3. In St. Paul's writings, apart from the Pastoral Epistles, ffUTTjp is found only twice — Eph 5-^ and Ph 3^". The interpretation of the former passage is much disputed. The husband's relation as head to the wife and Christ's relation as Head to the Church are compared, and in this connexion Christ is called crdiTijp tov o-w^uaros (of the Church). This last statement seems to imply that Christ's head- ship over the Church is based on His being the Saviour of the Church - body. The question is whether this must be understood in the sense which will likewise be applicable to the relation between husband and wife. In the ordinary sense the husband could hardly be called the saviour of the wife's body. But Wagner (ZNTWwi. [1905] p. 220) has called attention to a passage in Clement (Pce.d. ii. 5) where it is stated that the Creator provides man with meat and drink rod (rib^eaOai xaptJ', ' for the sake of keeping alive.' Applying tliis to our passage, he obtains the very congruous sense : As the husband is awrrip of the wife, by supplying the sustenance of her physical life, so Christ is (rwT7?p of the Church, inasmuch as He endows her with eternal life ; and for this reason both hold the posi- tion of head. This secures for o-tii^eLv the sense of 'endowing with eternal life.' The peculiarity of the passage, thus understood, would lie in this, "that the ordinary religious use of a-cb^eiv is illustrated by analogy with a natural use of the verb which seems to be without precedent in earlier Biblical Greek. In Ph 3-** the word awT-rip has a specific eschatological reference : Christ is awr-^p, because at the resurrection He will transform the body of believers into the likeness of His own glorious body, trwfetj/ therefore here also is equivalent to the bestowal of life.
i. With sudden and remarkable frequency o-wttjp emerges in the Pastoral Epistles (10 times) and in 2 Peter (5 times). In the Pastorals there is further the peculiarity that the name is applied to both God and Christ : to God, in 1 Ti 1^ 2^ 4i«, Tit P 2" 3* ; to Christ, in 2 Ti P", Tit P 2'^ S^. In 2 Peter the reference is always to Christ. In Jude also God is once called ' our Saviour through Jesus Christ ' (v.25). The designation of God as Saviour
can appear strange only on the basis of our estab- lished custom to reserve this title for Christ ; on the basis of the OT it was a perfectly natural usage, for here always God, never the Messiah, is called yTiD, cuT-qp. And in the NT itself the act of saving is, where a subject is indicated, as naturally ascribed to God as to Christ (comparatively few passages reflect on the subject). Except perhaps for the one passage, 1 Ti 4*", it cannot be said that the mean- ing of ao}T7]p in the Pastorals and 2 Peter difl'ers from its ordinary import, or that of aw^etv in the NT elsewhere. Christ is Saviour, because He abolished death and brought life and immortality to light tiirough the gospel (2 Ti 1^") ; as Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ has an eternal Kingdom into which believers receive entrance (2 P 1"). He is called ' the great God and Saviour,' in so far as be- lievers look for the blessed hope and appearing of His glory (Tit 2^'^). The hope of eternal life comes from God our Saviour (Tit 1^ 2"). Eschatological also is the reference in ' the commandment of the Lord and Saviour ' (2 P S% In Tit 2'" the thought is implied that God is Saviour in the ethical sphere, whence ' the doctrine of God our Saviour ' becomes an incentive to holy living. But peculiar is 1 Ti 4^* where God is called ' the Saviour of all men, especially of them that believe. ' Wagner proposes to apjily here the same sense given to aur-qp in Eph 5'^ : God is Saviour of all men, inasmuch as He supplies them with natural life ; Saviour especially of believers, because He supplies these with the higher life of the Spirit (I.e. p. 222, where Philo [de Mundi Opif. 60: God = €i)ep7^T7js /cat (tcotij/)] is quoted). This might seem to be favoured by 1 Ti 6^^ 'God who keepetli all things alive,' or 'who givetli life to all things ' (cf . the alternative reading 'gu}oyovq(jii for crihaei in Lk 17^^). But it is less in keeping with Tit 2^^ Avhere a similar universalism of God's o-di^eiv is affirmed, and yet this is a matter of redemption, not of nature. Wagner is quite correct, however, in urging against von Soden that ' God aojTTjp of all men ' cannot mean ' God is willing to be awT-qp of all men ' ; and against B. Weiss, that it cannot mean ' God has made salvation objectively possible for all men, while subjectively He realizes it in believers only.' The solution of the difficulty must be sought elsewhere, viz. in connexion with the pronounced universalism of the Pastoral Epistles in general. The emphasis and frequency with which this principle is brought forward render it probable that something specific in tlie historical situation to which the Pastorals address themselves lies at its basis, and at the basis also of the fre- quency with which the words ath^eiv, ffwrripia, (twtt]- pLos, <7WTT}p are employed. There is absolutely no reason to suspect the writer of any intention to weaken or neutralize the doctrine of predestination. Besides involving denial of the Pauline origin of tiie Epistles, this would leave unexplained why, in other passages, the principle of predestination is enunciated with all desirable distinctness. The only plausible view is that the passages under review contain a warning against the dualistic trend of that incipient Gnosticism to whose early presence in tlie Apostolic period the Epistles of tlie First Captivity also bear witness. In a twofold sense it might become of importance to vindicate, over against this theory, the universalism of .saving grace : on the one hand, in so far as Gnosticism on principle excluded from salvation those who lacked the pneumatic character ; and, on the other hand, in so far as those belonging to the pnennmtici might be considered to carry the power of salva- tion by nature in themselves. In other words, it might become necessary to empliasize that God saves all men, not merely one class of men, and that no man is by his subjective condition either sunk beneath the possibility or raised above the