Appendix C
A Word-Study Reference for the Book's Load-Bearing Vocabulary
Theology lives in words. The whole debate over what God has done, what He wants, and whether He will succeed turns, again and again, on a handful of Greek and Hebrew terms. What does "all" really mean? What kind of word is "eternal"? When every tongue "confesses," is that praise or surrender?
This appendix gathers the words that carry the most weight in this book. Each entry gives the English handle, the original-language term with a plain definition, the key texts where the word matters most, and the question the word raises. Then it points you to the chapter that develops the argument in full. Think of this as a quick-reference guide you can return to whenever a chapter's word study needs a second look.
Two notes before we begin. First, I follow the English-first rule throughout. You will always see the English word before its Greek or Hebrew original. No one needs to know Greek to follow the argument. Second, heavier detail (lexicons, scholarly debates, variant readings) lives in the footnotes, not the body. The entries stay plain; the footnotes go deeper for readers who want that.
How to Use This Reference
Each entry below is self-contained. You do not need to read them in order. If a chapter sends you here for a word, find its bold heading below. Read the entry, then follow the link back to the chapter that owns the full argument. If you are reading straight through, the entries follow the order of the book's four parts. They move from the character of God, to the cross for all, to the will to save all, to the victory of grace.
Plain gloss: "all, every, the whole." The most common adjective in the New Testament, used over 1,200 times.1
Key texts: Romans 5:18 ("one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men"). Also 1 Corinthians 15:22 ("in Christ shall all be made alive"); 1 Timothy 2:4 ("God desires all people to be saved"); Romans 11:32 ("that he may have mercy on all").
The question: Does "all" mean every human being without exception, or only all kinds of people (that is, people from every class and nation, but not every individual)? The answer controls the scope of the cross, the will of God, and the reach of grace.2
Where the argument lives: Chapter 11 introduces the grammar and scope of pas through the two-Adams parallel in Romans 5:18. The "all kinds of people" reading is stated at full strength and answered in Chapter 13.
Plain gloss: "the ordered creation, the inhabited world, the human race." In John's writings, kosmos often names the hostile human world in rebellion against God (1 John 5:19). That makes the love-claims all the larger. The world God loves is the world that has turned its back on Him.3
Key texts: John 1:29 ("takes away the sin of the world"); John 3:16-17 ("God so loved the world"); 1 John 2:2 ("not for ours only but also for the whole world"). Also 2 Corinthians 5:19 ("reconciling the world to himself").
The question: Does "world" mean the entire human race, or can it mean "the world of the elect scattered among the nations"? The traditional limiting reading must shrink this word in text after text. The question is whether the word can bear that shrinking.4
Where the argument lives: Chapter 9 develops the full word study and the Johannine "world" texts.
Plain gloss: "to restore a broken relationship, to bring back into peace." The prefix apo- in apokatallassō intensifies the action: to reconcile completely, to bring all the way back. This stronger form appears only at Colossians 1:20, 1:22, and Ephesians 2:16.5
Key texts: 2 Corinthians 5:18-19 ("God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself"). Also Colossians 1:19-20 ("through him to reconcile to himself all things, making peace by the blood of his cross").
The question: Is reconciliation something God has accomplished for the whole world, or only offered? And does "all things" in Colossians 1:20 mean all things truly brought to peace, or merely forced into submission? The word itself names a restored relationship, not a military defeat.6
Where the argument lives: Chapter 10 develops both reconciliation texts in full.
Plain gloss: "the sacrifice that turns away wrath and deals with sin." Scholars debate whether the emphasis falls on turning away God's anger (propitiation) or on cleansing sin (expiation). Both ideas are present. The word names what the cross accomplished.7
Key texts: 1 John 2:2 ("He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world"). Also 1 John 4:10 ("He sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins").
The question: If Jesus is the propitiation not only for "our" sins but for "the whole world," then whose sin has He not dealt with? The scope clause in 1 John 2:2 is one of the hardest texts for any view of limited atonement to absorb.
