I’m somewhat perplexed by what you mean here. I do think that recipients need to be united with Christ in order to obtain salvation. However, that’s actualised/realised at a different time for each individual (Do you agree that’s how it happens on earth with non-believers becoming believers?).
For example, I’d be wrong to point to the Prodigal Son when he was in the pig pen and say, “He’s not reconciled to his father, therefore he will never be!” However, it’s still true that he must return & repent before he can be reconciled. So the Bible has to continually remind us of the means “return & repent” (although in our case this is done with the Holy Spirit’s help), before it can state the “quality/result” which is reconciliation, sanctification, never ending life with God, etc.
I don’t think Universal Salvation is in danger, it’s just traditional theology assumes that it’s only believers in this life, whereas, I’d say it’s only believers full stop.
Do you find these to analogies helpful?
Just because there’s only one ferry across the river, doesn’t mean everyone won’t cross in it eventually.
Just because it says, “only those who go in the ferry will get to the other side”, doesn’t imply everyone won’t cross.
I’ve changed it from bridge to ferry, as the ferry does the action, and makes people more passive in the event, which I suspect is closer to the truth.
I’ve had an idea, try this thought experiment: Imagine the implications of God electing everyone. Ask yourself, “Is He allowed to?”, “Does increasing the number of the elect normally change your theodicy (it shouldn’t do, e.g. if there was only 10 elect vs 100 elect, that shouldn’t effect it at all)?”
Did that help?