And I might add - an annihilation interpretation - if we lay out all the options on the table (along with some type of exile interpretation, if we follow the thoughts of Joshua Ryan Butler).
WHY… 
What is it about “universalism” per se that you would love it to be true?
STP,
We all have to interpret passage A in light of passage B very often. Otherwise, the Bible sometimes seems to contradict itself. If you’re going on sheer volume, Christian Universalism has to do this a LOT less often than ECT or even CI. There are probably at least ten times as many scriptures which seem on the surface to teach the Blessed Hope as there are that seem on the surface to teach ECT. UR, imo, ties the entire Biblical narrative together in a way that neither CI nor ECT can accomplish. I was personally shocked at the overwhelming preponderance of UR verses in scripture.
You can find a very good collection of these passages in Gerry Beauchemin’s book, “Hope Beyond Hell.” It’s available free here: hopebeyondhell.net/ or, if you want a Kindle version, go to Amazon. The .mobi file is also free, or was the last time I checked. The book starts out with a story which I found very thought provoking, but the bulk of the writing is focused on the Biblical case for UR. He also looks at the “hell verses.” I’ll disclaim now. I don’t see all the verses he lists as pointing to UR in particular and you probably won’t, either. Nevertheless, the ones I DO find convincing are so very many as to dwarf the numbers of the ones I felt were a stretch.
Blessings, Cindy
I hate ‘infernalism too’…it bothers me to hear ‘eternal hell’ preached…it’s maligning the beautiful Lord I believe in and worship…I do not know why they come here and preach ‘eternal damnation’…but, it’s allowed…maybe to remind us Universalists to be thankful we are free from such an obscene twisted perverted and psychologically damaging belief system.
Let me now add a bit to the Zombie analogy, so we can “put all the cards on the table.”
I look at the hell topic, with 3 possible outcomes:
Universalism
Annihilation
Isolation or exile (i.e. much better position - in my opinion - than ETC)
All these are positions one can argue for, within the context of the Protestant scriptural canon. Regardless of outcome, perhaps it’s how humans respond to God’s all embracing love? Let’s explore this a bit more.
Hell is Heaven experienced differently
Or we can take this view extract from What is Orthodox Hell?
In Universalism in the Orthodox Church, we find these interesting statements:
But as we discuss Annihilationism, we will find
So in reality, my position on hell is a hybrid of that of the Eastern Orthodox and Tiffany Snow’s vision, where their energy **might **become part of the new earth. What counts is how they respond to God’s attempt to save them, by this over powering love in Christ. Hell is Heaven experienced differently, as the Eastern Orthodox express it. Perhaps it is the Dark Night of the Soul of St John of the Cross.
How do we experience God’s love in hell?
or
Or (in the The Mercy of Hell? A Review of The Skeletons in God’s Closet (Part 1))
More on this in the interview Facing the Skeletons in God’s Closet and the Hope of Holy War Joshua Ryan Butler in The Skeletons in God’s Closet: The Mercy of Hell, the Surprise of Judgment.
Notice I like Butler’s position over that of eternal conscious torment. There’s also the experiences of Tiffany Snow, who had a near death experience. She became a contemporary Christian healer and stigma bearer (i.e. in the Old Catholic Church tradition). Here is her perspective on what happens three weeks after death at After Death
Therefore universalism, annihilation and eternal, self-imposed exile, are all humane options (from a human standpoint), on how we response to God’s all embracing love, where God finally becomes “all in all”. And would God know how humans would respond, or do we take some option like Open Theism ?
Or let’s put it this way. A doctor comes to you with a new scientific wonder drug. This drug can put you in an eternal blissful state, and make you exceptionally strong, smart and fast, along with being immune to all diseases. But the drug could also kill you or put you into an internal, imaginary world, where you don’t experience the real reality - perhaps it’s the “real” reality of the Matrix movies, that becomes your new reality. And the doctor might not know if it would work on everyone 100% of the time. Would you take it? In this analogy, we have the possibilities of universalism, annihilation and eternal, self-imposed exile. And we can give the same pill to the Zombies and see what would become their “new reality.”