Where the argument lives: Chapter 9 treats 1 John 2:2 within the Johannine "world" texts.
Plain gloss: "a price paid to set someone free." A lytron is the payment. An antilytron (used only at 1 Timothy 2:6) adds the idea of a "corresponding" or "substitutionary" ransom: a price paid in place of the captive.8
Key texts: 1 Timothy 2:5-6 ("Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all"); Mark 10:45 ("the Son of Man came to give his life as a ransom for many").
The question: If the ransom has been paid "for all," can the people for whom it was paid remain in captivity forever? The word itself insists that a price has changed hands. The question is whether the transaction reaches everyone it was meant for.
Where the argument lives: Chapter 12 develops the ransom-for-all cluster and the scope-versus-application distinction.
Plain gloss: "to purchase in the marketplace." The word carries a commercial image: a buyer pays the price and takes ownership.9
Key texts: 2 Peter 2:1 ("denying the Master who bought them"); 1 Corinthians 6:20 ("you were bought with a price"); Revelation 5:9 ("by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe").
The question: In 2 Peter 2:1, even false teachers are said to have been "bought" by the Master. If Christ purchased even those who deny Him, the atonement's reach extends beyond the circle of the faithful. Peter does not say they were merely offered a purchase. He says they were bought.
Where the argument lives: Chapter 12.
Plain gloss: "to rescue, to deliver, to make whole." The noun sōtēr ("Savior") is applied both to God and to Christ. Paul calls God "our Savior" (1 Tim 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 1:3) and calls Christ "our Savior" in the same letters (Titus 1:4; 2:13; 3:6).
Key texts: 1 Timothy 4:10 ("the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe"); Titus 2:11 ("the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people").
The question: God is called "the Savior of all people." If He is the Savior of all, does He actually save all? The word malista ("especially") in 1 Timothy 4:10 is the key to this question, so it gets its own entry below.
Where the argument lives: Chapter 12.
Plain gloss: "most of all, to the highest degree, especially." This is a word of degree, not of exclusion. It narrows a spotlight without turning off the wider light.10
Key text: 1 Timothy 4:10 ("the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe").
The question: Does "especially" mean "only"? If so, then God is the Savior of believers alone and the rest of the sentence is empty. But malista never means "only" in Greek. It means "most of all." The verse says God saves all, and believers enjoy that salvation in a special or prior way. The word resists any reading that turns "all" into "some."11
Where the argument lives: Chapter 12.
Words Belong to the God Who Spoke Them
A word study is not the whole argument. Words live in sentences, sentences live in books, and books live in the story God is telling. This appendix collects the vocabulary; the chapters do the theology. And the theology this book builds is bounded: salvation through Christ alone, by grace through faith, with the cross as the real and costly center. No word here is recruited to say that faith does not matter, that the cross is optional, or that all roads lead to God. These words belong to the gospel (see Appendix B and Chapter 1).
Plain gloss: Both words mean "to will, to desire, to want." Some scholars suggest that thelō leans toward a mere wish while boulomai leans toward a settled purpose. But the distinction is too neat. Scripture uses both words for the same divine desire. Paul uses thelō in 1 Timothy 2:4. Peter uses boulomai in 2 Peter 3:9. Both say the same thing: God wants every person saved.12
Key texts: 1 Timothy 2:4 ("God desires [thelei] all people to be saved"); 2 Peter 3:9 ("not wishing [boulomenos] that any should perish").
The question: Is God's will to save all a real purpose or a mere preference? If it is only a wish, the Almighty stands frustrated by His creatures. If it is a purpose, His purpose and its outcome need to be squared. The two-wills doctrine is one attempt. This book offers another.
Where the argument lives: Chapter 13 (on thelō) and Chapter 14 (on boulomai). The two-wills question is engaged in Chapter 15.
Plain gloss: "long-suffering, patience, steadfast endurance." Literally "long-tempered," the opposite of short-tempered. When applied to God, it describes a patience that holds the door open for repentance.13
Key texts: 2 Peter 3:9 ("The Lord is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish"). Also 2 Peter 3:15 ("count the patience of our Lord as salvation") and Romans 2:4 ("God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance").
