No, I did not create the picture. But I did respond to it. Unfortunately, I’m not comfortable doing so in public on my blog because I (might) be endorsing UR. Still working through my thoughts on Talbott’s little gem.
Anyway. The photo I got from my agnostic friend. Below is my line by line response to the photo and subsequently to him. I’d love your thoughts. 
**Line one:
**
I’m not certain I disagree. However, the verses cited in support do not necessarily support an eternal conscious existence. The verse cited in Romans specifically mentions death, not hell. Revelation is an ambiguous passage that simply states that there are people outside the gates – gates that never shut.
This does not necessarily support the idea of “hell” as “hell” or hades, is thrown into the lake of fire earlier in chapter 20. So hell technically doesn’t exist anymore.
Which leaves it open for a possible discussion as to what happens. Many would disagree, but I think there is plenty of room for interpretation.
**Line two:
**
There are MANY other verses that support the idea of God desiring/willing that all men would be saved. Arminians wouldn’t disagree, nor would Calvinists (though they have a different take on the phrase “all men.”)
I Timothy 2:4 speaks of God’s desire to save all men/ Romans 11:32 speaks of having mercy upon all/ Lamentations 3:22 & 3:31-33 speak about God not rejecting forever and being bountiful in love/ The (almost annoying) cliche verse John 3:16.
I’m not certain much more needs to be said. Just that God’s love is far greater than one verse.
**Line three:
**
Wikipedia is not a necessarily valid source of information. I prefer redditt. There are many books written about Biblical prophecy, and simply reading them for yourself is best.
**Line four:
**
I would argue that there are some great reasons (somewhat controversial reasons) that support this claim. But, sure, I don’t disagree. I personally view the atonement through the Christus Victor model, but not at the exclusion of other models.
**Line five:
**
I’m not certain Luke 13 is necessarily a parable or not. Instead, it seems that again Jesus is drawing a specific parallel between the people who claimed his name and did not act according to his teachings and the people who acted in accordance with Christ. In fact, I think verse 30 (which was not cited in the footnotes) sums up the entire thrust of the passage:
"Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last.”
This fits perfectly with the parable about the sheep and goats in Matthew 25. It does not seem to speak specifically about eschatological judgment, or even “hell”, but of right action inspired by the Holy Spirit. This is, of course, based on the brief memory of an F.F. Bruce commentary on the NT where I think he mentioned something along those lines. I could be mistaken, but it seems to make some sort of sense right now. If shown wrong, I’ll re-write.
**Line six, seven and eight:
**
I think all Christians would dispute this. My analysis is very brief and simplistic, and I attempt no caricature.
Calvinists would say that God chose specific people in accordance with his purpose and for his glory. This includes only the elect. They would say that God only intended to save the remnant, and thus this satisfies his plan.
*See John Piper, Wayne Grudem and Gordon Clark.
*
Arminians would affirm that God loves everyone, but allows for human freedom and rejection. God does accomplish his plans, but human freedom trumps His ultimate desire for the salvation of all men. His plan to save all according to his foreknowledge is complete.
*See Roger Olson, Jacob Arminius and Thomas Oden.
*
Universalists (specifically Christian and exclusively through Jesus) affirm that God accomplishes his entire will, and that He factored human freedom into his sovereign will. This includes the simple fact that He will save everyone in the end.
*See Thomas Talbott, George MacDonald and Robin Parry.
*
All of the three systems triumphs over Satan, as Satan is genuinely defeated in the end – either through imprisonment, ultimate death or reconciliation.
So. Either God doesn’t want to save everyone, or some people have the God-given strength/courage/rebelliousness to reject God, or God will ultimately save everyone. I strongly lean towards either death or restoration, and lately restoration seem more plausible.
Either way, the question is answered and the assertion is ultimately insufficient in it’s overall critique.
–Nick