Glossary of Key Terms

Aion / Aiōn (Greek: αἰών)

A Greek noun meaning “age,” “era,” or “a long period of time.” In the New Testament, aion frequently refers to a specific age or epoch in God’s plan—for example, “this present age” versus “the age to come.” The word does not inherently mean “eternity” in the sense of infinite, unending time. Its meaning depends on context. Jesus speaks of “the age to come” (ho aion ho mellōn) as a future period in God’s redemptive plan. The plural form aiones (“ages”) appears throughout the New Testament, often in doxologies such as “unto the ages of the ages” (eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn). Understanding this word is essential because it is the root of aionios, one of the most debated words in all of eschatology. See Chapter 6 for a full discussion.¹

Aionios (Greek: αἰώνιος)

The adjective derived from aion. Traditionally translated “eternal” or “everlasting” in most English Bibles, but its fundamental meaning is “pertaining to an age” or “age-long.” This is not a fringe claim—it is the standard etymological derivation, confirmed by Septuagint usage and by the native Greek-speaking church fathers. In the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament), aionios describes things that clearly came to an end: Jonah’s time in the fish (Jonah 2:6), the Levitical priesthood, and even mountains that “were scattered” (Habakkuk 3:6). The most important test case is Matthew 25:46, where Jesus speaks of kolasin aiōnion—which the universalist reads as “age-long correction” rather than “eternal punishment.” The Latin translation aeternus collapsed the nuance of the Greek and permanently shaped Western reading of these passages. Ilaria Ramelli and David Konstan’s Terms for Eternity is the definitive scholarly treatment. See Chapter 6 for a full word study.²

Apollymi (Greek: ἀπόλλυμι)

A Greek verb often translated “to destroy,” “to perish,” or “to lose.” This word appears in some of the most important judgment texts in the New Testament, including John 3:16 (“should not perish”) and Matthew 10:28 (“destroy both soul and body in Gehenna”). However, the same word also means “to lose”—and this meaning is crucial. In Luke 15, the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son are all described using forms of apollymi. In every single case, what is “lost” is eventually found and restored. The shepherd does not give up on the lost sheep. The woman does not give up on the lost coin. The father does not give up on the lost son. The entire trajectory of apollymi in Luke 15 is loss-then-recovery, not loss-as-final-end. This range of meaning is central to the universalist reading of judgment texts. See Chapter 7 for a full discussion.³

Apokatastasis (Greek: ἀποκατάστασις)

A Greek noun meaning “restoration” or “restitution of all things.” The word appears in Acts 3:21, where Peter speaks of “the time of the restoration of all things” (chronōn apokatastaseōs pantōn) that God has promised through the prophets. In early Christian theology, apokatastasis became the technical term for the doctrine that God will ultimately restore every rational creature to fellowship with Himself through Christ. The most famous early proponent was Origen (c. 185–254), but the doctrine was also held by Clement of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, Maximus the Confessor, Isaac of Nineveh, and many others. The word carries a rich theological history—it speaks of God’s purpose to undo the effects of the Fall completely and bring all of creation back to its original, intended relationship with the Creator. See Chapters 2, 25, and 26 for detailed discussion.⁴

Descensus ad Inferos (Latin)

Latin for “the descent into the lower regions” or “the descent into hell.” This phrase refers to the ancient Christian belief, enshrined in the Apostles’ Creed (“He descended into hell”), that between His death and resurrection, Christ descended to the realm of the dead. The doctrine is based on texts such as 1 Peter 3:18–20 (Christ preaching to the spirits in prison), 1 Peter 4:6 (the gospel proclaimed to the dead), Ephesians 4:8–10 (Christ descending to the lower regions), and Acts 2:31 (Christ not being abandoned to Hades). For the universalist case, the descensus is theologically significant because it demonstrates that Christ’s saving work extends beyond the boundary of physical death. If Christ preached to the dead, then death does not end God’s pursuit of the lost. This provides the foundation for the postmortem opportunity and, by extension, for the hope that God’s pursuing love will ultimately prevail for every person. See Chapters 23 and 27 for detailed treatment.⁵

Kolasis vs. Timoria (Greek: κόλασις / τιμωρία)