The question: Is God's patience a saving instrument or simply a delay before judgment falls? Peter answers plainly: "count the patience of our Lord as salvation." History's long stretch is the patience of a God who will not give up.
Where the argument lives: Chapter 14.
Plain gloss: "in order that, so that." A purpose word. Paul writes that God "consigned all to disobedience" and adds hina: "so that he might have mercy on all." The hina names the goal behind the act. The disobedience is not the end. The mercy is.14
Key text: Romans 11:32 ("For God has consigned all to disobedience, that [hina] he may have mercy on all").
The question: If hina marks God's purpose, then the mercy on "all" is not a wish or a side effect. It is what the whole arrangement was designed to produce. The scope of the disobedience (all) and the scope of the mercy (all) are deliberately matched.
Where the argument lives: Chapter 17.
Plain gloss: "to place under, to arrange beneath, to subject." The word can describe either forced submission or willing, ordered self-giving, depending on context.15
Key texts: 1 Corinthians 15:27-28 ("when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him").
The question: Is the subjection of "all things" to Christ a scene of conquest or of restoration? Paul answers his own question in verse 28: the Son himself is "subjected" to the Father using the very same verb. The Son's subjection is not defeat. It is glad, ordered self-giving. The verse teaches us what kind of subjection fills the end.16
Where the argument lives: Chapter 19.
Plain gloss: "to make powerless, to render inactive, to abolish, to destroy." The word does not always mean total annihilation; it often means "to put out of business," "to make of no effect."17
Key text: 1 Corinthians 15:26 ("The last enemy to be destroyed is death").
The question: If death itself is destroyed, then nothing that holds people in death can stand. A populated hell is death still holding territory. An eternal grave is death undefeated. Paul says death is the last enemy, and it will be "brought to nothing." That means the last grip of death on any creature is broken.
Where the argument lives: Chapter 19.
Plain gloss: "to confess openly, to acknowledge, to give thanks and praise." In the Septuagint and the New Testament, this verb almost always carries the tone of glad, willing praise. It is not the grudging admission of a prisoner. It is the joyful cry of someone who means what he says.18
Key texts: Philippians 2:11 ("every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father"); Romans 14:11 ("every tongue shall confess to God").
The question: When every tongue confesses that Jesus is Lord, is that forced surrender or genuine worship? The word itself points toward praise. In 1 Chronicles 29:13 it means thanksgiving. In Psalm 30:4 it means joyful singing. Paul uses it in Romans 14:11, citing Isaiah 45, where the confession sits inside a call to "turn to me and be saved." Hart renders the verb as "gladly confess," and the usage supports him.19
Where the argument lives: Chapter 19.
The Same Verb, Two Subjects
In 1 Corinthians 15:27-28, the verb "subjected" (Greek hypotassō) is used for both the enemies placed under Christ's feet and the Son placed under the Father. If the Son's "subjection" is glad and loving (and no one reads it as defeat), then the same verb, in the same sentence, points toward the same quality of willing surrender for all things. The verse interprets itself.
Plain gloss: "restoration, the act of setting things back in their proper order." The word appears in Acts 3:21, where Peter speaks of "the restoration of all things, which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago."20
Key text: Acts 3:21 ("until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke").
The question: What is the scope of "all things" being restored? The early church fathers who held the larger hope used this word as a title for their entire doctrine. Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, and others spoke of the apokatastasis as the final restoration of every creature to God. The word names the hope this book defends.
Where the argument lives: Chapter 1 introduces the concept; the Glossary defines it.
One Word, Many Centuries
The early church knew this word well. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, and many others in the Greek- and Syriac-speaking East used apokatastasis as shorthand for the conviction that God's work is not finished until every creature is home. The word fell into disfavor after the sixth-century condemnations of certain Origenist speculations, but the hope it names never disappeared entirely. It reappears in every century, in voices as varied as Julian of Norwich, the Moravians, and George MacDonald. This book's claim is that the hope is grounded not in sentiment but in the deepest doctrines of the faith itself.
