“Salvation” is a word often thrown around by the church. But what does the word mean, biblically speaking? What is the significance of “salvation?” What, exactly, happens to institute “salvation?” What is God…Christ…humanity doing in the work? Until the church as a whole can sufficiently articulate what “salvation” is, the word will continue to be a code for something one person, perhaps, has over another. It will continue to be a cuss-word in the mouth and on the lips of the haves over against the have-nots.

The biblical word “salvation,” in the Greek is, “soteria” – “safety, deliverance, preservation from danger of destruction; rescued.” In the New Testament the word is used to describe a rescue from a present negative situation or circumstance (Luke 19:9; Rom. 1:16; 2Cor. 7:10; Phil. 1:28; 1Thes. 5:8-9; 2Tim. 2:10 for example). We have only twice that Jesus (Himself) used the term: Luke 19:9, where salvation is a present experience within a person (Luke 17:20-21); and John 4:22, where salvation has something to do with proper worship of God. Yet, Jesus also spoke about this salvation eschatologically, where it carries one beyond natural death and on into eternity (Luke 16:22; 20:37-38; 23:43).

Johannine (the Apostle John’s) Theology considers salvation as a sort of present and final eschatological experience – where the future event effects the present situation (John 5:24, 28; 6:44, 47; 6:51, 54; 10:28; 11:25-26; 1Jn 2:28; 3:2; 4:17). John also speaks (and has Jesus speaking) of salvation as a kind of rebirth (John 3:3; 1Jn 3:9; 1Jn 5:1).

Pauline (the Apostle Paul’s) Theology also speaks of salvation as eschatological (Rom. 13:11; 1Thes. 4:17), where there is a redemption of the physical body (Rom. 8:23; 1Cor. 15:50-52). But, salvation is a present reality where one is freed from and, in fact, died to, sin (Rom. 6:2), crucifying the flesh with its sinful desires (Gal. 5:24), where a new creature is created (2Cor. 5:17). For Paul, salvation is a mystical union with Christ where one walks out in the present a future guarantee (Rom. 8:24; 1Cor. 1:18; 2Cor. 2:15). Salvation is reconciliation with God (Rom. 5:1) where we have been received as His children (Rom. 8:14-15). Another concept that Paul articulates is the idea of a consummated redemption of all creation (Rom. 8:19-23; 1Cor. 15:26, 28).

The overwhelming thing to recognize concerning salvation in Pauline thought is that it refers to what Christ has done in His great saving act for sinners; all of Pauline Theology revolves around this Christological understanding, and it bears heavily on his own understanding on the point and purpose of the church (1Tim. 1:15). Salvation is a word which speaks of God’s rescuing of humanity, in Christ, from their desperate state of sin. We have been destined for salvation, not wrath (1Thes. 5:9-10). That this salvation has a distinct structure is clear (Rom. 10:10). That, in Christ, salvation is sufficient for all humanity, but efficient only for those who believe is equally as clear (Titus 2:11). It is in no way on part of humanity that salvation has come, but to believe that God is who He says He is (Rom. 4; Eph. 2:5, 8-10; 2Thes. 2:13; Titus 3:5).

A final notion concerning salvation in Pauline Theology should be of inertest; that is, the idea that salvation, in essence, is the reasonable mental exchange (either instantaneous or by process) of exiting out of ignorance and into the “epignosis,” “the knowledge of the truth” (Rom. 2:20; 1Tim. 2:4; 2Tim. 2:25; 3:7; Titus 1:1; Heb. 10:26). For Paul, as usual, salvation, first, is a working of the mind. Where someone without salvation is ignorant, salvation itself is true knowledge (literally speaking). And I think it is here where we find the real form for understanding the ideology of “salvation,” which the church so needs to apprehend.

It would appear that there is a stream of thought in certain Christian circles which claims that Satan (or the devil) does not have any strength or power to harm or otherwise torment humanity. The argument is that the suffering and death of Christ on the cross has disarmed the enemy and, in essence, made him impotent. While it is true that Christ defeated Satan on the cross, theologically speaking, that sentence has not yet been carried out, practically speaking; and while it is also true that we now (“in Christ”) have the right to say “no” to Satan, it does not necessarily follow that he is neither powerless nor a non-threat. I would argue, in fact, that it is precisely the might of the enemy which makes this certain Christian thought possible! He has lulled some of us to sleep and caused us to believe the lie.

Reason dictates that, since Satan is not in “Hell” (for there is no biblical principle for thinking he is) – in fact, he is the “prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 2:2) and “the ruler and authority in heavenly places” (Eph. 3:10) – he is still very much able to do harm.

