By our salvation all things are ours, we are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s (1 Corinthians 3:22-23). II. INDIVIDUAL SALVATIONThe Council of Trent describes the process of salvation from sin in the case of an adult with great minuteness (Sess. VI, v-vi).It begins with the grace of God which touches a sinner’s heart, and calls him to repentance. This grace cannot be merited; it proceeds solely from the love and mercy of God. Man may receive or reject this inspiration of God, he may turn to God or remain in sin. Grace does not constrain man’s free will.Thus assisted the sinner is disposed for salvation from sin; he believes in the revelation and promises of God, he fears God’s justice, hopes in his mercy, trusts that God will be merciful to him for Christ’s sake, begins to love God as the source of all justice, hates and detests his sins.This disposition is followed by justification itself, which consists not in the mere remission of sins, but in the sanctification and renewal of the inner man by the voluntary reception of God’s grace and gifts, whence a man becomes just instead of unjust, a friend instead of a foe and so an heir according to hope of eternal life. This change happens either by reason of a perfect act of charity elicited by a well disposed sinner or by virtue of the Sacrament either of Baptism or of Penance according to the condition of the respective subject laden with sin. The Council further indicates the causes of this change. By the merit of the Most Holy Passion through the Holy Spirit, the charity of God is shed abroad in the hearts of those who are justified.Against the heretical tenets of various times and sects we must hold that the initial grace is truly gratuitous and supernatural; that the human will remains free under the influence of this grace; that man really cooperates in his personal salvation from sin; that by justification man is really made just, and not merely declared or reputed so; that justification and sanctification are only two aspects of the same thing, and not ontologically and chronologically distinct realities; that justification excludes all mortal sin from the soul, so that the just man is no way liable to the sentence of death at God’s judgment-seat. Other points involved in the foregoing process of personal salvation from sin are matters of discussion among Catholic theologians; such are, for instance, the precise nature of initial grace, the manner in which grace and free will work together, the precise nature of the fear and the love disposing the sinner for justification, the manner in which sacraments cause sanctifying grace. But these questions are treated in other articles dealing ex professo with the respective subjects. The same is true of final perseverance without which personal salvation from sin is not permanently secured.What has been said applies to the salvation of adults; children and those permanently deprived of their use of reason are saved by the Sacrament of Baptism.-----------------------------------A.J. MAAS Transcribed by Donald J. Boon The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIIICopyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York

sal-vā´shun:

I.    IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

1.    General

2.    Individualism

3.    Faith

4.    Moral Law

5.    Sacrifices

6.    Ritual Law

II.    INTERMEDIATE LITERATURE

1.    General

2.    The Law

III.    THE TEACHING OF CHRIST

1.    The Baptist

2.    Kingdom of God

3.    Present and Future

4.    Individualism

5.    Moral Progress

6.    Forgiveness

7.    Person of Christ

8.    Notes

IV.    PAUL

1.    General

2.    Moral Progress

3.    The Spirit

4.    Mystical Union

5.    Forgiveness

6.    Atonement

7.    Summary

8.    Notes

V.    THE REST OF THE NEW TESTAMENT: SUMMARY

1.    John

2.    Hebrews

3.    Peter

4.    Summary

LITERATURE

In English Versions of the Bible the words “salvation” “save,” are not technical theological terms, but denote simply “deliverance,” in almost any sense the latter word can have. In systematic theology, however, “salvation” denotes the whole process by which man is delivered from all that would prevent his attaining to the highest good that God has prepared for him. Or, by a transferred sense, “salvation” denotes the actual enjoyment of that good. So, while these technical senses are often associated with the Greek or Hebrew words translated “save,” etc., yet they are still more often used in connection with other words or represented only by the general sense of a passage. And so a collection of the original terms for “save,” etc., is of value only for the student doing minute detailed work, while it is the purpose of the present article to present a general view of the Biblical doctrine of salvation.

I. In the Old Testament

1. General:

(1) As long as revelation had not raised the veil that separates this life from the next, the Israelite thought of his highest good as long life in a prosperous Palestine, as described most typically in Deu 28:1-14. But a definite religious idea was present also, for the “land of milk and honey,” even under angelic protection, was worthless without access to God (Exo 33:1-4), to know whom gives happiness (Isa 11:9; Hab 2:14; Jer 31:34). Such a concept is normal for most of the Old Testament, but there are several significant enlargements of it. That Israel should receive God’s characteristic of righteousness is a part of the ideal (Isa 1:26; Isa 4:3, Isa 4:4; Isa 32:1-8; Isa 33:24; Jer 31:33, Jer 31:34; Eze 36:25, Eze 36:26; Zec 8; Dan 9:24; Psa 51:10-12). Good was found in the extension of Israel’s good to the surrounding nations (Mic 4:1-4; Isa 2:2-4; Isa 45:5, Isa 45:6; Zec 2:11; Zec 8:22, Zec 8:23; Isa 60; Isa 66:19-21; Zec 14:16, Zec 14:17, etc.), even to the extension of the legitimate sacrificial worship to the soil of Egypt (Isa 19:19-22). Palestine was insufficient for the enjoyment of God’s gifts, and a new heaven and a new earth were to be received (Isa 65:17; Isa 66:22), and a share in the glories was not to be denied even to the dead (Isa 26:19; Dan 12:2). And, among the people so glorified, God would dwell in person (Isa 60:19, Isa 60:20; Zec 2:10-12). (2) Salvation, then, means deliverance from all that interferes with the enjoyment of these blessings. So it takes countless forms - deliverance from natural plagues, from internal dissensions, from external enemies, or from the subjugation of conquerors (the exile, particularly). As far as enemies constitute the threatening danger, the prayer for deliverance is often based on their evil character (Psa 101:1-8, etc.). But for the individual all these evils are summed up in the word “death,” which was thought to terminate all relation to God and all possibility of enjoying His blessings (Psa 115:17; Isa 38:18, etc.). And so “death” became established as the antinomy to “salvation,” and in this sense the word has persisted, although the equation “loss of salvation = physical death” has long been transcended. But death and its attendant evils are worked by God’s wrath, and so it is from this wrath that salvation is sought (Jos 7:26, etc.). And thus, naturally, salvation is from everything that raises that wrath, above all from sin (Eze 36:25, Eze 36:26, etc.).