Plain gloss: The noun aiōn means "an age, a long but indefinite stretch of time." Its adjective aiōnios means "pertaining to an age, age-long." The Hebrew olam, which aiōn translates in the Septuagint, refers to time beyond the visible horizon. It may point to the past or to the future, but it does not carry the built-in meaning of "endless."21
Key texts: Matthew 25:46 ("these will go away into aiōnios punishment, but the righteous into aiōnios life"). Also Matthew 18:8 and 25:41 ("aiōnios fire"). And 2 Corinthians 4:18 (the seen is temporary, the unseen is aiōnia).
The question: Does aiōnios mean "eternal" in the absolute sense, or "pertaining to the coming age"? This is the single most debated translation issue in the conversation about hell. Several things are clear. First, the Greek language had perfectly good words for "eternal" (such as aidios, used at Romans 1:20 and Jude 6). The New Testament writers almost never used those words for punishment.22 Second, the Hebrew olam plainly does not always mean "forever" in the Old Testament. Jonah was in the fish "forever" (olam), but only for three days (Jonah 2:6). The Aaronic priesthood is "everlasting" (olam), but it has been set aside (Exodus 40:15; Hebrews 7:14-22).23 Third, many Greek-speaking church fathers read aiōnios as something less than absolute eternity. Basil the Great reported that most Eastern Christians read the aiōnios kolasis ("chastening of the age") in Matthew 25:46 as a temporary condition. Chrysostom once used aiōnios for Satan's reign to stress that it would end.24
This entry is only a sketch. The fuller argument belongs to Appendix D, where the judgment texts are treated one by one.
A Note on Kolasis
The word translated "punishment" in Matthew 25:46 is kolasis (Greek κόλασις), not timōria. In classical Greek, kolasis refers to corrective punishment, the kind meant to improve the one punished. Timōria, by contrast, refers to retributive punishment. It aims to satisfy the one who punishes. Aristotle drew this distinction. Plato used kolasis to argue that punishment proves virtue can be taught. William Barclay observed that in all of Greek secular literature, kolasis is never used for anything but remedial punishment. The word's own history leans toward correction, not endless payback.25 A related note: the English word "hell" hides the fact that four different words in the original languages are collapsed into it. Sharon Baker reminds us: "These words are not interchangeable in the original language, yet we treat them in English as if they were, lumping and dumping them all into 'hell.'" Those four words are Sheol, Gehenna, Hades, and Tartaros, and each refers to a different reality.26 See Appendix D for the full treatment.
Words are servants, not masters. No single word proves the case for the larger hope, and no single word settles it against. What these words do, taken together, is reveal a pattern. The scope words say "all" and "the world." The atonement words say "ransom," "reconcile," and "propitiation" for the whole world. The will-of-God words say "desires" and "not wishing that any should perish." The victory words say "every knee," "every tongue," "all in all," with the last enemy destroyed. And the duration word, so often translated "eternal," turns out to be far more flexible than our English Bibles let on.
I do not claim these words end the debate. I claim they set the table. The meal is served in Chapters 2 through 24, where the texts are read in context and the tradition is heard at full strength. These words are the ingredients. The chapters are the cooking. Turn to the chapter that owns each word and see whether the recipe holds.
↑ 1. The word πᾶς (pas) occurs over 1,200 times in the Greek New Testament. BDAG (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed.) defines it as "pertaining to totality with focus on its individual components: every, each" and "pertaining to totality: all, the whole, entire."
