First I offer the disclaimer that I am not sure what you perceive as the difference between Universal Restoration, Universal Reconciliation, and Universalism. That said, I'll do my best to explain. I was weighing your reaction against a related topic.
Most Calvinists that I have met (or read) are staunch defenders of Eternal Conscious Torment. I have met the one or two that uphold the literal destruction of the wicked to ashes, which does lessen the whole injustice angle that this thread is discussing, because at least then God shows man the same consideration as every other created creature, the mercy inherent in death. God created cattle with no other options than to graze and live and die, but he does not torture 90% of the cattle over a never-ending barbecue because He chose to be offended by the way He made them.
Now with the disclaimer that I consider Calvinism to be a massive twisting of the scripture and against the whole gospel, I think that if it was followed consistently that it would lead to Universalism... or perhaps as you would say, Universal Restoration. It does clearly say that God is willing that all men should repent and come to a knowledge of the truth, that God is not willing that any should perish, but all should come to eternal life, that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. If Calvinism is true and God can and will make anything and everything happen as he prefers best, then the only logical outcome for the Calvinist is that of Universal Restoration. God wants all to be saved. Ergo, all will be saved. So the consistent Calvinist becomes a believer in Universal Restoration.
However, I have also noticed in my observation of Universalist forums that pretty much all of them seem to embrace the denial of free will aspect that (to me) defines Calvinism. I think that the Universalist has no other option, because if God did create man with free will, then that free will (by definition) could be used to reject his creator. The Universalist says that no one can for ever reject the Creator, so therefore free will must be an illusion. So the philosophical Univeralist must essentially adopt Calvinism and the denial of free will.
As to which is the cause and which is the effect, I suppose it depends on the person. So I was wondering as to your personal experience and perspective, which element was the foundation and which was built on top of the other. The application would be as follows: assuming your faith was biblical, would biblical evidence against Universal Reconciliation leave your Calvinism intact? Or what if the hypothetical situation were reversed, and you were persuaded that not all things were yet determined... would this still allow for faith in Universal Reconciliation?
Like I said earlier, even if I do not agree I at least appreciate your consistency.
Thank you for your response.
The fact that there is no such thing as chance, for me personally, is utter truth.
My faith was not initially derived from scripture of any religion.
However; with that being said, universal reconciliation has been, thus far, verified by all scriptures I have read.
For me, one isn't built upon the other exactly, but both do work together.
As far as the will of man is concerned; I've been doing a little research and find the term free will to be not very accurate. This is verified by the fact that though I know of the direction I should go, and the reasons/ benefits of said direction, I can't, by my own will, steer myself in that direction. People with strong addictions most often continue in that addiction even after realizing it is wholly negative. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm not certain if people have a technical free will... Will... Yes, utterly free will.... Maybe not.
Strictly scripturally speaking; both the concept that all is ordained, and the concept that all will ultimately return to GOD are represented equally.
As far as eternal torment is concerned;
It is my belief that the word hell in the bible is a misrepresentation, and generally speaking, hell is equal to utter and final destruction, and not eternal torture. The destruction is eternal, yet doesn't equate to infinite torture for finite crimes. One cannot justifiably state that GOD is both benevolent, and tortures souls for eternity.
It is also written that hell is for a term, and that all will be changed including earth and heaven and hell. After the judgement there will be no heaven or earth or hell. There will be GOD, and the Will of GOD. Whatever new creation GOD forms will come forth as well, but that is neither here nor there as it will be wholly of GOD.
Hope that helps, sorry if it didn't. Please feel free to ask anything and I will gladly answer what I can.
I wish you the best,
Peace
Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk