Joe121589 wrote:I am asking this from an Universalist perspective. Considering that much of Universalism rests on moral ground, and the rejection of infernalism rests on moral repulsion. Basically is God able to do what he wants, whether its to any benefit, or is he bound to some moral code that prevents him from harming people? There is a third philosophy of a kind of pantheism, where God is the collective desire of all humanity.
You're asking the Euthyphro Dilemma, from Socrates (though originally he asked it about the gods; but it applies to a single God Most High, too, which is how it has been usually applied afterward).
Much of the unique point to trinitarian theism (and admittedly binitarian theism) is the idea that the one and only ground of all existence (the ground of being) is a mutually supporting self-sacrificial interpersonal relationship. Thus the ground of all being (even the ground of the ground of all being!) is essentially love being actively and eternally fulfilled. The greatest power isn't the power to merely cause effects, which can be easily depersonalizing, but the power of distinct persons to love one another in service for one another.
God on this theory doesn't only command morality, and doesn't only do morality, and doesn't require a moral standard superior to God, and doesn't require relating to a not-God reality in order to be moral. God is essentially
morality, and not in a merely static way (if that was even possible) but in an always-intentionally active way.
Which has massive implications for universal salvation, including a theologically unique level of assurance (though if lesser theologies are true instead universal salvation could still be true and perhaps even assured.) God won't ever act in such a way as to permanently break interpersonal communion between persons, although He may tolerate or even act to bring about temporary breaks (between created persons) in order to get other things done. That would be for God to act against the principle action of God's own self-existence. Theoretically God could
do that, but not practically
do so and continue to exist as God -- and if God self-annihilates that way then all reality, including our past, present, and future, also ceases to exist. So we wouldn't be here to even talk about the theoretical possibility, though we can acknowledge it (and deny it will ever happen).
That's a somewhat overly short account of the theological implications of trinitarian (or at least binitarian) theism for morality. But it's how I came, rather suddenly and unexpectedly, to believe some kind of universal salvation must be true.
Edited to add: those logical connections do not in themselves mean at-least-binitarian theism is true. That question has to be settled one way or another before arriving at the topic of morality.