↑ 2. The "all kinds of people" reading holds that pas in texts like 1 Timothy 2:4 and Romans 5:18 means "people from every class, rank, and nation" rather than "every individual without exception." This reading is defended by, among others, John Calvin, Commentary on the Epistles to Timothy, on 1 Tim 2:4, and more recently by Thomas Schreiner. Thomas Talbott exposes the pattern behind this move: Augustine read "everyone" universally in 1 Timothy 2:1, where the exhortation is to pray for all people, but then narrowed "all people" in 2:4 to "some from all groups." Since the same referent carries across the paragraph, the shift is driven by the theological system, not by the sentence. See Talbott, The Inescapable Love of God, 2nd ed. (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2014), ch. 7. Andrew Hronich reinforces the point: Paul calls for prayers for actual people, not classes of people. See Hronich, Once Loved Always Loved (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2023), ch. 3. James Beilby observes that those who deny God's universal saving will face a heavy burden: they must "deuniversalize" the clearly universal implications of John 3:16, 1 Timothy 2:4, and 2 Peter 3:9. See Beilby, Postmortem Opportunity (2021), 81–82. Chapter 13 of this book states the reading at full strength and answers it.
↑ 3. BDAG defines κόσμος (kosmos) in its theological sense as "the sum total of everything here and now, the world, the (orderly) universe" and, especially in John's writings, as "humanity in general." The Johannine tension between the world as the object of God's love (John 3:16) and the world as the sphere of rebellion (1 John 5:19) is fundamental to the argument of Chapter 9.
↑ 4. The "world of the elect" reading holds that John's kosmos refers not to every human being but to the elect scattered among all nations, so that "God so loved the world" means "God so loved His chosen ones from every nation." George Sidney Hurd replies that "the only examples of the term 'world' being used to refer to less than the totality of humanity is in the context of obvious hyperbole" (Hurd, The Universal Solution, ch. 3). Robin Parry notes that in John's Gospel, kosmos is "a loaded word that refers to the sinful and rebellious human world that rejects God," which makes the love-claims all the larger: "the world that God loves and sent his Son for (3:16) is the world that hates and rejects him." Parry observes that Jesus dies to save not merely his followers "but also the whole nation of Israel (11:50) and the whole world (3:16; cf. 1 John 2:2)." See Parry, The Evangelical Universalist, 3rd ed. (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2012), 108. James Beilby adds that the narrowing of these universal texts is driven by the interpreter's system, not by the sentences themselves. See Beilby, Postmortem Opportunity (2021), 81–82. See also Chapter 9 for the full engagement.
↑ 5. The compound verb ἀποκαταλλάσσω (apokatallassō) is unique to Paul and appears only at Colossians 1:20, 1:22, and Ephesians 2:16. Like the simpler καταλλάσσω (katallassō) found in Romans 5:10, 1 Corinthians 7:11, and 2 Corinthians 5:18–20, the verb "presupposes some kind of rupture in relationship that is then repaired." Robin Parry stresses that the "all things" reconciled in Colossians 1:20 are, "without any doubt, the same 'all things' that are created in v. 16. In other words, every single created thing. It is not 'all without distinction' (i.e., some of every kind of thing) but 'all without exception' (i.e., every single thing in creation)." See Parry, The Evangelical Universalist, 3rd ed. (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2012), 50–54.
↑ 6. The "pacification" reading holds that Colossians 1:20's reconciliation of "all things" includes the forced subjugation of hostile powers, not their salvation. The word katallassō itself, however, describes a restored relationship characterized by peace, not a military defeat. Parry answers: "That reconciliation should be seen in salvific terms is underscored by the fact that the poem expands on the notion of reconciling all things in terms of making peace through the blood of his cross. The reconciliation of all things brings peace with God—a notion that, for Paul, clearly expresses salvation." James D. G. Dunn concurs: "What is being claimed is quite simply and profoundly that the divine purpose in the act of reconciliation and peacemaking was to restore the harmony of the original creation, to bring into renewed oneness and wholeness 'all things.'" See Parry, The Evangelical Universalist, 3rd ed., 51–52; Dunn, Colossians, 104, as cited in Parry, 51 n. 13. See Chapter 10 for the full treatment.
