This thesis examines theological discussions on free will, divine will, and the nature of atonement within the framework of Christian universalism. Utilizing a comparative method, combined with a qualitative literature review and content analysis, the research assesses the theological coherence and plausibility of positions advanced by David Bentley Hart, Karl Barth, and Eleonore Stump. Hart advocates a form of deterministic universalism grounded in the logical necessity of a benevolent and omnipotent God. Barth centers salvation in Christ alone, rejects double predestination, and presents a nuanced relationship between divine sovereignty and human agency that supports a universalist interpretation. Stump offers a relational and volitional model of atonement, emphasizing the necessity of a freely willed human response to divine grace. Together, these perspectives form a rigorous theological framework that challenges traditional doctrines of eternal damnation by highlighting the primacy of divine love and justice. The analysis demonstrates that despite their differing emphases, these theologians contribute significantly to contemporary theological debates on the scope and nature of salvation.