Kolasis means “correction,” “pruning,” or “corrective punishment.” Timoria means “retribution” or “vengeance.” The distinction between these two words is one of the most important word studies in the entire eschatological debate. Aristotle drew the distinction explicitly in his Rhetoric (1.10.17): kolasis is punishment inflicted for the benefit of the one being punished; timoria is punishment inflicted for the satisfaction of the one punishing. In Matthew 25:46—the most famous judgment text in the Gospels—Jesus chose kolasis, not timoria. If Jesus had intended merely retributive punishment, the word timoria was available to Him. He chose the word that means corrective punishment. The universalist argument is that this choice was deliberate and theologically significant: divine judgment, even at its most severe, is always aimed at the healing and restoration of the person, not at their mere retribution or destruction. See Chapters 7 and 14 for detailed discussion.⁶

Mishpat / Tsedaqah (Hebrew:  משפט / צדקה)

Mishpat is the Hebrew word for “justice” or “judgment.” Tsedaqah means “righteousness” or “right-making.” These two words appear together dozens of times in the Old Testament, especially in the prophets, and together they describe what God’s justice actually looks like. Biblical justice is not merely punitive. Mishpat and tsedaqah aim at setting things right—restoring right relationships, lifting up the oppressed, correcting what has gone wrong. When the prophets call for justice, they are calling for a world made whole, not merely a world where wrongdoers are punished. This understanding of justice is foundational to the universalist case: if God’s justice is fundamentally restorative—aimed at making things right rather than merely punishing what went wrong—then the final expression of God’s justice must be the restoration of all things, not the permanent destruction or torment of some. See Chapter 3 for a discussion of God’s character and justice.⁷

Olam (Hebrew: עולם)

The Hebrew equivalent of the Greek aion. Olam means “a long duration,” “antiquity,” “futurity,” or “age.” Like aion, it does not inherently mean “eternal” in the sense of infinite, unending time. In the Old Testament, olam describes things that clearly had a beginning and an end: a slave who serves his master “forever” (le’olam, Exodus 21:6) serves for the duration of his life, not for eternity. The Levitical priesthood is described as olam, yet it was superseded. The Septuagint translators rendered olam with aion and aionios, which confirms that these Greek words carry the same range of meaning—“age-long” rather than necessarily “everlasting.” See Chapter 6.⁸

Olethros (Greek: ὄλεθρος)

A Greek word meaning “destruction,” “ruin,” or “devastation.” It appears in key judgment texts, most notably 2 Thessalonians 1:9 (“eternal destruction from the presence of the Lord”) and 1 Corinthians 5:5 (“for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved”). The word does not necessarily require the cessation of existence. In 1 Corinthians 5:5, olethros is explicitly restorative—Paul hands a man over to Satan for the “destruction” of the flesh so that his spirit may be saved. The destruction serves a redemptive purpose. This restorative usage of olethros within Paul’s own writings is an important data point for interpreting 2 Thessalonians 1:9, where the same word is often read as final, terminal destruction. See Chapter 7.⁹

Recapitulatio (Latin; Greek: anakephalaiōsis)

Latin for “recapitulation” or “summing up.” This theological concept, developed most fully by Irenaeus of Lyon (c. 130–202), holds that Christ “recapitulates” or “sums up” all of human history and all of humanity in Himself. In His incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension, Christ relived and redeemed every stage of human existence, undoing what Adam did and restoring what Adam lost. The concept is rooted in Ephesians 1:9–10, where Paul says God’s plan is to “unite all things” (anakephalaiōsasthai ta panta) in Christ. For the universalist case, recapitulatio carries a sweeping, comprehensive scope: if Christ sums up all things in Himself, then nothing falls outside His redemptive embrace. The logic of recapitulation points naturally toward universal restoration. See Chapter 21.¹⁰

Annihilationism

The view that the final fate of the unrepentant is the total destruction of their being—they simply cease to exist. In annihilationism, the unsaved are not tormented forever (as in eternal conscious torment) and are not eventually restored (as in universalism). They are destroyed completely and permanently. The fire of judgment consumes them, and they are no more. Annihilationism is closely related to conditional immortality but places the emphasis on the result of judgment (destruction) rather than on the condition of immortality (that only the saved receive eternal life). Some annihilationists prefer the term “conditional immortality” because it sounds less negative. See the entry for “Conditional Immortality” below.¹¹