↑ 7. The word ἱλασμός (hilasmos) occurs in the New Testament only at 1 John 2:2 and 4:10. BDAG gives "propitiation" and "expiation" as possible glosses. Leon Morris argued for "propitiation" (the turning away of wrath); C. H. Dodd argued for "expiation" (the covering of sin). Both elements are present in the biblical concept. For the scope question, the word's meaning matters less than its scope clause: "not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."
↑ 8. The word ἀντίλυτρον (antilytron) is a hapax legomenon (used only once in the NT, at 1 Timothy 2:6). The prefix ἀντί (anti) carries the sense of "in the place of" or "corresponding to," making the ransom explicitly substitutionary. BDAG: "a ransom, in our literature only as the price paid for freeing captives: ransom."
↑ 9. BDAG defines ἀγοράζω (agorazō) as "to secure the rights to someone by paying a price, buy, acquire as property." The commercial force of the word makes 2 Peter 2:1 remarkable: even false teachers are said to have been purchased by the Master.
↑ 10. BDAG defines μάλιστα (malista) as "to a very high degree, most of all, above all, especially, particularly." It is a word of emphasis, not exclusion. Compare its use in Galatians 6:10 ("let us do good to everyone, and especially to those of the household of faith"), where no one reads it as meaning "only to the household of faith."
↑ 11. George Sidney Hurd notes that 1 Timothy 4:10 creates serious difficulty for any reading that limits the atonement to believers alone. The verse names God as "the Savior of all people" before narrowing to "especially of those who believe." The narrowing presupposes a wider group. See Hurd, The Triumph of Mercy, 2nd ed., ch. 1, "The Savior of the Whole World." Andrew Hronich presses the same text: had Augustine surveyed Paul's usage of "all" elsewhere in this epistle, he would have found 1 Timothy 4:9–10, where Paul calls God "the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe." The word "especially" (malista) does not erase "all"; it highlights believers within a larger group already saved. Hronich asks: "Did He give Himself as a ransom for all kinds of men or every individual man?" See Hronich, Once Loved Always Loved, ch. 3. James Beilby lists the universalist texts together and concludes: "It must be admitted that each of these texts, taken by themselves, lends prima facie support to belief in universal salvation." See Beilby, Postmortem Opportunity, 281.
↑ 12. The distinction between θέλω (thelō) and βούλομαι (boulomai) is sometimes overstated. Marvin Vincent, in Vincent's New Testament Word Studies, comments on thelō at 1 Timothy 2:4: "He desires the salvation of all. Thelō (to desire) indicates a determined purpose." George Sidney Hurd, The Triumph of Mercy, 2nd ed., ch. 3, "Does God Get What He Wants?," confirms that both words express God's saving intent. Thomas Talbott traces how the attempt to soften thelō at 1 Timothy 2:4 follows directly from Augustine's prior commitment: "even though 1 Timothy 2:4 appears to say that God 'desires everyone to be saved,' its real meaning, when taken in the context of the Bible as a whole, is merely that God wills the salvation of all kinds of people." Talbott exposes this as a move driven by the system, not the sentence. See Talbott, The Inescapable Love of God, 2nd ed., ch. 7. James Beilby adds that the Calvinist reinterpretations of these "universal salvific desire" passages "are not interpretations of what the texts actually say; they are clever ways of avoiding the implications of what the texts say." See Beilby, Postmortem Opportunity, 82–83. See also NIDNTTE (New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis) on the overlap between the two word families.
↑ 13. BDAG defines μακροθυμία (makrothymia) as "a state of remaining tranquil while awaiting an outcome, patience, steadfastness, endurance." The related verb μακροθυμέω (makrothymeō) in 2 Peter 3:9 describes God's active, purposeful waiting for repentance.
↑ 14. The conjunction ἵνα (hina) most commonly introduces purpose or result clauses: "in order that," "so that." In Romans 11:32 it makes the mercy clause the goal of the disobedience clause. BDAG lists "marker to denote purpose, aim, or goal" as the primary definition.