2. Individualism:

(1) At first the “unit of salvation” was the nation (less prominently the family), i.e. a man though righteous could lose salvation through the faults of others. A father could bring a curse on his children (2Sa 21:1-14), a king on his subjects (2 Sam 24), or an unknown sinner could bring guilt on an entire community (Deu 21:1-9). (On the other hand, ten righteous would have saved Sodom (Gen 18:32).) And the principle of personal responsibility was grasped but slowly. It is enunciated partly in Deu 24:16 (compare Jer 31:29, Jer 31:30), definitely in Eze 14:12-20; 18; 33:1-20, and fairly consistently in the Psalms. But even Ezekiel still held that five-and-twenty could defile the whole nation (Eze 8:16), and he had not the premises for resolving the problem - that temporal disasters need not mean the loss of salvation. (2) But even when it was realized that a man lost salvation through his own fault, the converse did not follow. Salvation came, not by the man’s mere merit, but because the man belonged to a nation peculiarly chosen by God. God had made a covenant with Israel and His fidelity insured salvation: the salvation comes from God because of His promise or (in other words) because of His name. Indeed, the great failing of the people was to trust too blindly to this promise, an attitude denounced continually by the prophets throughout (from, say, Amo 3:2 to Mat 3:9). And yet even the prophets admit a real truth in the attitude, for, despite Israel’s sins, eventual salvation is certain. Ezekiel 20 states this baldly: there has been nothing good in Israel and there is nothing good in her at the prophet’s own day, but, notwithstanding, God will give her restoration (compare Isa 8:17, Isa 8:18; Jer 32:6-15, etc.).

3. Faith:

Hence, of the human conditions, whole-hearted trust in God is the most important. (Belief in God is, of course, never argued in the Bible.) Inconsistent with such trust are, for instance, seeking aid from other nations (Isa 30:1-5), putting reliance in human skill (2Ch 16:12), or forsaking Palestine through fear (Jer 42). In Isa 26:20 entire passivity is demanded, and in 2Ki 13:19 lukewarmness in executing an apparently meaningless command is rebuked.

4. Moral Law:

(1) Next in importance is the attainment of a moral standard, expressed normally in the various codes of the Law. But fulfillment of the letter of the commandment was by no means all that was required. For instance, the Law permitted the selling of a debtor into slavery (Deu 15:12), but the reckless use of the creditor’s right is sharply condemned (Neh 5:1-13). The prophets are never weary of giving short formulas that will exclude such supralegalism and reduce conduct to a pure motive: “Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish justice in the gate” (Amo 5:15); “To do justly, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with thy God” (Mic 6:8). And the chief emphasis on the Law as written is found in the later books, especially Ps 119 (compare Psa 147:20). (2) Certain breaches of the Law had no pardon, but were visited with death at once, even despite repentance and confession (Josh 7). But for the most part it is promised that repentance will remove the guilt of the sin if the sin be forsaken (Ezek 18) or, in the case of a sin that would not be repeated, if contrition be felt (2 Sam 12). Suffering played a part in salvation by bringing knowledge of sin to the conscience, the exile being the most important example (Eze 36:31). But almost always it is assumed that the possibility of keeping the Law is in man’s own power, Deu 30:11-14 stating this explicitly, while the Wisdom Books equate virtue with learning. Consequently, an immense advance was made when man felt the need of God’s help to keep the Law, the need of the inscription of the Laws on the heart (Jer 31:31-34). So an outlook was opened to a future in which God would make the nation righteous (see references in 1, above).

5. Sacrifices:

(1) The acceptance of repentance as expiating past sins was an act of God’s mercy. And so His mercy instituted other and additional means of expiation, most notably that of the sacrifices. But a theology of sacrifice is conspicuously absent from the whole Old Testament, for Lev 17:11 is too incidental and too obscure to be any exception. The Christian (or very late Jewish) interpretations of the ritual laws lack all solidity of exegetical foundation, despite their one-time prevalence. Nor is the study of origins of much help for the meaning attached to the rites by the Jews in historic times. General ideas of offering, of self-denial, of propitiation of wrath, and of entering into communion with God assuredly existed. But in the advanced stages of the religion there is no evidence that sacrifices were thought to produce their effect because of any of these things, but solely because God had commanded the sacrifices. (2) Most sins required a sacrifice as part of the act of repentance, although in case of injury done the neighbor, only after reparation had been made. It is not quite true that for conscious sins no sacrifices were appointed, for in Lev 5:1; Lev 6:1-3, sins are included that could not be committed through mere negligence. And so such rules as Num 15:30, Num 15:31 must not be construed too rigorously. (3) Sacrifices as means of salvation are taught chiefly by Ezekiel, while at the rebuilding of the temple (Haggai, Zechariah) and the depression that followed (Malachi), they were much in the foreground, but the pre-exilic prophets have little to say about their positive value (Jer 7:22 is the nadir). Indeed, in preexilic times the danger was the exaltation of sacrifice at the expense of morality, especially with the peace offering, which could be turned into a drunken revel (Amo 5:21-24; Isa 22:13; compare Pro 7:14). Attempts were made to “strengthen” the sacrifices to Yahweh by the use of ethnic rites (Hos 4:14; Isa 65:1-5), even with the extreme of human sacrifice (Jer 7:31; Eze 20:26). But insistence on the strict centralization of worship and increasing emphasis laid on the sin and trespass offerings did away with the worst of the abuses. And many of the Psalms, especially Ps 66 and Ps 118, give beautiful evidence of the devotion that could be nourished by the sacrificial rites.