Christus Victor

Latin for “Christ the Victor.” This is a model of the atonement that emphasizes Christ’s triumph over the powers of sin, death, and the devil. In the Christus Victor framework, the cross and resurrection are a cosmic victory: Christ defeats the enemies that hold humanity captive and liberates His creation. Gustaf Aulén’s classic work Christus Victor (1931) argued that this was the dominant atonement model in the early church, before the later development of satisfaction and penal substitution theories. For the universalist case, the Christus Victor model is significant because its scope is inherently cosmic—Christ’s victory is over all the powers of evil, and His liberation extends to all who are held captive. A partial victory, in which some creatures remain permanently under the dominion of sin, death, or destruction, would not truly be a victory at all. See Chapter 5.¹²

Conditional Immortality (CI)

The view that human beings are not inherently immortal. Immortality is a gift that God gives only to those who are saved through faith in Christ. The unsaved do not live forever in torment; instead, they are ultimately destroyed and cease to exist. CI rejects both eternal conscious torment (ECT) and universalism (UR). The CI position holds that the “destruction” language of Scripture (Matthew 10:28; 2 Thessalonians 1:9; Philippians 3:19) should be taken at face value as indicating the total end of the person’s existence. CI affirms that hell is real and that judgment is serious, but it argues that the final punishment is death—the permanent, irreversible end of conscious existence—rather than unending torment. This book is written to readers who currently hold the CI position and have already rejected ECT. The argument of this book is that the CI reader’s own convictions about God’s love, justice, and the postmortem opportunity point naturally and logically toward universal restoration. Key CI scholars include Edward Fudge, John Stott, Clark Pinnock, and Chris Date.¹³

Eternal Conscious Torment (ECT)

The traditional Western Christian view that the unsaved will suffer conscious, unending punishment in hell for all eternity. In this view, hell is a place (or state) of everlasting suffering from which there is no escape, no reprieve, and no end. ECT has been the dominant position in Western Christianity since Augustine (4th–5th century) and was reinforced by the medieval period, the Reformation, and much of modern evangelicalism. Both the author and the intended reader of this book have already rejected ECT. The primary arguments against ECT include the disproportionality of infinite punishment for finite sin, the incompatibility of unending torment with a God whose nature is love (1 John 4:8), and the lexical evidence that aionios does not require the meaning “everlasting.” ECT is mentioned in this book only when addressing specific objections, not as a position that needs systematic refutation, since the reader has already moved beyond it.¹⁴

Exclusivism / Restrictivism

The view that salvation is available only through explicit, conscious faith in Jesus Christ during one’s earthly lifetime. On this view, those who die without having heard and believed the gospel are lost—whether that means eternal torment (ECT exclusivism) or permanent destruction (CI exclusivism). Restrictivism is the stricter form of this position: not only is Christ the only Savior, but conscious knowledge of and response to the gospel in this life is the only means of salvation. The restrictive view faces a severe moral challenge: billions of human beings have lived and died without ever hearing the name of Jesus. If restrictivism is true, the vast majority of humanity is condemned through no fault of their own. This book rejects both exclusivism and restrictivism on the basis of 1 Peter 3:18–20, 1 Peter 4:6, and the theological logic that a just and loving God would not condemn those who never had an adequate opportunity to respond.¹⁵

Inclusivism

The view that while Jesus Christ is the only Savior, people may be saved through Christ even if they have not explicitly heard or responded to the gospel in this life. Inclusivists affirm that Christ’s atoning work is the sole basis of salvation, but they hold that God may apply that work to people who respond positively to whatever light they have received—through general revelation, conscience, or the work of the Holy Spirit beyond the boundaries of the visible church. Notable inclusivist thinkers include C. S. Lewis, Clark Pinnock, and (in some formulations) the Second Vatican Council. Inclusivism represents a middle ground between exclusivism and universalism. This book’s position goes beyond inclusivism: it affirms not merely that God can save those who have not heard, but that God will ultimately save all, through the postmortem opportunity and the persistent work of His love.¹⁶

Intermediate State

The period between a person’s physical death and the final resurrection. In the theology of this book, the intermediate state is conscious: the person continues to exist as a disembodied soul, aware and active, awaiting the resurrection of the body. Believers in the intermediate state are in paradise, consciously present with the Lord (Luke 23:43; 2 Corinthians 5:8; Philippians 1:23; Revelation 6:9–11). Unbelievers are in Hades, a conscious but unpleasant waiting place that is not the same as the lake of fire or final hell (Luke 16:19–31). The intermediate state is temporary—it ends at the final resurrection and judgment. The reality of the conscious intermediate state is essential for the postmortem opportunity: if the person exists consciously between death and resurrection, then God can encounter them, love them, and work toward their restoration during this period. See Chapters 1 and 31.¹⁷