SOME come here to preach infernalism, and then some others come here because they have honest questions. It’s important to recognize the difference.
You need to define “infernalism”, and which online dictionary it came from. I can’t find it in any conventional online dictionaries. Is the spelling right? 
I even consulted the Castalia and Gallifrey intergalactic dictionaries. 
all very interesting, Randy…fascinating to hear the Eastern Orthodox take on things and the annihilationist take on it etc etc…but, I prefer to simply believe Isaiah 45: 23 which says,
“I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness And will not turn back,
That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance.”
God has sworn by Himself,this truth is so certain that He can swear by no other…that ALL will ultimately swear allegiance to Him.ALL will ultimately be saved…that’s really ALL I need to know.
funny clip !..hahaa !
Well, from a human perspective, it sure would be nice to know all of my family, friends, and even those with whom I have no contact or knowledge of, that all us undeserving sinners would be saved from hell and would experience joy with God forever. I imagine this is similar to why you love universalism, isn’t it?
I really hope I don’t come across as preachy. I apologize if I do. My aim isn’t to argue or convince anyone here. As I understand it, this is a safe place for me and others like me to explore these ideas, and dialogue about them, so that we would grow and be challenged.
Im all good with that, as long as we can mutually respect different beliefs
Well STP… how is it that you by your own acknowledgment, an “undeserving” sinner, and from your own fallen “human perspective” would assume, imagine or think that you could possibly have MORE LOVE IN YOUR HEART for your fellows to desire such a “joy” than does God have in His heart for the same??
**
IOW… IF out of the goodness of your own heart you could want such a “joy” for all, how so NOT God… are you greater than He?**
You could do well to consider the implications of your position!
Yeah, I have thought about this. And it is a fairly compelling question. Maybe even a biblical one.
But where I am right now, it’s not a convincing question. Since God is greater, His ways are higher, His thoughts are deeper, so who can comprehend His thoughts? So perhaps it’s not out of the goodness of my heart that I want this for all, but out of selfishness. But God, in His wisdom, and for His glory, allows some to experience His wrath (Romans 9:22-24).
I don’t know. I do know that I’m not too interested in arguments that rely on my judgment of what is and isn’t good, because my judgment could very well be tainted by my sin. So if your question has any weight to it, it’s only because it’s rooted in the biblical question, and it’s answer must also come from Scripture.
Luke 11:11-13 raises a similar question. “What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a serpent; or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!”
The main thing that pops out at me, though, is that even though the heavenly Father is clearly revealed as greater than we are, He still only gives the Holy Spirit to those who ask. And even though it’s not spelled out clearly, it seems like there’s an implication that not all ask. “To those” implies that there are yet others who don’t fall into the category of “those.”
So, yes, God is greater, but that doesn’t mean He must conform to my idea of good, but His own. He gives good gifts (the Holy Spirit) to those who ask.
Is there another passage that addresses this idea (that God is greater and His goodness is greater), but doesn’t limit it to those who ask? Or, perhaps, still limits it to those who ask, but says that all will ask?
There sure is. It is in the form of a parable. You might know it… You know, the Good Samaritan. 
- If I recall correctly, Jesus didn’t wake up the good Samaritan and say “Hey there buddy, just want to ask you, do you want to be saved? You MUST SAY YES before I can do this!!!” Nope, he picked him up and paid all his medical bills. That, is very similar to the Lost Coin. How could a coin know it is a lost? It can’t… But our Lord will seek them out.
Besides, if you really read John 3:16 and 17 you have to come the conclusion that you were once this ‘condemned’ person. You were lost before you saved… So why can’t others be lost and saved later? I mean, if you are writing off those who are not saved based on their current condition, isn’t that a bit hypocritical, since, say, 20 years prior you might have been in that same condition? And, why would death be a barrier? I suspect you may say “Because then it will be obvious” - That didn’t seem to stop our Lord when he revealed himself to Thomas, who wouldn’t believe until he seen for his own eyes? Unless you believe Thomas is lost, because he wouldn’t believe until it was made plain to him… Death is no barrier to God and if the character of the person is the same pre-death and post-death then I fail to see how it would be ‘too late’ after death. Perhaps too late for something, like too late to know you did this before seeing. Just like it was too late for Thomas to receiving the blessing of “Blessed are those who have NOT seen, yet believe” - Thomas lost out on that, but most don’t seem to think he lost his salvation!!! How absurd. Yet that is exactly how most feel about those who die without believing.