6. Ritual Law:

Of the other means of salvation the ritual law (not always sharply distinguishable from the moral law) bulks rather large in the legislation, but is not prominent in the prophets. Requisite to salvation was the abstention from certain acts, articles of food, etc., such abstinence seeming to lie at the background of the term “holiness.” But a ritual breach was often a matter of moral duty (burying the dead, etc.), and, for such breaches, ritual means of purification are provided and the matter dropped. Evidently such things lay rather on the circumference of the religion, even to Ezekiel, with his anxious zeal against the least defilement. The highest ritual point is touched by Zec 14:20, Zec 14:21, where all of Jerusalem is so holy that not a pot would be unfit to use in the temple (compare Jer 31:38-40). Yet, even with this perfect holiness, sacrifices would still have a place as a means by which the holiness could be increased. Indeed, this more “positive” view of sacrifices was doubtless present from the first.

II. Intermediate Literature.

1. General:

(1) The great change, compared with the earlier period, is that the idea of God had become more transcendent. But this did not necessarily mean an increase in religious value, for there was a corresponding tendency to take God out of relation to the world by an intellectualizing process. This, when combined with the persistence of the older concept of salvation in this life only, resulted in an emptying of the religious instinct and in indifferentism. This tendency is well represented in Ecclesiastes, more acutely in Sirach, and in New Testament times it dominated the thought of the Sadducees. On the other hand the expansion of the idea of salvation to correspond with the higher conception of God broke through the limitations of this life and created the new literary form of apocalyptics, represented in the Old Testament especially by Zechariah 9 through 14; Isaiah 24 through 27, and above all by Daniel. And in the intermediate literature all shades of thought between the two extremes are represented. But too much emphasis can hardly be laid on the fact that this intermediate teaching is in many regards simply faithful to the Old Testament. Almost anything that can be found in the Old Testament - with the important exception of the note of joyousness of Deuteronomy, etc. - can be found again here. (2) Of the conceptions of the highest good the lowest is the Epicureanism of Sirach. The highest is probably that of 2 Esdras 7:91-98 Revised Version: “To behold the face of him whom in their lifetime they served” the last touch of materialism being eliminated. Indeed, real materialism is notably absent in the period, even Enoch 10:17-19 being less exuberant than the fancies of such early Christian writers as Papias. Individualism is generally taken for granted, but that the opposite opinion was by no means dormant, even at a late period, is shown by Mat 3:9. The idea of a special privilege of Israel, however, of course pervades all the literature, Sibylline Oracles 5 and Jubilees being the most exclusive books and the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, the most broad-hearted. In place of national privilege, though, is sometimes found the still less edifying feature of party privilege (Ps Sol; Enoch 94-105), the most offensive case being the assertion of Enoch 90:6-9 that the (inactive) Israel will be saved by the exertions of the “little lamb” Pharisees, before whom every knee shall bow in the Messianic kingdom.

2. The Law:

(1) The conceptions of the moral demands for salvation at times reach a very high level, especially in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs (making every allowance for Christian interpolations). “The spirit of love worketh together with the law of God in long-suffering unto the salvation of men” (Test. Gad Mat 4:7) is hardly unworthy of Paul, and even Jubilees can say, “Let each love his brother in mercy and justice, and let none wish the other evil” (Jub 36:8). But the great tendency is to view God’s law merely as a series of written statutes, making no demands except those gained from a rigid construing of the letter. In Luk 10:29, “Who is my neighbor?” is a real question - if he is not my neighbor I need not love him! So duties not literally commanded were settled by utilitarian motives, as outside the domain of religion, and the unhealthy phenomenon of works of supererogation made its appearance (Luk 17:10). The writer of Wisdom can feel smugly assured of salvation, because idolatry had been abstained from (Wisd 15:4; contrast Paul’s polemic in Rom 2). And discussions about “greatest commandments” caused character in its relation to religion to be forgotten. (2) As God’s commands were viewed as statutes the distinction between the moral and the ritual was lost, and the ritual law attained enormous and familiar proportions. The beautiful story of Judith is designed chiefly to teach abstinence from ritually unclean food. And the most extreme case is in Jubilees 6:34-38 - all of Israel’s woes come from keeping the feasts by the actual moon instead of by a correct (theoretical) moon (!). (3) Where self-complacency ceased and a strong moral sense was present, despair makes its appearance with extraordinary frequency. The period is the period of penitential prayers, with an undercurrent of doubt as to how far mercy can be expected (Song of Three Children verses 3-22; Pr Man; Baruch 3:1-8, etc.). “What profit is it unto us, if there be promised us an immortal time, whereas we have done the works that bring death?” (2 Esdras 7:119 the Revised Version (British and American)). The vast majority of men are lost (2 Esdras 9:16) and must be forgotten (2 Esdras 8:55), and Ezra can trust for his own salvation only by a special revelation (7:77 the Revised Version (British and American)). So, evidently, Paul’s pre-Christian experience was no unique occurrence. (4) Important for the New Testament background is the extreme lack of prominence of the sacrifices. They are never given a theological interpretation (except in Philo, where they cease to be sacrifices). Indeed, in Sirach 35 they are explicitly said to be devotions for the righteous only, apparently prized only as an inheritance from the past and “because of the commandment” (Sirach 35:5; yet compare 38:11). When the temple was destroyed and the sacrifices ceased, Judaism went on its way almost unaffected, showing that the sacrifices meant nothing essential to the people. And, even in earlier times, the Essenes rejected sacrifices altogether, without losing thereby their recognition as Jews.

III. The Teaching of Christ.

1. The Baptist:

The Baptist proclaimed authoritatively the near advent of the kingdom of God, preceded by a Messianic judgment that would bring fire for the wicked and the Holy Spirit for the righteous. Simple but incisive moral teaching and warning against trusting in national privileges, with baptism as an outward token of repentance, were to prepare men to face this judgment securely. But we have no data to determine how much farther (if any) the Baptist conceived his teaching to lead.

