Lexicon

G2433 - hilaskomai

Strong's: G2433 · BLB lookup Pronunciation: hil-as'-kom-ahee Part of speech: verb (deponent, middle/passive form, active meaning) Root: from hilaos ("propitious, gracious, favorable") Noun cognates: G2434 - hilasmos, hilasmos ("propitiation"; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:10); G2435 - hilasterion, hilastērion ("propitiation, mercy-seat"; Rom 3:25; Heb 9:5) Hebrew equivalent (LXX): kāphar (to cover, atone), the central Day-of-Atonement verb of Leviticus 16. Hilaskomai and hilastērion translate kāphar and its derived noun kappōret (mercy seat / ark-cover) throughout the LXX. NT occurrences: the verb appears only twice (Luke 18:13; Heb 2:17); the cognate nouns hilasmos (2×) and hilastērion (2×) carry the word group's wider NT weight.

Semantic range (Thayer / BDAG)

To propitiate / appease / render favorable, the wrath-turning sense; an atoning sacrifice turns aside divine anger by addressing the offense that grounds it. This is the dominant LXX sense and the Leon Morris-defended NT sense.
To expiate / cover / cleanse, the sin-removing sense; the focus is on the sin removed rather than the wrath turned aside. This is the C.H. Dodd-defended reading.
To be merciful, gracious, propitious, a more passive sense, often middle/passive in form: "be merciful to me" (Luke 18:13, hilasthēti moi, the tax collector's plea). The construction is identical to Septuagintal prayer language (e.g., 2 Kgs 5:18, "may YHWH be propitious to your servant").

The semantic range maps onto a single underlying logic: divine favor is rendered (toward the worshipper) precisely because the offense is covered (taken away) by sacrificial substitution. The propitiation-vs-expiation question asks which of the two aspects is in view in the verb's primary force, the answer, on the Reformed-evangelical reading, is both, with propitiation as the structurally prior moment that requires expiation as its means.

Theological force, the propitiation-expiation debate

The lexeme stands at the center of the 20th-century propitiation-vs-expiation debate.

C.H. Dodd (The Bible and the Greeks, 1935; commentary on Romans, 1932) argued that the LXX translators drained the Greek wrath-aversion language of its pagan content when they used the hilas- word group to translate Hebrew kāphar. On Dodd's reading, the underlying logic is sin-cleansing, not wrath-turning, and translations like the RSV's "expiation" at Romans 3:25 and 1 John 2:2 / 4:10 are doctrinally and lexically correct. Dodd's reading shaped the RSV, the early NEB, and a generation of mainline-Protestant atonement teaching that downplayed divine wrath as an Old-Testament category foreign to the gospel.

Leon Morris (The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross, 1955) decisively reversed the consensus. Morris demonstrated that:

The LXX usage retains wrath-aversion as a constitutive aspect, not merely a discarded shell. Hilaskomai translates kāphar in contexts where divine wrath is explicitly in view (Num 16:46-48, where Aaron's atoning act stops the plague-wrath; Ps 78:38, "He, being compassionate, atoned for their iniquity and did not destroy them").
The NT contexts presuppose divine wrath against sin as the doctrinal background, Romans 1:18-3:20 develops the wrath-of-God argument that Rom 3:25's hilastērion answers; 1 John 4:10's hilasmos presupposes the alienation it removes.
The Reformed-evangelical reading retains both moments: Christ's atonement expiates sin (covers it, removes it) and thereby propitiates God (turns aside His wrath against it). The two are not rivals but aspects of the same act.

D.A. Carson, John Stott (The Cross of Christ, 1986), and the NIV's choice of "sacrifice of atonement" with a "propitiation" footnote represent the post-Morris evangelical consensus.

Stream 1, The publican's plea (Luke 18:13)

Luke 18:13 gives the verb's only NT use in personal-prayer form: ho theos, hilasthēti moi tō hamartōlō ("God, be propitiated [be merciful, atone] toward me, the sinner"). The construction is passive imperative, hilasthēti, and the worshipper appeals for the divine wrath-aversion to be applied to himself.