Experience speaks to the fact that the enemy is still a very real power that works against humanity in our expression of Jesus Christ on earth. While many things are produced by our own darkened hearts, the enemy is at war against us as “we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Eph. 6:12). This invisible entity is made visible through the workings of the depravity of humanity.

The traditions of the Universal Church – from the Apostles, through the Ancient Church Fathers, the Medieval Church, the Reformation, and to the present era – state that Satan (and his angelic warriors) are the enemy of the human being and the human soul; whose single purpose is to kill, steal, and destroy anything and everything which is of humanity.

The Scriptures demand that we know and understand that these things are true:

Peter makes us aware of the fact that “Satan is a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour” (1Pet. 5:8). Paul say for us “not to be ignorant of the schemes of the devil” (Eph. 6:11). How are we “tempted by Satan” if he is without power (1Cor. 7:5)? How does he get “an advantage” over us (2Cor.2:11)? How does he “transform himself into an angel of light” (2Cor.11:14)? How did Satan have “messengers to buffet” Paul (2Cor. 12:7)? How is it possible Satan “hinders us” if he is without power (1Thes.2:18)? And what, then, does Paul mean when he says that antichrist is according to “the working of Satan with all power…” (2Thes. 2:9)? Not to mention that we can be caught in the “snare of the devil” (1Tim.3:6-7), that he has the “power of death” (Heb. 2:14), and how the “works of the devil” are yet to be “destroyed” (1Jn. 3:8).

It is a truth statement: “He who is in you is greater than he who is on the world” (1John 4:4), but does that not necessitate that there is one in the world who is great?

It is with, by, and through the local church that God meets the needs of the community. Thus, it is the universal church whereby humanity finds it’s Healer, Redeemer, Maker, and it’s Lover of their souls – Jesus Christ. This was originally the model which founded many western civilizations (including America). But like anything else the ends get lost in the means and the means become an end in themselves.

A misconception of the church today is that it is to be a place of (what I call) Free Social Entitlement. The misunderstanding comes in the misinterpretation of the primitive (apostolic) church. The problem, here, is the understanding that the first century churches simply handed out food, clothing, and whatever else, expecting absolutely nothing in return. Today, nations are built on the ideology of, at best, “welfare states;” and, at worst, “nanny states.” This condition comes out of the misconception of the primitive church. It has been proved throughout history that, if entitlement is the ends then laziness and rebellion are the means to that end. The old adage rings true: Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat the rest of his life.

In 1Timothy chapter 5 (VS 3-15) we see a perfect example of the actual first century thinking when we note Paul’s instruction concerning “Widows” and “Widows indeed.” Because a woman was a widow it did not necessitate that she would receive a “free ride” or a hand-out in any way. Notice Paul’s qualifiers, first, for widows: If a widow had children (or grandchildren) of her own it was their responsibility, not the churches burden, to care for her. If she was without an immediate family, she then takes a step closer (if you will) to church support. Yet, if she did not live the lifestyle of a “Christian” by definition but, rather, sought to please only herself and live the way of the unsaved, then she would receive nothing of help for her situation from the church. If, according to Paul, she satisfies these qualifications, next she must be at least 60 years-old (assumedly, past the age of “sensual desires” and child bearing). This way she could devote herself to Christ and His ministry. But if she was a younger widow, Paul suggests that she remarries and contribute to the vision in that way.

Now here is where it gets interesting: If a widow is, according to these qualifications, a “widow indeed,” and unless she is physically and/or mentally able to do so, she exchanges her daily bread for the work of ministry, as it were (I have not even mentioned the qualifiers of verse 10). In this, there is no victim role and no such thing as entitlement. There is not a free ride, nor a hand-out. Dignity is spared, because the widow is still a contributing member of society and a functioning member of the church. There was no such thing as “retirement” in the ancient church, because one’s responsibility is for others and not oneself (even as a widow).

Incidentally, it bears mentioning that, the accounts of collections, free rides and hand-outs was concerning the Jerusalem church and their persecution. They could not, for the most part, go out in public and, thus, earn a living to contribute to responsibilities. Therefore, the Gentile churches cared for their Jewish brothers and sisters, but in no sense can or should this be interpreted as entitlement.

Likewise, the church today should not confuse equipping dignity with enabling entitlements. Those who are unable to care for themselves should be taken care of by the church. But even in its many social ministries, the church is simply and only handing out fish and not actually and respectfully teaching people to fish.