Glossary of Key Terms

Aion (Greek: aiōn) — A Greek noun meaning “an age,” “a period of time,” or “an era.” In classical and Hellenistic Greek, aion most commonly referred to a long but bounded span of time—a world-age, an epoch, or a lifetime. It could also be used more loosely to describe a very long duration. The word does not inherently mean “eternity” in the philosophical sense of infinite, timeless existence; that meaning developed gradually, particularly under the influence of Latin translations (aeternum) and later theological usage. In the New Testament, aion appears in phrases like “this present age” (ho aion houtos) and “the age to come” (ho aion ho mellōn), which describe distinct periods in God’s unfolding plan. Understanding aion as “age” rather than “eternity” is foundational to the universalist interpretation of judgment texts. (See Chapter 15.)¹

Aionios (Greek: aiōnios) — The adjective formed from aion. In standard Greek usage, it means “pertaining to an age,” “age-long,” or “belonging to an era.” Most English Bibles translate it as “eternal” or “everlasting,” but this is a translation choice, not an inevitable rendering. Ilaria Ramelli and David Konstan have demonstrated in Terms for Eternity that aionios in Greek literature consistently denotes something pertaining to an age—long-lasting and significant, but not necessarily infinite in duration. Key examples: Jonah 2:6 (LXX) describes the “everlasting” bars that held Jonah, yet he was released after three days; Habakkuk 3:6 (LXX) calls mountains “aionios,” yet mountains are ancient, not literally eternal; Jude 7 describes Sodom’s “aionios fire,” yet Sodom is not still burning. In Matthew 25:46, Jesus speaks of kolasin aionion, which the universalist translates as “age-long correction” rather than “eternal punishment.” The early Greek-speaking fathers understood this distinction. It was the Latin translation of aionios as aeternus (which truly does mean “everlasting”) that collapsed the nuance and permanently shaped Western eschatology. This is one of the most important linguistic arguments in the entire universalist case. (See Chapter 15.)²

Anakephalaiosis (Greek) — Literally “summing up” or “recapitulation.” Used by Paul in Ephesians 1:10 to describe God’s plan to unite all things in Christ. The term carries the sense of gathering everything together under one head (kephalē). Irenaeus of Lyon built an entire theology of salvation around this concept, arguing that Christ “recapitulated” the entire human story—undoing the fall and restoring what was lost. The universalist reads the scope of this recapitulation as genuinely universal: all things, not merely some things, are gathered into Christ. (See also Recapitulatio.)

Annihilationism — The belief that the final fate of the unsaved is total destruction—ceasing to exist entirely. God does not torment them forever; instead, He withdraws the gift of existence. Some annihilationists believe this destruction happens immediately at death; others believe it follows the final judgment. Annihilationism overlaps significantly with conditional immortality but places more emphasis on the act of destruction itself. The key biblical texts cited in its favor include Matthew 10:28 (“destroy both soul and body”) and passages using the language of “perishing” or being “consumed.” This book argues that annihilationism, while more humane than eternal conscious torment, still falls short of the biblical vision of universal restoration. (See also: Conditional Immortality.)³

Apollymi (Greek: apollymi) — A Greek verb commonly translated “destroy,” “perish,” or “lose.” It appears frequently in judgment texts (e.g., Matthew 10:28; John 3:16). However, the range of meaning is broader than English “destroy” suggests. In the parables of Luke 15, the same verb describes what happened to the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the prodigal son—they were apollymi, “lost,” but all three were found and restored. In Matthew 10:6 and 15:24, Jesus was sent to the “lost (apollymi) sheep of Israel.” These sheep were not annihilated; they were wandering and needed to be brought back. The universalist argues that apollymi in judgment contexts should be read through this wider lens: the “lost” are not obliterated but are in a state from which God is working to recover them. (See Chapter 15.)⁴

Apokatastasis (Greek: apokatastasis pantōn) — The “restoration of all things.” The term appears in Acts 3:21, where Peter speaks of “the apokatastasis of all things, which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago.” In early Christian theology, it became the technical term for the belief that God will ultimately restore every rational creature—including all human beings and, in some formulations, even the fallen angels—to a right relationship with Himself. Origen of Alexandria and Gregory of Nyssa are the most prominent early defenders of this doctrine. It was never formally condemned by an ecumenical council in a way that would settle the question (the Fifth Ecumenical Council’s anathemas are historically contested), and Gregory of Nyssa—an unambiguous universalist—was honored as a pillar of orthodoxy and never censured. Conservative biblical universalism regards apokatastasis as the fullest expression of the biblical hope: God will, in the end, make all things new. (See Chapters 2, 8, 9, 10, 12, 32.)⁵

