The logic appears to be that the more all-inclusive we see Jesus, the more appealing he will be to a lost world. The Jesus who judges the quick and the dead in such a way to consign those who reject him to eternal damnation, the Jesus who demands utter allegiance to himself alone, it is suggested, is too-narrow, too exclusive to commend Christianity to those outside the fold. Let's make the circle bigger, we're told, bigger even than explicit belief, because the Jesus who loves and does not hate and plans to bring all individuals into heaven is a more compelling Jesus than the Jesus of the "traditional church."
But history shows us the opposite is the case. Ask the mainline denominations right now if "love wins" in this way. This "bigger" Jesus ironically makes for a smaller following. And this, I think, is why: A Jesus who is all-inclusive and demands no all-forsaking allegiance to himself for salvation and threatens no damnation does not commend others to him; he commends others to sit tight wherever they're at. He would not win people to himself; he would tell them such a thing is unnecessary. A person who believes that Jesus will save him even if he never believes has no compulsion to believe. He receives assurance without faith.
The universalist Jesus cannot be found in the Gospels; the Jesus we find there is too busy putting himself at the center of everything. The universalist Jesus is safe and safely ignored. It is the compelling Jesus of the Scriptures who refuses to be disregarded.