2. Kingdom of God:

It was in the full heat of this eschatological revival that the Baptist had fanned, that Christ began to teach, and He also began with the eschatological phrase, “The kingdom of God is at hand.” Consequently, His teaching must have been taken at once in an eschatological sense, and it is rather futile to attempt to limit such implications to passages where modern eschatological phrases are used unambiguously. “The kingdom of God is at hand” had the inseparable connotation “Judgment is at hand,” and in this context, “Repent ye” (Mar 1:15) must mean “lest ye be judged.” Hence, our Lord’s teaching about salvation had primarily a future content: positively, admission into the kingdom of God, and negatively, deliverance from the preceding judgment. So the kingdom of God is the “highest good” of Christ’s teaching but, with His usual reserve, He has little to say about its externals. Man’s nature is to be perfectly adapted to his spiritual environment (see RESURRECTION), and man is to be with Christ (Luk 22:30) and the patriarchs (Mat 8:11). But otherwise - and again as usual - the current descriptions are used without comment, even when they rest on rather materialistic imagery (Luk 22:16, Luk 22:30). Whatever the kingdom is, however, its meaning is most certainly not exhausted by a mere reformation of the present order of material things.

3. Present and Future:

But the fate of man at judgment depends on what man is before judgment, so that the practical problem is salvation from the conditions that will bring judgment; i.e. present and future salvation are inseparably connected, and any attempt to make rigid distinctions between the two results in logomachies. Occasionally even Christ speaks of the kingdom of God as present, in the sense that citizens of the future kingdom are living already on this earth (Mat 11:11; Luk 17:21(?); the meaning of the latter verse is very dubious). Such men are “saved” already (Luk 19:9; Luk 7:50(?)), i.e. such men were delivered from the bad moral condition that was so extended that Satan could be said to hold sway over the world (Luk 10:18; Luk 11:21).

4. Individualism:

That the individual was the unit in this deliverance needs no emphasis: Still, the divine privilege of the Jews was a reality and Christ’s normal work was limited to them (Mat 10:5; Mat 15:26, etc.). He admitted even that the position of the Jewish religious leaders rested on a real basis (Mat 23:3). But the “good tidings” were so framed that their extension to all men would have been inevitable, even had there not been an explicit command of Christ in this regard. On the other hand, while the message involved in every case strict individual choice, yet the individual who accepted it entered into social relations with the others who had so chosen. So salvation involved admission to a community of service (Mar 9:35, etc.). And in the latter part of Christ’s ministry, He withdrew from the bulk of His disciples to devote Himself to the training of an inner circle of Twelve, an act explicable only on the assumption that these were to be the leaders of the others after He was taken away. Such passages as Mat 16:18; Mat 18:17 merely corroborate this.

5. Moral Progress:

Of the conditions for the individual, the primary (belief in God being taken for granted) was a correct moral ideal. Exclusion from salvation came from the Pharisaic casuistry which had invented limits to righteousness. Exo 20:13 had never contemplated permitting angry thoughts if actual murder was avoided, and so on. In contrast is set the idea of character, of the single eye (Mat 6:22), of the pure heart (Mat 5:8). Only so can the spiritual house be built on a rock foundation. But the mere ideal is not enough; persistent effort toward it and a certain amount of progress are demanded imperatively. Only those who have learned to forgive can ask for forgiveness (Mat 6:12; Mat 18:35). They who omit natural works of mercy have no share in the kingdom (Mt 25:31-46), for even idle words will be taken into account (Mat 12:36), and the most precious possession that interferes with moral progress is to be sacrificed ruthlessly (Mat 18:8, Mat 18:9, etc.). Men are known by their fruits (Mat 7:20); it is he that doeth the will of the Father that shall enter into the kingdom (Mat 7:21), and the final ideal - which is likewise the goal - is becoming a son of the Father in moral likeness (Mat 5:45). That this progress is due to God’s aid is so intimately a part of Christ’s teaching on the entire dependence of the soul on God that it receives little explicit mention, but Christ refers even His own miracles to the Father’s power (Luk 11:20).

6. Forgiveness:

Moral effort, through God’s aid, is an indispensable condition for salvation. But complete success in the moral struggle is not at all a condition, in the sense that moral perfection is required. For Christ’s disciples, to whom the kingdom is promised (Luk 12:32), the palsied man who receives remission of sins (Mar 2:5), Zaccheus who is said to have received salvation (Luk 19:9), were far from being models of sinlessness. The element in the character that Christ teaches as making up for the lack of moral perfection is becoming “as a little child” (compare Mar 10:15). Now the point here is not credulousness (for belief is not under discussion), nor is it meekness (for children are notoriously not meek). And it most certainly is not the pure passivity of the newly born infant, for it is gratuitous to assume that only such infants were meant even in Luk 18:15, while in Mat 18:2 (where the child comes in answer to a call) this interpretation is excluded. Now, in the wider teaching of Christ the meaning is made clear enough. Salvation is for the poor in spirit, for those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for the prodigal knowing his wretchedness. It is for the penitent publican, while the self-satisfied Pharisee is rejected. A sense of need and a desire that God will give are the characteristics. A child does not argue that it has earned its father’s benefits but looks to him in a feeling of dependence, with a readiness to do his bidding. So it is the soul that desires all of righteousness, strives toward it, knows that it falls short, and trusts in its Father for the rest, that is the savable soul.