Critically: the prayer is offered in the temple, during the hour of incense (Luke 18:10), which Luke's first-century audience would recognize as the very hour the priest performs the daily atoning offering on behalf of the people (Exod 30:7-8; Lk 1:9-10). The tax collector's plea is asking for the application of the Day-of-Atonement coverage to himself personally. The justification verdict that follows ("this man went down to his house justified", Lk 18:14) confirms the request was answered. The verse is the load-bearing Synoptic anchor for forensic-justification language and for the imputation-by-propitiation pattern Paul develops at Romans 3:21-26.

Stream 2, The high-priestly atonement (Hebrews 2:17)

Heb 2:17 gives the verb's only active-purpose NT use: eis to hilaskesthai tas hamartias tou laou ("to make propitiation for the sins of the people"). The construction is infinitive of purpose, the incarnation's purpose-clause includes the priestly act of hilaskesthai. The verb's accusative direct-object is hamartias ("sins"), making explicit that the propitiation operates on the sins (the expiation-aspect) for the wrath-aversion (the propitiation-aspect) to be effected.

The Hebrews 2:17 use establishes the incarnation-priesthood-atonement chain that the rest of the epistle develops (4:14-16; 7:23-28; 9:11-14, 24-28; 10:11-18). The verb is then taken up by the noun-cognate hilastērion at Hebrews 9:5 (the mercy-seat) and the synoptic theology of the cognates' nouns hilasmos and hilastērion across the NT.

Stream 3, The noun-cognates (Rom 3:25; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:10; Heb 9:5)

The verb's two-occurrence sparseness is supplemented by the noun-cognates, which carry the heavier NT weight:

Romans 3:25, hilastērion (noun, accusative). God set forth Christ as a propitiation (or, on some readings, as the propitiation-place / mercy-seat) in His blood, to demonstrate God's righteousness. The lexical-grammatical debate over whether hilastērion names the act (propitiation) or the place (mercy seat, kappōret) is technical, but both readings preserve the substitutionary atonement structure.
1 John 2:2, hilasmos (noun, nominative). Christ Himself is the hilasmos concerning our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world's. The verse anchors the personal-and-cosmic scope of the propitiation.
1 John 4:10, hilasmos (noun, accusative). The Father sent the Son to be the hilasmos for our sins; the verse establishes the propitiation-initiated-by-love structure (4:10 reads "in this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son...").
Hebrews 9:5, hilastērion (noun, accusative). The mercy-seat in the Holy of Holies; the term anchors the Day-of-Atonement / Leviticus 16 typology that the propitiation language presupposes.

The four noun-occurrences plus the two verb-occurrences yield six NT word-group occurrences, all converging on Christ's substitutionary atoning death as the act that turns away divine wrath by removing sin.

Stream 4, The Septuagint background (Exod 25; Lev 16; Num 16; Ps 78)

The NT hilas- word group is inseparable from its LXX background:

Exodus 25:17-22 (LXX), poiēseis hilastērion epithema ("you shall make a propitiation-cover/mercy-seat"); the kappōret of the Ark of the Covenant becomes hilastērion in Greek. This is the lexical bridge to Romans 3:25 and Hebrews 9:5.
Leviticus 16 (LXX), the Day of Atonement chapter. Kāphar (translated exilaskomai in LXX) saturates the chapter; the high priest atones for the holy place, the altar, the priests, and the people through the bull-and-goat blood-rite. This is the typological background of Hebrews' priestly Christology.
Numbers 16:46-48, Aaron stands between the dead and the living with the censer; the verb exilaskomai names the act that stops the plague-wrath. This is Morris's load-bearing wrath-aversion proof-text.
Psalm 78:38 (LXX 77:38), "He, being compassionate, atoned for their iniquity and did not destroy them, and many times He turned away His anger." Morris's lexical anchor for the propitiation reading: atoned for / did not destroy / turned away anger.

