Looking for an apologetic to the "Cosmic Child Abuse" objection Recently during a discussion I got smacked with the "Cosmic Child Abuse" argument. I had heard of it before, but never really had to wrestle with it in real life. I discovered that I don't actually have a satisfactory answer.

The situation: Assume Universal salvation for the sake of argument. So God loves everyone, is able to save everyone, is willing to save everyone, and will in actual fact save everyone. That's all well and good, but in order to save everyone, the father sent his son to be tortured on a cross and also (for the sake of argument) descend into the deepest depths of Hell and endure further ineffable tortures there too.

The problem: Doesn't this compromise both God's love and his justice? How was it loving for God to torture his own son? How was it just/fair for Jesus to take the punishment that we deserve?

Scope: I would be happy to hear apologetics from any tradition, seeing as this is a problem which plagues almost all if not all Christian traditions.
According to the doctrine of the Trinity, Jesus being the Son of God means that He is fully God made manifest in human form (John 1:14). Jesus is simultaneously both fully God and fully man. As such, Jesus being crucified wasn't God sending someone else to be pusnished, but instead God taking the punishment Himself.

This, therefore, does not compromise God's love and justice, but instead is examplary of it. It is loving because God has saved us from punishment, and it is just because "as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousnessg leads to justification and life for all men." (Romans 5:18-21)