Postmortem Opportunity

The belief that God provides a genuine offer of salvation to persons after their physical death. This is not a “second chance” in the cheap sense—it is God’s patient, persistent, loving pursuit reaching those who never had an adequate encounter with the gospel during their earthly life. The doctrine is grounded in 1 Peter 3:18–20 (Christ preaching to the spirits in prison), 1 Peter 4:6 (the gospel proclaimed to the dead so they might live), Ephesians 4:8–10 (Christ descending to fill all things), and the Descensus clause of the Apostles’ Creed. This book assumes the reader already accepts the postmortem opportunity. The argument of this book is that the postmortem opportunity, taken to its logical conclusion, leads to universal restoration: if God is patient enough to pursue people beyond death, and if His love never fails (1 Corinthians 13:8), then God’s pursuit will ultimately succeed for every person. James Beilby’s Postmortem Opportunity provides the most comprehensive scholarly treatment of this doctrine. See Chapters 1, 23, 27, 28, and 29.¹⁸

Pseudoevangelized

A term used to describe people who have “heard” the gospel but have not truly been evangelized in any meaningful sense. A person is pseudoevangelized when their encounter with Christianity has been so distorted—through hypocrisy, abuse, cultural imperialism, manipulation, or a fundamentally false presentation of who God is—that they have never actually encountered the real good news. The concept is important because it expands the scope of who deserves a genuine encounter with God beyond those who have never heard the gospel to include those who have heard only a counterfeit version of it. If a person has been told that “God loves you but will torture you forever if you don’t comply,” they have not heard the true gospel—they have been pseudoevangelized. A just and loving God, who gives each person the encounter they personally need, would not hold such a person accountable for rejecting a message that misrepresented Him. See Chapters 27 and 29.¹⁹

Universalism (Liberal vs. Conservative)

Universalism, broadly, is the belief that God will ultimately save every human being. However, not all universalisms are created equal, and the distinction between liberal and conservative universalism is absolutely essential to this book.

Liberal universalism (sometimes called pluralistic universalism) tends to deny biblical authority, downplay the reality and seriousness of sin, reject substitutionary atonement, minimize or deny the need for personal faith in Christ, and sometimes affirm that all religions are equally valid paths to God. Liberal universalism often rests on sentimentality rather than Scripture.

Conservative biblical universalism (the position of this book) affirms biblical authority without exception, affirms the reality and severity of sin, affirms substitutionary atonement, affirms the necessity of faith in Christ for salvation (no one is saved apart from Christ), affirms the reality and painfulness of hell as God’s purifying fire, and affirms a real, serious, final judgment. Conservative universalism differs from liberal universalism as starkly as conservative Christianity differs from liberal Christianity on any other topic. The conservative universalist simply adds one further conviction: that God’s love is powerful and patient enough to bring every person to genuine, willing faith in Christ—whether in this life or beyond it. Key conservative universalist scholars include Thomas Talbott, Robin Parry, David Bentley Hart, Ilaria Ramelli, Sharon Baker, and Brad Jersak. See Chapter 2 for a full discussion of this distinction.²⁰

Gehenna (Greek: γέεννα; Hebrew: Ge-Hinnom)

The Greek form of the Hebrew Ge-Hinnom, meaning “Valley of Hinnom.” Gehenna was a real geographical location: a valley just south of Jerusalem. In the Old Testament, it was the site of child sacrifice during the reigns of wicked kings Ahaz and Manasseh (2 Chronicles 28:3; 33:6), and the prophet Jeremiah condemned these practices in the strongest terms (Jeremiah 7:31–32; 19:1–13). By the first century, the Valley of Hinnom was associated with divine judgment and the burning of refuse. Jesus used Gehenna as His primary image for the judgment awaiting the unrepentant (Matthew 5:22, 29–30; 10:28; 23:15, 33; Mark 9:42–48). In the universalist reading, Gehenna functions as a powerful warning—the fire is real, painful, and deeply serious—but like the fire in the Valley of Hinnom itself, it serves a purpose and the valley continues to exist after the burning. Jesus’ Gehenna warnings function to change present behavior, not to describe irrevocable final destinies. See Chapter 12.²¹