7. Person of Christ:

Christ speaks of the pardon of the publican (Luk 18:9 ff) and of the prodigal welcomed by the Father (Luk 15:20), both without intermediary. And it is perhaps not necessary to assume that all of those finding the strait gate (Mat 7:14) were explicitly among Christ’s disciples. But would Christ have admitted that anyone who had come to know Him and refused to obey Him would have been saved? To ask this question is to answer it in the negative (Mar 9:40 is irrelevant). Real knowledge of the Father is possible only through the unique knowledge of the Son (Luk 10:21, Luk 10:22), and lack of faith in the Son forfeits all blessings (Mar 6:5, Mar 6:6; Mar 9:23). Faith in Him brings instant forgiveness of sins (Mar 2:5), and love directed to Him is an indisputable sign that forgiveness has taken place (Luk 7:47). But Christ thought of Himself as Messiah and, if the term “Messiah” is not to be emptied of its meaning, this made Him judge of the world (such verses as Mar 8:38 are hardly needed for direct evidence). And, since for Christ’s consciousness an earthly judgeship is unthinkable, a transcendental judgeship is the sole alternative, corroborated by the use of the title Son of Man. But passage from simple humanity to the transcendental glory of the Son-of-Man Messiah involved a change hardly expressible except by death and resurrection. And the expectation of death was in Christ’s mind from the first, as is seen by Mar 2:18, Mar 2:19 (even without Mar 2:20). That He could have viewed His death as void of significance for human salvation is simply inconceivable, and the ascription of Mar 10:45 to Pauline influence is in defiance of the facts. Nor is it credible that Christ conceived that in the interval between His death and His Parousia He would be out of relation to His own. To Him the unseen world was in the closest relation to the visible world, and His passage into glory would strengthen, not weaken, His power. So there is a complete justification of Mar 14:22-25: to Christ His death had a significance that could be paralleled only by the death of the Covenant victim in Exo 24:6-8, for by it an entirely new relation was established between God and man.

8. Notes:

(1) Salvation from physical evil was a very real part, however subordinate, of Christ’s teaching (Mar 1:34, etc.). (2) Ascetic practices as a necessary element in salvation can hardly claim Christ’s authority. It is too often forgotten that the Twelve were not Christ’s only disciples. Certainly not all of the hundred and twenty of Act 1:15 (compare Act 1:21), nor of the five hundred of 1Co 15:6, were converted after the Passion. And they all certainly could not have left their homes to travel with Christ. So the demands made in the special case of the Twelve (still less in such an extremely special case as Mar 10:21) in no way represent Christ’s normal practice, whatever readiness for self-sacrifice may have been asked of all. So the representations of Christ as ruthlessly exacting all from everyone are quite unwarranted by the facts. And it is well to remember that it is Mat 11:19 that contains the term of reproach that His adversaries gave Him.

IV. Paul.

Instead of laying primal stress on Paul’s peculiar contributions to soteriology, it will be preferable to start from such Pauline passages as simply continue the explicit teaching of Christ. For it is largely due to the common reversal of this method that the present acute “Jesus-Paulus” controversy exists.

1. General:

That Paul expected the near advent of the kingdom of God with a judgment preceding, and that salvation meant to him primarily deliverance from this judgment, need not be argued. And, accordingly, emphasis is thrown sometimes on the future deliverance and sometimes on the present conditions for the deliverance (contrast Rom 5:9 and Rom 8:24), but the practical problem is the latter. More explicitly than in Christ’s recorded teaching the nature and the blessings of the kingdom are described (see KINGDOM OF GOD), but the additional matter is without particular religious import. A certain privilege of the Jews appears (Rom 3:1-8; 9-11), but the practical content of the privilege seems to be eschatological only (Rom 11:26). Individual conversion is of course taken for granted, but the life after that becomes highly corporate. See CHURCH.

2. Moral Progress:

(1) The moral ideal is distinctly that of character. Paul, indeed, is frequently obliged to give directions as to details, but the detailed directions are referred constantly to the underlying principle, Rom 14 or 1Co 8:1-13 being excellent examples of this, while “love is the fulfillment of the law” (Rom 13:10) is the summary. (2) Persistent moral effort is indispensable, and the new life absolutely must bring forth fruit to God (Rom 6:4; Rom 13:12; Gal 5:24; Col 3:5; Eph 2:3; Eph 4:17, Eph 4:22-32; Tit 2:11-14). Only by good conduct can one please God (1Th 4:1), and the works of even Christians are to be subjected to a searching test (1Co 3:13; 1Co 4:5; 2Co 5:10) in a judgment not to be faced without the most earnest striving (1Co 10:12; Php 2:12), not even by Paul himself (1Co 9:27; Php 3:12-14). And the possibility of condemnation because of a lack of moral attainment must not be permitted to leave the mind (1Co 3:17; Gal 5:21; compare Rom 8:12, Rom 8:13; Rom 11:20; 1Co 10:12; Gal 6:7-9). Consequently, growth in actual righteousness is as vital in Paul’s soteriology as it is in that teaching of Christ: Christians have “put off the old man with his doings” (Col 3:9).

3. The Spirit:

That this growth is God’s work is, however, a point where Paul has expanded Christ’s quiet assumption rather elaborately. In particular, what Christ had made the source of His own supernatural power - the Holy Spirit - is specified as the source of the power of the Christian’s ordinary life, as well as of the more special endowments (see SPIRITUAL GIFTS). In the Spirit the Christian has received the blessing promised to Abraham (Gal 3:14); by it the deeds of the body can be put to death and all virtues flow into the soul (Gal 5:16-26), if a man walks according to it (1Co 6:19, 1Co 6:20; 1Th 4:8). The palmary passage is Romans 7 through 8. In Romans 7 Paul looks back with a shudder on his pre-Christian helplessness (it is naturally the extreme of exegetical perversity to argue that he dreaded not the sin itself but only God’s penalty on sin). But the Spirit gives strength to put to death the deeds of the body (Rom 8:13), to disregard the things of the flesh (Rom 8:5), and to fulfill the ordinance of the Law (Rom 8:4). Such moral power is the test of Christianity: as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God (Rom 8:14).

4. Mystical Union:

This doctrine of the Spirit is simply that what Christ did on earth would be carried on with increased intensity after the Passion. That this work could be thought of out of relation to Christ, or that Christ Himself could have so thought of it (see above, III, 7) is incredible. So the exalted Christ appears as the source of moral and spiritual power ( Paul speaks even more of Christ’s resurrection than of the Passion), the two sources (Christ and the Spirit) being very closely combined in 2Co 3:17; Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6. Our old man has been crucified, so putting an end to the bondage of sin, and we can prevent sin from reigning in our mortal bodies, for our burial into Christ’s death was to enable us to walk in newness of life (Rom 6:2-14). The resurrection is a source of power, and through Christ’s strength all things can be done (Php 4:13, Php 4:10). Christ is the real center of the believer’s personality (Gal 2:20); the man has become a new creature (2Co 5:17; compare Col 2:20; Col 3:3); we were joined to another that we might bring forth fruit to God (Rom 7:4). And by contact with the glory of the Lord we are transformed into the same image (2Co 3:18), the end being conformation to the image of the Son (Rom 8:30).