↑ 15. BDAG defines ὑποτάσσω (hypotassō) as "to cause to be in a submissive relationship, to subject, to subordinate." The word's range of meaning is wide: it can describe a military defeat (1 Cor 15:25, Ps 110), a child's obedience to parents (Luke 2:51), or the mutual submission of Christians to one another (Eph 5:21). In 1 Corinthians 15:28, the Son's own subjection to the Father teaches what kind of subjection Paul envisions at the end. Thomas Talbott presses this point in his reading of Philippians 2:6–11: forced obeisance, wrung from a defeated creature, "brings no glory to God." A confession made "to the glory of God the Father" (Phil 2:11) must be genuine, not coerced. See Talbott, The Inescapable Love of God, 2nd ed. David Bentley Hart's rendering of the 1 Corinthians 15:22–28 passage in his New Testament translation highlights the universalist implications of the "all in all" formula. See Hart, That All Shall Be Saved (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2019), Second Meditation, §I.
↑ 16. Hunter Coates notes that the earliest commentaries on Philippians 2:10-11 and 1 Corinthians 15 lacked any doubt that these texts describe universal reverence toward Jesus. He surveys exomologeō and hypotassō across the Septuagint and patristic literature and concludes that both words consistently point toward willing participation, not forced compliance. See Coates, Grace Abounds (Eugene, OR: Resource Publications, 2024), ch. 5.
↑ 17. BDAG defines καταργέω (katargeō) as "to cause something to lose its power or effectiveness, invalidate, make powerless." The word is used 27 times in the New Testament, almost exclusively by Paul. Its range includes "abolish" (Eph 2:15, of the law), "bring to an end" (1 Cor 13:8, of prophecy), and "destroy" (1 Cor 15:26, of death). The emphasis is on rendering powerless rather than annihilation in every case.
↑ 18. The verb ἐξομολογέω (exomologeō) occurs in the Septuagint and New Testament overwhelmingly in contexts of praise, thanksgiving, and willing confession: 1 Chronicles 29:13 (thanksgiving), Psalm 30:4 (praise), Matthew 11:25 (Jesus' prayer of thanks), Romans 14:11 (citing Isaiah 45's confession). Hunter Coates argues that Paul follows this tradition closely when he uses exomologēsētai in Philippians 2:11 to denote worship and praise, not grudging acknowledgment. See Coates, Grace Abounds, ch. 5.
↑ 19. David Bentley Hart renders Philippians 2:11 with "every tongue gladly confess" for the Greek exomologēsētai, reflecting the verb's consistent usage as praise language. See Hart, That All Shall Be Saved, Second Meditation, §I, where the universalist-passage catalog includes Phil 2:9-11 among the texts whose Greek most naturally reads as universal salvation.
↑ 20. The noun ἀποκατάστασις (apokatastasis) occurs only once in the New Testament, at Acts 3:21 (ἀποκαταστάσεως πάντων, "restoration of all things"). BDAG: "restoration, reestablishment." Ilaria Ramelli defines apokatastasis as "related to the verb ἀποκαθίστημι, 'I restore, reintegrate, reconstitute, return,'" bearing "the fundamental meaning of 'restoration, reintegration, reconstitution.'" See Robin A. Parry with Ilaria L. E. Ramelli, A Larger Hope? Vol. 2 (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2019), Introduction. Andrew Hronich notes a revealing difference in translation: most English versions use "restoration" (NASB, NLT, KJV's "restitution"), while the ESV's phrasing of Acts 3:21 slightly obscures the universal scope of Peter's claim; David Bentley Hart renders it as "the times of that Restoration of all things." The term was used in antiquity for healing and the return to a proper state, whether astronomical, therapeutic, or spiritual. See Hronich, Once Loved Always Loved, ch. 7.