Hades (Greek: ᾧδης)

The Greek term for the realm of the dead. In the New Testament, Hades is the intermediate holding place where the dead await the final judgment. It is not the same as Gehenna or the lake of fire. Hades is temporary—in Revelation 20:13–14, Hades itself is thrown into the lake of fire, which means Hades ceases to exist at the final judgment. In Jesus’ parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31), the rich man is in Hades, not in the lake of fire. He is conscious, in discomfort, and still capable of concern for his brothers. The “great chasm” of that parable describes a reality within the intermediate state, not the final eschatological state. The unsaved do not go to the lake of fire at the moment of death; they go to Hades, where they await the final judgment. See Chapters 1 and 13.²²

Lake of Fire

The image used in Revelation 20–21 to describe the final destination of those judged at the great white throne. Revelation 20:14 says that Death and Hades are thrown into the lake of fire, and adds, “This is the second death.” Those whose names are not found in the book of life are also thrown in (Revelation 20:15). The universalist does not deny the reality of the lake of fire. Instead, the universalist notes several crucial details: first, Death itself is thrown into the lake of fire, and 1 Corinthians 15:26 says death is the “last enemy to be destroyed.” If death is truly destroyed, then even the second death is overcome. Second, the very next chapters of Revelation describe a New Jerusalem with gates that are never shut (Revelation 21:25), nations being healed (Revelation 22:2), and an open invitation to come and drink the water of life freely (Revelation 22:17). The lake of fire is real and terrifying, but it does not appear to be God’s final word. See Chapter 24.²³

Sheol (Hebrew: שאול)

The Old Testament Hebrew term for the abode of the dead. Sheol is a shadowy, underground realm where all the dead were believed to go—both the righteous and the wicked (Genesis 37:35; Psalm 88:3; Ecclesiastes 9:10). In the Septuagint, Sheol is almost always translated as Hades. In the earlier strata of the Old Testament, Sheol is described as a place of silence, darkness, and diminished existence rather than a place of punishment. Over time, the concept developed, and by the intertestamental period and the New Testament era, a distinction between the righteous and wicked in the afterlife had emerged (see the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus). For the universalist argument, the key point is that God is present even in Sheol: “If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there” (Psalm 139:8). There is no place beyond God’s reach and no person beyond His love. See Chapters 1 and 27.²⁴

Tartarus (Greek: τάρταρος)

A Greek term that appears only once in the New Testament, in 2 Peter 2:4, where Peter says God “cast the sinning angels into Tartarus” (tartarōsas) and committed them to chains of darkness until judgment. In Greek mythology, Tartarus was the deepest part of the underworld, a prison for the Titans. Peter borrows this image to describe the holding place for fallen angels awaiting final judgment. Tartarus is not the same as Gehenna, Hades, or the lake of fire. It is a temporary holding place specifically for rebellious angelic beings, not for human dead. The universalist case does not focus heavily on Tartarus, but it is worth noting that even here, the language implies a temporary confinement “until judgment”—it is a holding state, not a final one.²⁵

Near-Death Experience (NDE)

A reported experience of consciousness during a period when the body is clinically dead or very close to death. Common elements of NDEs include a sensation of leaving the body, passing through a tunnel, encountering a being of light, experiencing a life review, meeting deceased relatives, and feeling overwhelming peace and love. NDEs have been reported across cultures, religions, and historical periods. While NDEs are not invoked as a primary argument in this book, they are relevant to the anthropological case for substance dualism (Chapter 31) and for the reality of the conscious intermediate state. If NDEs reflect genuine experiences of consciousness apart from the body, they provide experiential support for the existence of the immaterial soul—and if the soul exists and is conscious beyond death, then God’s relationship with each person continues beyond the grave.²⁶

Veridical NDE

A near-death experience in which the person reports accurate, verifiable information that they could not have obtained through normal sensory means. For example, a patient who reports witnessing specific events in another room of the hospital during the period when they were clinically dead, and whose report is later confirmed by medical staff. Veridical NDEs are considered some of the strongest evidence for the claim that consciousness can exist independently of brain function. If these reports are genuine, they challenge the physicalist view that the mind is nothing more than brain activity and support the dualist view that an immaterial mind or soul can operate apart from the body. The relevance for this book is primarily anthropological: veridical NDEs support the existence of the immaterial soul, which in turn supports the reality of the conscious intermediate state, which in turn provides the ontological foundation for the postmortem opportunity. See Chapter 31.²⁷