5. Forgiveness:

(1) This growth in actual holiness, then, is fundamental with Paul: “If any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his” (Rom 8:9). And the acquisition of strength through union with Christ is vitally connected with the remission of sins. In Rom 7:1-6 (compare Col 2:11, Col 2:12), the mystical union with Christ makes His death ours (compare Col 3:3) and so removes us from the Law (compare Rom 10:4; 1Co 15:56), which has no relation to the dead. And by the life-giving power of this union the strength of sin is broken (Rom 6:6). (2) The condition in man that makes forgiveness possible Paul calls “faith” - a very complicated term. Its chief use, however, is in opposition to “works” (most clearly in Rom 9:30 through 10:13). The Jews’ “pursuit after righteousness” - the attempt to wring salvation from God as wages earned - was vain (Rom 10:13), and in contrast is the appeal to God, the conscious relinquishment of all claim (Rom 4:5). The soul looks trustingly for salvation to its Father, precisely the attitude of the “children” in the teaching of Christ. But no more than in the teaching of Christ is faith a purely passive virtue, for man must be “obedient” to it (Rom 1:5; Rom 10:16; 1Th 2:13). And for the necessary presence of love in faith compare 1Co 13:2; Gal 5:6; Eph 3:17.

6. Atonement:

Because of faith - specifically, faith in Christ (except Rom 4; Gal 3:6) - God does not visit the penalties of sins on believers, but treats them as if they were righteous (Rom 5:1, etc.). But this is not because of a quality in the believer or in the faith, but because of an act that preceded any act of Christian faith, the death of Christ (not the cross, specifically, for Paul does not argue from the cross in all of Roman). Through this death God’s mercy could be extended safely, while before this the exercise of that mercy had proved disastrous (Rom 3:25, Rom 3:26). And this death was a sacrifice (Rom 3:25, etc.). And it is certain that Paul conceived of this sacrifice as existing quite independently of its effect on any human being. But he has given us no data for a really complete sacrificial doctrine, a statement sufficiently proved by the hopeless variance of the interpretations that have been propounded. And that Paul ever constructed a theory of the operation of sacrifices must be doubted. There is none in the contemporary Jewish literature, there is none in the Old Testament, and there is none in the rest of the New Testament, not even in Hebrews. Apparently the rites were so familiar that sacrificial terminology was ready to hand and was used without particular reflection and without attempting to give it precise theological content. This is borne out by the ease with which in Rom 3:24, Rom 3:25 Paul passes from a ransom (redemption) illustration to a (quite discordant) propitation illustration. For further discussion see ATONEMENT; JUSTIFICATION. Here it is enough make a juridical theory constructed from Pauline implications and illustrations central in Christianity is to do exactly what Paul did not do.

7. Summary:

Summing up, there is a double line of thought in Paul: the remission of penalties through the atoning death of Christ and the destruction of the power of sin through strength flowing from Christ, the human element in both cases being faith. The question of the order of the steps is futile, for “to have faith,” “to be in Christ,” and “to have the Spirit” are convertible terms, i.e. in doctrinal phraseology, the beginnings of sanctification are simultaneous with justification. Attempts to unify the two lines of thought into a single theory cannot claim purely Biblical support. The “ethical” theory, which in its best form makes God’s pardon depend on the fact that the sinner will be made holy (at least in the next world), introduces the fewest extraneous elements, but it says something that Paul does not say. On the other hand one may feel that considering Paul as a whole - to say nothing of the rest of the New Testament - the pure justification doctrine has bulked a little too large in our dogmatics. God’s pardon for sin is an immensely important matter, but still more important is the new power of holiness.

8. Notes:

(1) Baptism presents another obstacle to a strict unifying of Pauline theology. A very much stronger sacramentarianism is admitted in Paul today than would have been accepted a generation ago, and such passages as Rom 6:1-7; Gal 3:27; Col 2:12 make it certain that he regarded baptism as conferring very real spiritual powers. But that he made a mechanical distinction between the blessings given then and those given at some other time must be doubted. (2) Salvation from the flesh (Rom 7:24) involves no metaphysical dualism, as “flesh” is the whole of the lower nature from which the power to holiness saves a man (Rom 8:13). Indeed, the body itself is an object of salvation (Rom 8:11; and see RESURRECTION). (3) Quite in the background lies the idea of salvation from physical evil (2Co 1:10, etc.). Such evils are real evils (1Co 11:30), but in God’s hands they may become pure blessings (Rom 5:3; 2Co 12:7). (4) Salvation from sin after conversion is due to God’s judging the man in terms of the acquired supernatural nature (Rom 8:14, etc.). Yet certain sins may destroy the union with Christ altogether (1Co 3:17, etc.), while others bring God’s chastening judgment (1Co 11:30-32). Or proper chastisement may be inflicted by Paul himself (1Co 5:1-5; 1Ti 1:20) or by the congregation (Gal 6:1; 2Th 3:10-15; 2Co 2:6).