Randy quoted:
This quote reminded my of C.S. Lewis’s Narnian Chronicles. In one of the books, the dwarves who did not believe in Aslan’s Country, nonetheless ended up there. But they thought they were still in the stinking stable. When offered delicious food, they rejected it believing it to be animal food. When offered choice wine, they threw it away in disgust, thinking it was urine from the troughs behind the animals.
It’s not that I don’t think God’s greatness or goodness can’t be understood. It’s just that we should understand them as Scripture defines them rather than our reasoning might define them. I’ve talked with a lot of people who reason very different them me on a multitude of issues. So which one is right? The one that reasons according to Scripture. Scripture is the standard by which everything else is judged right and wrong.
God wouldn’t play out the scenario you described because it’s contrary to how He’s described Himself in Scripture. He is the God of truth (Deuteronomy 32:4), and He doesn’t lie (Numbers 23:19).
Today I was thinking about our pastor visitor today, as I read this article from the evangelical Patheos blog. It’s entitled The Summit Lecture Series: Does Jesus Love Muslims? with Nabeel Qureshi. I found the 7 minute video entitled a Muslim Christian dialogue, friendship and debate interesting:
When the Muslim talks about debating a Christian friend, the Christian responds about the folks in Jesus time being multi-lingo. And that point hit home, as I balance English, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian and Mandarin. A motivation for me to learn Russian and Mandarin, is to read the literature in the original languages.
You know what? This week I spend a couple days helping a Muslim physician friend with his computer. And tomorrow I visit a Hindu family I know. And both are familiar with my Christian faith. So if the Muslim in the video can debate and be friends with the Christian, then we can be friends with anyone on this forum - who tries to behave in a Christlike manner.
About 2 weeks ago, I’m over at a friends house, who is a Wheaton college professor. He has his PhD in Linguistics from the University of Chicago. His wife is a medical doctor. One gentlemen there was a missionary, who is teaching a Hebrew course in Spanish, down in Costa Rica. He talks of friendly debates between friends who are Catholic, health and prosperity gospel believers, Mennonites, etc. And a Mennonite was at the gathering. Imagine talking to:
A Mennonite that “war is right”
A health and prosperity gospel believer that “Christians need to suffer in health and finances”
A Roman Catholic that only the bible is true - in and of itself.
A Pentecostal that the gifts of the spirit disappeared when the disciples disappeared
Watch the Muslim video above - it’s fascinating.
Just stay away from small talk! Mr. Data is getting the hang of it, as he studies from a master
And enjoy this Nerd vs Geek rap debate, as I prepare to watch the new Star Wars movie (imagine if we had a bunch of Nerds and Geeks on this forum. The admins and moderators would have their hands full - keeping the peace) :
God’s goodness IS higher than ours, and His love IS greater than ours. Different, too–to whit: MORE (not less) good and MORE (not less) loving.
But since you do not accept “man’s reasoning” here it is from the mouth of our Lord:
Very true, Qaz.
Granted, you agree the simple question I put to you is… “fairly compelling” and “maybe even a biblical one” –– but then “where I am right now, it’s not a convincing question.” Well, where are you right now STP that a compelling and biblical question leaves you unconvinced?
It would make a total nonsense of Scripture for God to say one thing therein and man “not be convinced” as to its common sense understanding and so setting such aside on the pretence that His ways/thoughts being far above ours and never the twain shall meet.
So how could you as a “pastor” with all honesty preach grace and not know your own heart as to whether you are motivated out of selfishness or goodness? But even then, does it even matter? As is indicative in the NT but that “Christ is preached!” (Phil1:15-18) IOW… you can’t use your own equivocating disposition in seemingly (or in effect) downgrading the grace of God so as to fence in your own doctrinal sacred cows.
Nowhere in that entire context is a postmortem rendering applicably necessary.
Consider these…