Christus Victor — A model of the atonement that understands Christ’s death and resurrection as a cosmic victory over sin, death, and the devil. Rather than focusing exclusively on the legal or penal dimensions of the cross (as in penal substitutionary atonement), Christus Victor emphasizes that Christ conquered the powers that enslaved humanity. Gustaf Aulén famously retrieved this model in his 1931 book of the same name, arguing it was the dominant understanding in the early church. The universalist finds Christus Victor especially congenial because it raises the question: If Christ has already defeated death and the powers of evil, how can any of those powers hold any human being captive forever? The scope of Christ’s victory determines the scope of salvation. This book affirms Christus Victor alongside substitutionary atonement, not in place of it. (See Chapters 14, 23, 28.)⁶

Conditional Immortality (CI) — The belief that human beings are not inherently immortal. Immortality is a gift God grants to the redeemed. Those who ultimately reject God simply cease to exist—they are not tormented forever, but neither are they restored. God, in effect, withdraws the gift of existence from those who refuse His offer of life. Key proponents include Edward Fudge (The Fire That Consumes), John Stott, and Clark Pinnock. CI is sometimes called “annihilationism,” though CI advocates often prefer the term “conditional immortality” because it emphasizes the conditional nature of eternal life rather than the act of destruction. This book treats CI as a serious theological position—closer to the truth than eternal conscious torment—but argues that it still falls short of the biblical vision. If God genuinely desires all to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4) and never gives up on any creature, then annihilation is an admission of divine defeat. (See Chapters 2, 4, 28, 31.)⁷

Conscious Intermediate State — See: Intermediate State.

Descensus ad Inferos (Latin: “descent to the dead” or “descent into hell”) — The traditional Christian teaching that Christ, between His death and resurrection, descended to the realm of the dead. This doctrine is affirmed in the Apostles’ Creed: “He descended into hell.” The “hell” in this clause is not Gehenna or the lake of fire but Hades/Sheol—the general abode of the dead. The biblical basis includes 1 Peter 3:18–20 (Christ preached to the spirits in prison), 1 Peter 4:6 (the gospel was preached to the dead), and Ephesians 4:8–10 (Christ descended into the lower parts of the earth). The universalist sees the descensus as profoundly significant: Christ went to the dead to preach good news to them, which implies that death does not place a person beyond the reach of God’s saving work. The descensus is the historical and theological foundation of the postmortem opportunity. (See Chapters 8, 21.)⁸

Esoteric / Esotericism — In McClymond’s usage, “esoteric” refers to hidden, mystical, or occult traditions that claim access to secret spiritual knowledge unavailable to ordinary believers. McClymond traces a “gnostic-kabbalistic-esoteric” tradition that he believes has influenced universalist thinking from the second century to the present. He identifies motifs such as the “return from exile,” “Adamic androgyny,” and “dematerialization” as markers of this esoteric tradition. This book responds that the motifs McClymond identifies as esoteric are often deeply biblical (the return from exile is a central Old Testament theme, not a kabbalistic invention), and that contemporary conservative universalism is built on Scripture and patristic theology, not on mystical or occult traditions. McClymond’s use of the “esoteric” label functions as guilt by association rather than substantive argument. (See Chapters 4, 5, 7.)⁹

Eternal Conscious Torment (ECT) — The traditional Western view that the unsaved will suffer conscious punishment in hell forever, without end and without possibility of escape, relief, or restoration. ECT became the dominant view in Western Christianity largely through the influence of Augustine (354–430 AD) and was reinforced by the Latin translation of aionios as aeternus. Key biblical texts cited in its support include Matthew 25:46, Revelation 14:11, and Revelation 20:10. This book argues that ECT is neither the best reading of Scripture nor the view of the earliest Greek-speaking church. It creates profound theological tensions: a God who is “love” (1 John 4:8) but torments His creatures without end; a Christ who “died for all” (2 Cor. 5:14) but fails to save most; a final state in which God is supposedly “all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28) while a large portion of creation remains in unending agony. The book presents universal restoration as a superior alternative to both ECT and conditional immortality. (See Chapters 2, 4, 15, 17, 18, 28.)¹⁰