V. Rest of New Testament: Summary.

1. John:

(1) John had the task of presenting Christ to Gentiles, who were as unfamiliar with the technical meaning of such phrases as “kingdom of God” or “Son of Man” as is the world today, and to Gentiles who had instead a series of concepts unknown in Palestine. So a “translation of spiritual values” became necessary if the gospel were to make an immediate appeal, a translation accomplished so successfully that the Fourth Gospel has always been the most popular. The Synoptists, especially the extremely literal Mark, imperatively demand a historical commentary, while John has successfully avoided this necessity. (2) The “kingdom of God,” as a phrase (Joh 3:3, Joh 3:5; compare Joh 18:36), is replaced by “eternal life.” This life is given in this world to the one who accepts Christ’s teaching (Joh 5:24; Joh 6:47), but its full realization will be in the “many mansions” of the Father’s house (Joh 14:2), where the believer will be with Christ (Joh 17:24). A judgment of all men will precede the establishment of this glorified state (Joh 5:28, Joh 5:29), but the believer may face the judgment with equanimity (Joh 5:24). So the believer is delivered from a state of things so bad as expressible as a world under Satan’s rule (Joh 12:31; Joh 14:30; Joh 16:11), a world in darkness (Joh 3:19), in ignorance of God (Joh 17:25), and in sin (Joh 8:21), all expressible in the one word “death” (Joh 5:24). (3) The Jews had real privilege in the reception of Christ’s message (Joh 1:11; Joh 4:22, etc.), but the extension of the good tidings to all men was inevitable (Joh 12:23, Joh 12:12, etc.). Belief in Christ is wholly a personal matter, but the believers enter a community of service (Joh 13:14), with the unity of the Father and Son as their ideal (Joh 17:21). (4) The nature of the moral ideal, reduced to the single word “love” (Joh 13:34; Joh 15:12), is assumed as known and identified with “Christ’s words” (Joh 5:24; Joh 6:63, etc.), and the necessity of progress toward it as sharply pointed as in the Synoptists. The sinner is the servant of sin (Joh 8:34), a total change of character is needed (Joh 3:6), and the blessing is only on him who does Christ’s commandments (Joh 13:17). This “doing” is the proof of love toward Christ (Joh 14:15, Joh 14:21); only by bearing fruit and more fruit can discipleship be maintained (Joh 15:1-6; compare Joh 14:24), and, indeed, by bearing fruit men actually become Christ’s disciples (Joh 15:8, Gr). The knowledge of Christ and of God that is eternal life (Joh 17:3) comes only through moral effort (Joh 7:17). In John the contrasts are colored so vividly that it would almost appear as if perfection were demanded. But he does not present even the apostles as models of sanctity (Joh 13:38; Joh 16:32), and self-righteousness is condemned without compromise; the crowning sin is to say, “We see” (Joh 9:41). It is the Son who frees from sin (Joh 8:36), delivers from darkness (Joh 8:12; Joh 12:46), and gives eternal life (Joh 11:25, Joh 11:26; compare Joh 3:16; Joh 5:24; Joh 6:47). This emphasis on the divine side of the process is probably the reason for the omission of the terms “repent,” “repentance,” from the Gospel in favor of “faith” (Joh 6:29, especially), but this “faith” involves in turn human effort, for, without “abiding,” faith is useless (Joh 8:30, Joh 8:31). (5) An advance on the Synoptists is found in the number of times Christ speaks of His death (Joh 3:14, Joh 3:15; Joh 10:11, Joh 10:15; Joh 12:24, Joh 12:32; Joh 17:19) and in the greater emphasis laid on it, but no more than in the Synoptists is there any explanation of how the Atonement became effectual. A real advance consists in the prospect of Christ’s work after His death, when, through the Paraclete (Joh 7:38, Joh 7:39; Joh 14:16 ff), a hitherto unknown spiritual power would become available for the world. And spiritual power is due not only to a union of will with Christ but to mystical union with Him (Joh 15:1-9). See above, III, 7, for the relation of these thoughts to the synoptic teaching.

2. Hebrews:

(1) The emphasis of He is of course on the sacrificial work of Christ, but the Epistle makes practically no contribution to theology of sacrifice. The argument is this: The Old Testament sacrifices certainly had an efficacy; Christ’s sacrifice fulfilled their types perfectly, therefore it had a perfect efficacy (Heb 9:13, Heb 9:14). This must have been a tremendously potent argument for He’s own purpose, but it is of very little help to the modern theologian. (2) More than in Paul is emphasized the human training of Christ for His high-priestly work. Since He laid hold of the seed of Abraham (Heb 2:16), He learned by experience all that man had to suffer (Heb 2:17; Heb 4:15; Heb 5:8, etc.). In He the essence of the sacrifice lies not in the death but in what we call the ascension - the presentation of the blood in the heavenly tabernacle (Heb 9:11-14; see the commentaries). That the death was specifically on the cross (Heb 12:2 only) belonged to the stage of training and had no special significance in the sacrificial scheme. Christ’s intercession for us in heaven receives more emphasis than in the rest of the New Testament (Heb 7:25).

3. Peter:

The one other distinct contribution to New Testament soteriology is made in 1 Peter’s evaluation of the vicarious suffering of the “Servant” of Isa 53:1-12. What Christ did through His sufferings we may do in some degree through our sufferings; as His pains helped not only living mankind, but even departed sinners, so we may face persecution more happily with the thought that our pains are benefiting other men (1Pe 3:16-20). It is hardly possible that Peter thought of this comparison as conveying an exhaustive description of the Atonement (compare 1Pe 1:19), but that the comparison should be made at all is significant.

4. Summary:

(1) Salvation is both a present and a future matter for us. The full realization of all that God has in store will not be ours until the end of human history (if, indeed, there will not be opened infinite possibilities of eternal growth), but the enjoyment of these blessings depends on conditions fulfilled in us and by us now. But a foretaste of the blessings of forgiveness of sins and growth in holiness is given on this earth. The pardon depends on the fact of God’s mercy through the death of Christ - a fact for religious experience but probably incapable of expression as a complete philosophical dogma. But strength comes from God through the glorified Christ (or through the Spirit), this vital union with God being a Christian fundamental. These two lines are in large degree independent, and the selection of the proportions profitable to a given soul is the task of the pastor. (2) That human effort is an essential in salvation is not to be denied in the face of all the New Testament evidence, especially Paul taken as a whole. And yet no one with the faintest conception of what religion means would think of coming before God to claim merit. Here the purely intellectual discussions of the subiect and its psychological course in the soul run in different channels, and “anti-synergistic” arguments are really based on attempts to petrify psychology experience into terms of pure dogma. (3) Still more true is this of attempts to describe mathematically the steps in salvation - the ordo salutis of the older dogmatics - for this differs with different souls. In particular, New Testament data are lacking for the development of the individual born of Christian parents in a Christian country. (4) Further, the social side of salvation is an essentially Christian doctrine and cannot be detached from the corporate life of the Christian church. Salvation from temporal evils is equally, if secondarily, Christian. Nationalism in salvation is at present much in the background. But it is as true today as it was in ancient Israel that the sins of a nation tend to harm the souls of even those who have not participated actively in those sins.