Physicalism

The view that human beings are entirely physical—there is no immaterial soul or spirit that exists apart from the body. On this view, the mind is a product of brain activity, and when the brain dies, the person ceases to exist entirely. Physicalists who are Christians typically hold that God will re-create the person at the resurrection, but they deny that the person exists in any form between death and that re-creation. This book rejects physicalism because it undermines the conscious intermediate state and the postmortem opportunity. If there is no soul, then at death the person ceases to exist, and there is no person for God to encounter, love, or restore between death and resurrection. Physicalism makes the postmortem opportunity incoherent: you cannot preach to someone who does not exist. See Chapter 31 for a detailed critique.²⁸

Nonreductive Physicalism

A variant of physicalism that holds that while human beings are entirely physical (no separate soul), mental properties and consciousness “emerge” from physical processes in ways that cannot be fully reduced to or explained by those physical processes alone. Nonreductive physicalists acknowledge that the mind is real and causally effective but deny that it is a separate substance from the body. The view has been influential among some Christian philosophers and theologians, notably Nancey Murphy. From the perspective of this book, nonreductive physicalism faces the same fundamental problem as standard physicalism: if there is no immaterial soul, then at death the person ceases to exist, and the conscious intermediate state—and with it, the postmortem opportunity—becomes incoherent. The “nonreductive” qualifier does not solve the problem of personal survival after death. See Chapter 31.²⁹

Property Dualism

The view that mental properties (thoughts, feelings, consciousness) are genuinely different in kind from physical properties, even though they may arise from or depend on physical processes. Property dualism affirms that there is something irreducibly “mental” about consciousness but stops short of affirming a separate mental substance (soul). It is a middle position between physicalism and substance dualism. For the purposes of this book, property dualism is an improvement over strict physicalism because it takes the reality of consciousness seriously. However, it does not go far enough to ground the conscious intermediate state. If the mental properties depend on the physical brain, then when the brain dies, the mental properties cease. Only substance dualism—which affirms that the soul is a real, immaterial substance that can exist apart from the body—provides the ontological basis for personal survival after death. See Chapter 31.³⁰

Substance Dualism

The view that human beings are composed of two distinct substances: a material body and an immaterial soul (or spirit). The soul is a real, immaterial entity that can exist apart from the body—though full human flourishing requires the union of body and soul in the resurrection. Substance dualism is the anthropological position held throughout this book. It is supported by biblical texts such as Genesis 35:18 (Rachel’s soul departing), 1 Kings 17:21–22 (Elijah praying for the child’s soul to return), Ecclesiastes 12:7 (the spirit returns to God), Matthew 10:28 (the soul survives the body’s death), Luke 23:43 (conscious existence in paradise after death), 2 Corinthians 5:1–8 (absent from the body, present with the Lord), Philippians 1:23 (to depart and be with Christ), and Revelation 6:9–11 (the souls under the altar, conscious and speaking).

Critically, the substance dualism of this book is not Platonic dualism. Plato taught that the soul is inherently immortal and that the body is a prison from which the soul escapes. Biblical substance dualism teaches that the soul was created by God, that its continued existence depends on God’s will (Matthew 10:28), that the body is good (Genesis 1:31), and that the resurrection of the body is the ultimate goal. The soul’s survival of death is the foundation of the conscious intermediate state and the postmortem opportunity—and therefore the foundation of the case for universal restoration. See Chapters 1 and 31.³¹

Talbott’s Trilemma

A philosophical argument formulated by Thomas Talbott in The Inescapable Love of God. Talbott identifies three propositions, any two of which imply the negation of the third: (1) God genuinely wills the salvation of all people. (2) God accomplishes everything He genuinely wills. (3) Some people are not saved. Calvinism affirms (2) and (3) but denies (1)—God does not truly will the salvation of all. Arminianism affirms (1) and (3) but denies (2)—God’s will can be frustrated by human free will. Universalism affirms (1) and (2) and denies (3)—all are eventually saved. Talbott argues that the biblical evidence for (1) is overwhelming (1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9; Ezekiel 33:11), and the biblical evidence for (2) is also strong (Isaiah 46:10; Ephesians 1:11). If both are true, then (3) must be false—and universal salvation follows. See Chapter 30.³²