Exclusivism / Restrictivism — The belief that salvation is available only to those who explicitly hear and respond to the gospel of Jesus Christ during their earthly lifetime. Those who die without hearing the gospel, or who hear it and reject it, are lost forever (under ECT) or destroyed (under CI). Restrictivism is sometimes called “exclusivism” because it excludes from salvation everyone who does not come to explicit faith in Christ before death. This is the narrowest soteriological position. This book challenges restrictivism both on exegetical grounds (1 Peter 3:18–20; 4:6 describe a postmortem proclamation) and on theological grounds (a just and loving God would not permanently condemn those who never had a genuine opportunity to respond to the gospel). (See Chapters 2, 21, 27.)¹¹

Gehenna (Greek: geenna; Hebrew: gê hinnōm, “Valley of Hinnom”) — A real valley on the south side of Jerusalem. In the Old Testament, it was the site where some kings of Judah practiced child sacrifice to the pagan god Molech (2 Kings 23:10; Jer. 7:31; 19:1–13). Because of these abominations, the prophets cursed it as a place of judgment. By Jesus’s time, “Gehenna” had become a metaphor for divine judgment—a place associated with God’s fierce response to evil. Jesus used the term twelve times, always as a warning about the severity of God’s judgment against sin. The universalist takes these warnings with complete seriousness but argues they describe a real and terrible experience of God’s purifying judgment, not a permanent state of existence. The fire of Gehenna is the fire of a God who will not tolerate sin—and who will not stop purifying until every trace of it is gone. (See Chapter 16.)¹²

Genetic Fallacy — A logical error in which a belief is evaluated based on its origins rather than its actual merits. If someone argues, “This idea came from a bad source, therefore the idea itself is bad,” they have committed the genetic fallacy. McClymond’s central methodology in The Devil’s Redemption is genealogical: he traces universalism’s supposed roots in gnostic, kabbalistic, and esoteric traditions and argues that these origins discredit the doctrine. This book identifies this as a textbook genetic fallacy. Even if universalism had originated in gnostic circles (which this book disputes), that would not make it false. The proper way to evaluate universalism is to examine its biblical evidence, theological coherence, and logical arguments—which is exactly what this book does. (See Chapter 3.)¹³

Gnosticism — A diverse family of religious movements in the second and third centuries that emphasized secret spiritual knowledge (gnosis) as the path to salvation. Gnostic systems typically taught that the material world was created by an ignorant or evil lesser god (the demiurge), that human beings contain a divine spark trapped in matter, and that salvation comes through special knowledge that liberates the soul from the material prison. Most gnostic systems were not universalist—they typically reserved salvation for one class of people (the pneumatikoi, or “spiritual ones”), denied it to another class (the sarkikoi, or “fleshly ones”), and were ambiguous about a third class (the psychikoi, or “soulish ones”). McClymond argues that Christian universalism originated in gnostic thought. This book, drawing extensively on Ilaria Ramelli’s research, demonstrates that the patristic universalists (Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, Maximus) were not gnostic disciples but fierce opponents of gnosticism. Origen spent his career refuting gnostic teachings. Patristic universalism was an anti-gnostic move, not a gnostic one. (See Chapters 4, 5, 9.)¹⁴

Guilt by Association — A rhetorical strategy in which a position is discredited by associating it with unsavory people or movements, without actually refuting the position on its own merits. McClymond employs this strategy throughout The Devil’s Redemption, linking universalism to gnosticism, Kabbalah, the occult, Unitarianism, and other movements that his audience would regard negatively. The question this book consistently presses is not “Who believed this?” but “Is it true?” Even if universalism had been believed by every heretic in history (it hasn’t), that would not make it false. Arguments stand or fall on their merits. (See Chapter 3.)