The Reformed-evangelical case for propitiation rests on the lexical continuity of the hilas- word group from LXX (where wrath-aversion is undeniable) into NT (where the same word group describes Christ's atoning work).

Notable verses

NT verb-uses (the two)

Luke 18.13, hilasthēti moi tō hamartōlō ("be propitious to me, the sinner"); the tax collector's plea
Hebrews 2.17, eis to hilaskesthai tas hamartias tou laou ("to make propitiation for the sins of the people")

NT noun-cognate uses (hilasmos)

1 John 2.2, autos hilasmos estin peri tōn hamartiōn hēmōn ("He Himself is the propitiation for our sins")
1 John 4.10, apesteilen ton huion autou hilasmon peri tōn hamartiōn hēmōn ("He sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins")

NT noun-cognate uses (hilastērion)

Romans 3.25-26, hon proetheto ho theos hilastērion ("whom God set forth as a propitiation")
Hebrews 9:5, hyperanō de autēs Cheroubin doxēs kataskiazonta to hilastērion ("above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat")

Old Testament / LXX background

Exod 25:17-22 (LXX), the mercy seat as hilastērion
Leviticus 16, the Day of Atonement; exilaskomai throughout
Num 16:46-48, Aaron's censer; exilaskomai stops the plague
Ps 78:38 / LXX 77:38, "He, being compassionate, atoned for their iniquity"

Patristic / scholarly note

Athanasius (De Incarnatione 6-9, 20) develops the hilaskomai logic without separating its expiation and propitiation aspects: the incarnation pays the debt of sin (expiation) and thereby turns aside the corruption-and-death that sin owes (propitiation, reframed in Christus Victor terms). Anselm (Cur Deus Homo, 1098) takes up the satisfaction-theory development on this exegetical ground: divine honor requires either satisfaction or punishment; Christ's atoning death provides the satisfaction the hilas- word group names.

Reformation engagement. Calvin (Institutes II.16-17; Commentary on Romans, on 3:25) reads Romans 3:25's hilastērion as the central New Testament locus for penal-substitutionary atonement, with the LXX kappōret/kāphar background determining the lexical force. Calvin and the Reformed tradition do not separate propitiation from expiation; the act removes sin in order to turn aside wrath.

The 20th-century debate. C.H. Dodd's expiation-only reading dominated mainline Protestant scholarship 1935-1955 and shaped RSV (1946/1952), early NEB, and the Bultmannian school. Leon Morris (The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross, 1955; The Atonement: Its Meaning and Significance, 1983) led the evangelical recovery, with Roger Nicole, D.A. Carson, John Stott (The Cross of Christ, 1986), and Henri Blocher building the contemporary consensus. The NIV, ESV, and CSB all preserve "propitiation" or "sacrifice of atonement" at Rom 3:25 / 1 Jn 2:2; 4:10, against the RSV's "expiation."

Modern lexical work. BDAG (3rd ed., 2000) lists "propitiate, conciliate" as the verb's primary gloss, with "expiate, wipe out" as a sub-sense; the entry retains both aspects. Moulton-Milligan's papyri evidence confirms the wrath-aversion sense was alive in Koine Greek outside Jewish-Christian contexts. The current scholarly consensus is post-Morris: the hilas- word group's NT use names propitiation-via-expiation, with both aspects load-bearing.

The doctrinal payoff is decisive against moral-influence-only atonement theories (Abelard; classical liberal Protestantism; some contemporary progressive theologies) that drain the cross of substitutionary wrath-aversion. The lexical evidence simply does not permit it.

Verses in this codex

See Obsidian's backlinks pane for every verse page linking here. Anchors: Luke 18.13 (the tax collector's plea), Hebrews 2.17 (high-priestly atonement), Romans 3.25-26 (the central NT hilastērion text), 1 John 2.2 / 1 John 4.10 (the hilasmos nouns), Hebrews 9:5 (the mercy seat).