The Second Death

A term used in Revelation (2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8) to describe the fate of those who are cast into the lake of fire after the final judgment. Revelation 20:14 identifies the second death explicitly: “The lake of fire is the second death.” In the ECT reading, the second death is eternal conscious torment. In the CI reading, it is permanent annihilation. In the universalist reading, the second death must be interpreted in light of 1 Corinthians 15:26 (“the last enemy to be destroyed is death”) and Revelation 21:4 (“there will be no more death”). If death in all its forms is truly destroyed, then even the second death is overcome. The second death is the final and most extreme experience of God’s purifying fire, but it is not the end of the story. The gates of the New Jerusalem remain open (Revelation 21:25). See Chapter 24.³³

Purgatorial Universalism

A specific form of conservative universalism that holds that after death, those who have not yet come to faith in Christ undergo a period of painful but redemptive purification—often described as God’s purifying fire—that ultimately leads them to willing, genuine repentance and faith. This is not the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory (which applies only to believers being cleansed of venial sins) but a broader application of the purification concept to all the unsaved. In purgatorial universalism, hell is real, painful, and serves a genuine purpose: it burns away everything that is not of God so that the image of God in every person can finally shine through. The duration and intensity of the purification varies—the more deeply entrenched in sin the person was, the more painful the process—but the fire never fails to find something worth saving, because every person bears God’s indelible image. This is the general model of universalism defended in this book. See Chapters 4, 8, and 28.³⁴

Hopeful Universalism

The position that universal salvation is a genuine and legitimate Christian hope, even if one stops short of asserting it as certain doctrine. Hopeful universalism says, “We may reasonably hope that all will be saved, but we cannot be certain.” This view has been associated with Hans Urs von Balthasar (Dare We Hope “That All Men Be Saved”?) and, in some readings, with C. S. Lewis. Hopeful universalism occupies a middle ground between confident universalism and the alternatives. This book takes a stronger position than hopeful universalism—it argues that universal restoration is the most biblically faithful and theologically coherent reading of Scripture. But the author acknowledges that hopeful universalism is a legitimate and honorable position for those who find the biblical evidence compelling but are not yet ready to commit to the full universalist conclusion.³⁵

Restorative Justice

A model of justice that focuses on repairing harm, restoring relationships, and rehabilitating offenders, rather than merely punishing wrongdoing. In restorative justice, the goal is to make things right—for the victim, for the offender, and for the community. This stands in contrast to retributive justice, which focuses on inflicting a proportional penalty on the offender regardless of whether the penalty heals anyone or anything. The universalist case argues that God’s justice is fundamentally restorative, as reflected in the Hebrew words mishpat and tsedaqah. God judges in order to heal, correct, and ultimately restore. His punishments are not ends in themselves but means toward reconciliation. A God whose justice is restorative cannot be satisfied with any outcome that leaves His creatures permanently broken, destroyed, or separated from Him. See Chapters 3 and 9.³⁶

Image of God (Imago Dei)

The biblical teaching that every human being is created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26–27; 9:6; James 3:9). The imago Dei is the foundation of human dignity, worth, and capacity for relationship with God. For the universalist case, a critical point is that the image of God in every person is indelible—however severely defaced by sin, it is never fully destroyed. Genesis 9:6 affirms the image of God even after the catastrophic effects of the Fall, and James 3:9 affirms it in the present tense. If every person bears God’s image, then there is always something left to save. God’s purifying fire always finds something worth redeeming, because every human being reflects, however faintly, the God who made them. See Chapters 4 and 28.³⁷

Creatio ex Nihilo (Latin)

Latin for “creation out of nothing.” The Christian doctrine that God created the universe from nothing—not from pre-existing matter, but by the free act of His will. David Bentley Hart argues in That All Shall Be Saved that creatio ex nihilo has profound moral implications for eschatology. If God created freely and out of love, knowing in advance the fate of every creature, then God is morally responsible for the existence of every person He creates. A God who creates persons He foreknows will be permanently lost has willed that loss into existence from the beginning. Hart contends that this makes permanent loss morally incompatible with a God of perfect love—and that only universal restoration honors the moral meaning of creation from nothing. See Chapter 30.³⁸