Literature.

The literature of salvation is virtually the literature of theology (see under separate articles, ATONEMENT; JUSTIFICATION; SANCTIFICATION; PERSON OF CHRIST; JOHANNINE THEOLOGY; PAULINE THEOLOGY, etc.), but a few recent works may be mentioned. Indispensable are the works of Stevens, The Christian Doctrine of Salvation and The Pauline Theology. Garvie’s Romans in the “New Century” series should be used as a supplement to any other commentary on Romans. The juridical theory has as its best defense in English Denney’s The Death of Christ. The ethical theory is best presented in the works of DuBose, The Gospel in the Gospels, The Gospel according to Paul, and High-Priesthood and Sacrifice (Sanday’s The Expositor reviews of the two former, reprinted in The Life of Christ in Recent Research, should be read in any case).

- Preserved from evil; the saving of man from the power and penalty of sin; the granting of eternal happiness.

Gen 49:18 (a) This is one of the early pictures of CHRIST. It is a prophecy concerning the fact that this One who is GOD’s salvation would one day come to those who were waiting for Him. (See also Luk 2:30; Luk 19:9. CHRIST JESUS Himself is GOD’s "salvation."

God’s salvation, as the Old Testament spoke of it, had a broad meaning. It referred to deliverance or preservation from disease, dangers, sufferings, death and the consequences of wrongdoing (Exo 14:30; Jdg 2:11-16; Psa 34:6; Psa 37:40; Jer 4:14; Jer 17:14). The means of God’s salvation may have been a warrior, a king, or some other national leader (Jdg 3:9; 2Ki 13:5), but in the highest sense the saviour was always God (1Sa 14:23; Isa 33:22; Isa 43:3; Isa 43:11; Isa 43:15; Hab 3:18).

In the New Testament, salvation may have the same broad meaning as in the Old Testament (Act 27:20; Act 27:43; 2Co 1:10; 2Th 3:2; 2Pe 2:9), but its best known meaning is in relation to deliverance from sin and its consequences. This salvation comes from God through Jesus Christ (Mat 1:21; Luk 2:11; Luk 19:10; Joh 3:17; Joh 12:47; Act 4:12; 1Ti 1:15) and it is possible only because Jesus Christ atoned for sin in his death on the cross (1Co 1:18; Tit 2:14; see ATONEMENT; SIN).

This salvation is so great that no words can describe it fully. The Bible therefore uses many different pictures of salvation in an effort to help people understand what God has done.

One picture is that of the courtroom, where God the judge declares believers righteous and acquits them (Rom 3:26; Rom 8:33; see JUSTIFICATION). Another picture is that of slavery, which shows that God has freed believers from the bondage of sin (1Pe 1:18-19; see REDEMPTION). The picture of new birth shows that God gives life to those who are spiritually dead (1Pe 1:23; see REGENERATION), and the picture of adoption shows how God places believers in his family and gives them the full status of sons (Rom 8:15; see ADOPTION).

A further picture is that of God’s turning those who are his enemies into his friends (Rom 5:10-11; see RECONCILIATION). The picture of a sacrificial offering expresses further aspects of salvation; for example, the death of a sacrificial victim in the place of the sinner (Heb 9:26; see SACRIFICE), and the presentation of an offering to turn away God’s anger against sin (Rom 3:25; see PROPITIATION). But regardless of whatever picture the Bible uses, it emphasizes constantly that salvation is solely by God’s grace, and that people receive it through faith and repentance (Act 5:31; Act 16:30-31; Act 20:21; 1Co 1:21; Eph 2:8-9; Tit 3:3-7; see FAITH; GRACE; REPENTANCE).

There are past, present and future aspects of salvation. The past aspect is that believers already have been saved because of Christ’s death for them. Their sin has been dealt with, they are no longer under condemnation, and they have the assurance of eternal life (Joh 5:24; Rom 5:1-2; Eph 2:1; Eph 2:8; see ASSURANCE). The present aspect is that believers continue to experience the saving power of God in victory over sin in their daily lives (1Co 1:18; Php 2:12; 2Ti 1:8-9; see SANCTIFICATION). The future aspect is that believers will experience the fulfilment of their salvation at the return of Jesus Christ (Rom 8:24; Rom 13:11; Php 3:20; 1Th 5:9; Heb 9:28; 1Pe 1:5; see RESURRECTION).

The means by which a person can receive eternal life through accepting Jesus Christ as his or her Lord and Savior (see John 3:16).

» See also: Gospel

—New Believer’s Bible Glossary

Salvation is the "saving" of a sinner from the righteous judgment of God. When someone appeals to God and seeks forgiveness in Jesus, his sins are forgiven. He is cleansed. His relationship with God is restored, and he is made a new creature (2Co 5:17). All of this is the work of God, not man. Salvation is a free gift (Rom 6:23).

We are saved from damnation. When anyone sins, and we all have (Rom 3:23; Rom 6:23), he deserves eternal separation from God (Isa 59:2). Yet, because of His love and mercy, God became a man (Joh 1:1; Joh 1:14 ) and bore the sins of the world in His body on the cross (1Pe 2:24; 1Jn 2:2). We are forgiven when we realize that there is nothing we can do to earn the favor of God and we put our trust in what Jesus did for us on the cross (Eph 2:8-9; 1Co 15:1-4). Only God saves. The only thing we bring to the cross is our sin.

Both God the Father (Isa 14:21) and Jesus (Joh 4:42) are called Savior; that is, deliverer from sin. Remember, it was the Father who sent the Son (1Jn 4:10) to be the Savior.