Hades (Greek: Hadēs) — The Greek term for the general abode of the dead. In the New Testament, Hades corresponds roughly to the Old Testament concept of Sheol. It is not the final place of punishment (that is the lake of fire in Revelation 20). Hades is a temporary holding place where the dead await the final resurrection and judgment. In Luke 16:19–31, the rich man is conscious in Hades—suffering, yes, but not yet in his final state. Revelation 20:14 says that Hades itself will be thrown into the lake of fire—meaning Hades is emptied and abolished at the final judgment. The distinction between Hades (temporary) and the lake of fire (the final purifying encounter with God) is crucial for the universalist argument. The unsaved do not go to “hell” when they die; they go to Hades and await the judgment. (See Chapters 16, 18, 31.)¹⁵

Inclusivism — The belief that while salvation is accomplished exclusively through the work of Christ, it is possible for people to be saved by Christ’s work even without explicit knowledge of Him during their earthly life. Inclusivists hold that God may apply Christ’s atoning work to those who respond to whatever light they have received—through creation, conscience, or other religious traditions—even if they never hear the name of Jesus. Inclusivism represents a middle position between exclusivism/restrictivism and universalism. This book goes further than inclusivism by affirming both the postmortem opportunity and the eventual salvation of all. But inclusivism and universalism share the conviction that God’s saving reach extends beyond those who hear the gospel in this life. (See Chapters 2, 21.)¹⁶

Intermediate State — The condition of human persons between physical death and the final resurrection. This book affirms a conscious intermediate state: when a person dies, their immaterial soul continues to exist and is aware. Believers go to be with Christ in paradise (Luke 23:43; Phil. 1:23; 2 Cor. 5:8). Unbelievers go to Hades, a conscious holding place (Luke 16:19–31). Neither paradise nor Hades is the final state; both await the resurrection and the final judgment. The conscious intermediate state matters enormously for the universalist case because it means God’s relationship with every person continues after death. If the person is conscious and God is still present, then the conditions exist for ongoing repentance and transformation. (See Chapters 2, 21, 31.)¹⁷

Kabbalah — A tradition of Jewish mysticism that developed primarily in medieval Europe, particularly in twelfth- and thirteenth-century Provence and Spain, with later developments in sixteenth-century Safed. Kabbalistic thought features elaborate cosmological schemes, including the doctrine of tikkun (repair or restoration of the cosmos). McClymond argues that kabbalistic ideas about cosmic restoration influenced Christian universalism. This book responds that Kabbalah postdates patristic universalism by many centuries and therefore cannot be the source of Origen’s or Gregory’s theology. The pattern McClymond identifies—the hope for universal restoration—emerges naturally from any serious engagement with biblical monotheism and does not require a kabbalistic origin. (See Chapters 5, 7.)¹⁸

Kolasis (Greek: kolasis) — A Greek noun meaning “correction,” “pruning,” or “remedial punishment.” It is the word Jesus uses in Matthew 25:46 (kolasin aionion). The distinction between kolasis and timoria was well known in the ancient world. Aristotle drew the distinction explicitly in his Rhetoric: kolasis is punishment inflicted for the benefit of the one being punished (correction), while timoria is punishment inflicted for the satisfaction of the one who punishes (retribution). The fact that Jesus chose kolasis rather than timoria is deeply significant. He described the punishment of the goats as corrective, not retributive. If Jesus had meant to describe endless retributive torment, timoria was the word available to Him—and He did not use it. (See Chapter 17.)¹⁹

Lake of Fire — An image appearing in Revelation 19:20; 20:10, 14–15; and 21:8. In Revelation, the beast, the false prophet, the devil, death, Hades, and those whose names are not found in the book of life are all thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is described as “the second death” (Rev. 20:14; 21:8). ECT proponents read the lake of fire as a place of eternal conscious torment. CI proponents read it as a place of final destruction. The universalist reads it in light of the biblical theme of fire as purification (Mal. 3:2–3; 1 Cor. 3:13–15; Heb. 12:29) and in light of the overall trajectory of Revelation 21–22, where the gates of the New Jerusalem are never shut, the leaves of the tree of life heal the nations, and God makes all things new. The lake of fire is the final, most intense encounter with the holy love of God—a love that burns away everything that is not of God and purifies until restoration is complete. (See Chapter 18.)²⁰

Mishpat / Tsedaqah (Hebrew) — Two Hebrew words that together express the Old Testament concept of justice. Mishpat means “justice” or “judgment”—the act of setting things right, vindicating the oppressed, and correcting what has gone wrong. Tsedaqah means “righteousness”—the state of things being as they should be. Together, they describe a vision of justice that is restorative, not merely retributive. Biblical justice is not about balancing a cosmic ledger through punishment; it is about making things right. When God judges, His goal is tsedaqah—putting things back in order, restoring what was broken, healing what was damaged. The universalist argues that this understanding of justice, rooted in the Old Testament itself, supports a view of hell as remedial rather than terminal. God’s judgment is an expression of His justice, and His justice aims at restoration. (See Chapters 15, 17, 24.)²¹