↑ 21. George Sidney Hurd provides a thorough study of olam, aiōn, and aiōnios in The Triumph of Mercy, 2nd ed., ch. 5, "The Duration of Punishment." He demonstrates from the Old Testament that olam refers to indefinite time and carries no necessary connotation of endlessness. Dr. Helena Keizer's doctoral dissertation, Life, Time, Entirety: A Study of Aiōn in Greek Literature and Philosophy, the Septuagint and Philo (Amsterdam University, 1999), concludes: "infinity is not an intrinsic or necessary connotation of aiōn, either in the Greek or in the Biblical usage (olam)," as cited in Gerry Beauchemin, Hope Beyond Hell, expanded ed. (2007/2016), ch. I.
↑ 22. David Bentley Hart observes that the adjective aiōnios, "unlike the adjective ἀΐδιος (aïdios) or ἀτελεύτητος (atelevtētos), never clearly means 'eternal' or 'everlasting' in any incontrovertible sense." He notes that the words which do carry the unambiguous meaning of "endless" (such as aïdios, aperantos, and adialeiptos) are never applied to eschatological punishment in the Gospels. See Hart, That All Shall Be Saved, Second Meditation, §III. Coates confirms this pattern: the New Testament consistently uses aïdios only for God's attributes and divine realities (Romans 1:20; Jude 6), never for human punishment. See Coates, Grace Abounds, ch. 4.
↑ 23. These examples are gathered in Hurd, The Triumph of Mercy, 2nd ed., ch. 5, §"OLAM," and in Beauchemin, Hope Beyond Hell, ch. I, "Aion and Aionios." Hurd also treats the phrase "olam and beyond" in Daniel 12:2, noting that the life of the righteous is described as "for olam and beyond," while the shame of the wicked is for olam alone, without the "and beyond" qualifier. See also Hurd, A Defense of Biblical Universalism, ch. 5, "The Duration of Punishment," and Extermination or Restoration?, ch. 6.
↑ 24. Hart cites Basil the Great's report that "the great majority of his fellow Eastern Christians assumed that the aiōnios kolasis…would consist in only a temporary probation of the soul." Hart also notes Chrysostom's use of aiōnios to describe Satan's reign "precisely in order to emphasize its transience." See Hart, That All Shall Be Saved, Second Meditation, §III. Solomon of Basra (thirteenth century, East Syrian) and Patriarch Timotheus II (fourteenth century) are additional witnesses to the tradition that aiōnios does not mean "eternal" when applied to punishment; see ibid.
↑ 25. Aristotle distinguishes κόλασις (kolasis, corrective punishment aimed at the offender's improvement) from τιμωρία (timōria, retributive punishment aimed at satisfying the punisher's sense of justice). See Hurd, The Triumph of Mercy, 2nd ed., ch. 5; Hurd, A Defense of Biblical Universalism, ch. 5. William Barclay, in New Testament Words, writes of kolasis at Matthew 25:46: "It originally meant the pruning of trees to make them grow better. I think it is true to say that in all Greek secular literature kolasis is never used of anything but remedial punishment." Thomas Talbott makes the same point; Hurd cites him in The Triumph of Mercy, 2nd ed., ch. 5 (Talbott's quotation of the Aristotelian distinction and the 1 Corinthians 5:5 illustration). See also Coates, Grace Abounds, ch. 4, for the patristic usage of kolasis in Clement of Alexandria, Basil, and both Gregorys.
↑ 26. Sharon L. Baker, Razing Hell: Rethinking Everlasting Torment and the Love of God (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2010), ch. 9 and accompanying references. The four words are: Sheol (Hebrew), a subterranean place for all the dead, also translated "grave" or "pit"; Gehenna (Greek γέεννα), the valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem, used by Jesus as a vivid image of judgment; Hades (Greek ᾍδης), the Greek equivalent of Sheol, translated as "grave" in 1 Corinthians 15:55; and Tartaros (Greek τάρταρος), an underworld prison from Greek mythology, used only once in the New Testament (2 Peter 2:4). Baker observes that the Old Testament Sheol "does not divide the good from the bad or the wicked from the righteous. No judgment of character or deeds takes place at all." The traditional doctrine of hell conflates these distinct realities into a single concept. See also Appendix D for the full treatment of the judgment texts.