Olam (Hebrew: ‘ōlām) — The Hebrew word most commonly translated “forever” or “everlasting” in the Old Testament. Like the Greek aion, olam fundamentally means a long, indefinite period of time—an age whose boundaries are hidden from view. It does not inherently mean “eternal” in the strict philosophical sense. Jonah uses olam for the “forever” he spent in the belly of the fish (Jonah 2:6)—but that “forever” lasted three days. The Mosaic covenant is described as an olam covenant, yet it was superseded by the new covenant. Circumcision is an olam ordinance, yet the New Testament declares it no longer binding. When olam was translated into Greek, the translators of the Septuagint chose aion and aionios—age-based terms. (See Chapter 15.)

Olethros (Greek: olethros) — A Greek noun meaning “destruction” or “ruin.” It appears in several New Testament judgment texts (1 Thess. 5:3; 2 Thess. 1:9; 1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 6:9). The word does not necessarily mean annihilation. In 1 Corinthians 5:5, Paul hands a man over to Satan “for the olethros of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.” Here olethros is explicitly remedial—the destruction of sinful patterns is the means by which the person is ultimately saved. The universalist reads this as a window into how Paul understands divine destruction more broadly: it targets what is wrong in a person in order to save the person. (See Chapter 15.)²²

Physicalism (Anthropological) — The view that human beings are entirely physical entities with no separate, immaterial soul. On this view, there is no “you” that survives the death of your body. Consciousness, personality, and identity are entirely products of the brain and nervous system. When the body dies, the person ceases to exist until God raises them at the resurrection. Some physicalist Christians argue for “resurrection without an intermediate state”—the person is dead (nonexistent) between death and resurrection. This book firmly rejects physicalism in favor of substance dualism. The physicalist view creates a serious problem for the universalist (and for any postmortem opportunity): if the person does not exist between death and resurrection, there is no person for God to relate to, purify, or restore during that period. Substance dualism preserves the continuity of the person and therefore the continuity of God’s redemptive work beyond death. (See Chapter 31.)²³

Postmortem Opportunity — The belief that God provides a genuine opportunity for salvation to persons after death. This is not “second chance” theology in the way critics often caricature it—for many people (those who never heard the gospel, those who died as infants, those in unreached people groups throughout history), it is the first genuine chance. The biblical basis includes 1 Peter 3:18–20 (Christ preached to the spirits in prison), 1 Peter 4:6 (the gospel was preached to the dead), and the descensus ad inferos tradition. James Beilby’s Postmortem Opportunity provides the most thorough recent academic treatment. The postmortem opportunity is the mechanism by which universal restoration can occur: God does not stop pursuing people at the moment of physical death. His love, His patience, and His offer of salvation continue as long as the person exists. For the universalist, this ongoing divine pursuit eventually prevails for every person. (See Chapters 2, 8, 21, 31.)²⁴

Recapitulatio (Latin; Greek: anakephalaiōsis) — “Recapitulation”—the gathering up or summing up of all things under one head. Irenaeus of Lyon (c. 130–202 AD) developed this into a major theological concept: Christ “recapitulated” the entire human story, entering into every stage of human life, undoing the damage of the fall, and restoring what Adam lost. For Irenaeus, Christ’s work is not merely about forgiving individual sins but about reversing the catastrophe of the fall at the deepest cosmic level. Paul uses the term in Ephesians 1:10—God’s plan is to “recapitulate all things in Christ.” The universalist reads the scope of this recapitulation as genuinely total: all things are gathered back into Christ, nothing is left outside. (See Chapters 14, 20, 23.)²⁵

Sheol (Hebrew: sh’ê’ōl) — The Old Testament term for the abode of the dead. In the Hebrew Bible, Sheol is the place where all the dead go—righteous and wicked alike (Gen. 37:35; Ps. 89:48; Eccl. 9:10). It is described as a shadowy, quiet place of diminished existence. Sheol is not hell in the later Christian sense. It is not a place of punishment for the wicked; it is simply the realm of the dead. Over time, Jewish thought developed a more differentiated afterlife (with distinct compartments for the righteous and the wicked), and by the New Testament period, Hades served as the Greek equivalent. Psalm 139:8 declares that even in Sheol, God is present. The universalist finds this significant: there is no place beyond God’s reach, not even death itself. (See Chapters 16, 18, 31.)²⁶

Substance Dualism — The philosophical and theological position that human beings are composed of two distinct kinds of reality: a material body and an immaterial soul (or spirit). The soul is not merely a function of the brain; it is a real, nonphysical substance that can exist apart from the body, though full human flourishing requires the union of both in the resurrection. Key biblical support includes Genesis 35:18 (Rachel’s soul departing), 1 Kings 17:21–22 (the child’s soul returning), Ecclesiastes 12:7 (the spirit returning to God), Matthew 10:28 (soul and body as separable), Luke 23:43 and 23:46 (Jesus committing His spirit to the Father and promising paradise), 2 Corinthians 5:1–8 (being away from the body and at home with the Lord), Philippians 1:23 (departing to be with Christ), and Revelation 6:9–11 (the conscious souls of the martyrs). This book affirms substance dualism but distinguishes it from Platonic dualism: the soul is not inherently immortal. God created the soul, and God could destroy it (Matt. 10:28). Its continued existence depends entirely on God’s will. The universalist affirms that God, in His love, will never exercise that ability because His purpose is always restoration, not destruction. Substance dualism is essential to the universalist case because it establishes that the person survives death and that God’s relationship with the person continues in the intermediate state—creating the conditions for the postmortem opportunity and eventual restoration. (See Chapter 31.)²⁷

Tartarus (Greek: tartaros) — A term borrowed from Greek mythology, used only once in the New Testament (2 Pet. 2:4), where God is said to have cast rebellious angels into Tartarus to be kept until the judgment. In Greek mythology, Tartarus was the deepest part of the underworld, reserved for the most severe punishments. Peter’s use of the term does not endorse the full mythological picture but uses it to describe a place of temporary confinement for fallen angels—they are held there until the judgment, not as their final fate. The universalist notes the temporary language: Tartarus is a holding place, not an eternal destination. (See Chapters 16, 18.)

Timoria (Greek: timōria) — A Greek noun meaning “retribution,” “vengeance,” or “retributive punishment.” Aristotle distinguished it from kolasis: whereas kolasis is punishment for the benefit of the one being punished, timoria is punishment for the satisfaction of the one inflicting it. In Matthew 25:46, Jesus used kolasis, not timoria. This choice is significant because it indicates that the punishment Jesus described is corrective in nature and purpose. Had Jesus intended to describe retributive, purposeless torment, timoria was available and He did not select it. The only New Testament use of timoria is in Hebrews 10:29, in a passage about the severity of rejecting God’s grace—even there, the universalist reads this as a warning, not a description of the final state. (See Chapter 17.)²⁸

Universalism (Liberal) — The belief that all people will be saved, typically grounded not in biblical exegesis but in a general confidence in human goodness, the benevolence of God understood in sentimental terms, or the assumption that a loving God simply would not allow anyone to suffer. Liberal universalism often downplays or denies the reality of sin, the necessity of the atonement, the need for personal faith, and the reality of judgment. It tends to be pluralistic—treating all religions as equally valid paths to God. Historically, liberal universalism led to Unitarianism in some cases (as McClymond documents). This book distances itself completely from liberal universalism. Conservative biblical universalism shares almost nothing with liberal universalism except the hope that all will be saved—and the reasons for that hope are entirely different. (See Chapters 2, 6.)²⁹

Universalism (Conservative Biblical) — The belief that God will ultimately bring every human being to genuine, willing faith in Jesus Christ and full restoration—not by overriding human freedom, but by the persistent, patient, purifying power of His love working through the postmortem opportunity. Conservative biblical universalism (also called “evangelical universalism,” “hopeful universalism,” or “biblical apokatastasis”) differs from liberal universalism in every important respect. It affirms the full authority of Scripture, Trinitarian theology, Chalcedonian Christology, substitutionary atonement, the absolute necessity of faith in Christ, the reality and severity of divine judgment, and the horror of sin. It holds that hell is real, painful, and terrifying—but remedial, not terminal. Key scholars include Thomas Talbott (The Inescapable Love of God), Robin Parry (The Evangelical Universalist), David Bentley Hart (That All Shall Be Saved), Ilaria Ramelli (The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis), Sharon Baker (Razing Hell), and Brad Jersak (Her Gates Will Never Be Shut). Among the early church fathers, Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, Clement of Alexandria, Maximus the Confessor, and Isaac of Nineveh held to some form of this hope. This is the position defended throughout this book. (See Chapters 1, 2, 32.)³⁰