I voted for the second option, although I think discipline is a better word than punishment. The Lord disciplines us for our benefit and healing, because he loves all of us and treats us all as his children.

I voted for the second option, although I think discipline is a better word than punishment. The Lord disciplines us for our benefit and healing, because he loves all of us and treats us all as his children.

I voted “other”; so here’s my explanation. I believe in Gehenna, Hades, and Tartarus, because these are in the Scripture. I do not believe in hell, because it isn’t.

I do believe that there will be a time of pruning for any/ all who need it after this mortal existence (LOF), and I do believe that all will be saved in due time.

I believe everyone will go through the refiners fire of God’s purification before they come home to heavenly glory. Punishment is meant for correction not punitive reasons.

In my opinion, the word “punishment” suggests penalty. I voted for the second option with the proviso that “punishment” is replaced with “correction” or “discipline.”

I’m one of the two people who voted “I do not believe in any punishment in the afterlife.”

I believe that at the death of the body the soul goes into the immediate presence of the risen Son of God, and that the uncreated energies of the Holy Trinity instantly transform the soul into sinlessness.

I believe that at Christ’s Second Coming all those whose bodies have already died will instantly be given their eternal bodies, and that all those whose bodies had never died will be instantly made sinless and their bodies will be transformed into their eternal bodies.

Think of a fallen human being as an ugly, greasy, smelly lump of black coal. Think of Christ as an immeasurably hot fire. When the coal is put into such a fire, it immediately is transformed into a beautiful, glowing stone. While remaining a rock, it also becomes fire.

My view is pretty simply and based on Revelations 21:7-8* "He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son. “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”*

Most of us, sadly, are not going to be overcomers in this first go around. Anyone who is mastered by their flesh is going to be lumped in with unbelievers in Christ. Overeating (Did you really need that cookie?), Gossipers, Pornographers (not the worlds definition – far more strict), Drunkards, Drug Addicts, Covetous, etc… Essentially pleasure seekers. I observe from those around me, even among the best of them, that they are mastered by something. That said, I do believe there are some who overcome in this life. I believe Christ does in fact perfect some people. I believe he can do that for each of us, but we must be willing to co-operate. I myself am hoping for such a state, but also realizing the odds are stacked against the majority. This isn’t an easy thing. Only people who overcome in this life will escape (or rather, not be harmed by it) the second death. I am under no illusions that I will make it.

The second death, though, isn’t eternal. If the punishment were eternal, then that would be unjust and pointless. Both grounds to dismiss an eternal torture chamber. If they are tortured and then annihilated, that makes even less sense. Why would you torture someone and extinguish their life? They will have no memory of it and it will be as if it never happened to them, making the torture part pointless. Imagine with me a child who was tortured and killed. It was terrible for the time, but now it has no memory of it happening. It is done and the baby is no more, assuming we die and stay dead.

Punishment, though, can come in many different forms. Both in this world and I believe in the next. I observe that in this world, punishment doesn’t have to mean getting sick, put in prison, etc… Punishment is having to live with one’s own knowledge that he violated his conscience! Punishment is knowing that a man is wretched to have done such a thing. Punishment is knowing you are mastered by sin and cannot escape without a savior. Punishment is far more than externally inflicted pain. The greatest form of punishment, in my opinion, is to reap what one sows. This enables the person to see that the reason they are punished is because they violated a basic law of the universe. This takes out the arbitrary nature of God punishing people just because he wants to convince them something is bad. I think that is mistaken. If sin itself isn’t always bad and causes God to ‘create’ a punishments for it, then we might as well conclude that righteousness is arbitrary, merely chosen by him. Truth, then, isn’t truth nor absolute, but whatever God says it is, to which I don’t agree with. If God did evil and called it good, it wouldn’t be good. So I am a big proponent of natural consequences. I don’t think, for example, that the two-towers in America were ‘punishment’ directly from God. If it was punishment, it was because of the policies this nation holds towards others that triggers the response it did. But that is only assuming it was punishment. It could have been evil men just doing evil deeds. It happens.

Therefore all that to say that some form of punishment in some abstract form will come to the majority of mankind (including those who profess Jesus Christ). How much and how little depends on what we know. Luke 12:46-48 - the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces, and assign him a place with the unbelievers. “And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few.” I believe, in many cases, Christian’s will have a far greater punishment than non-believers. Especially the ones who are hypocrites, tell others how to live and pretend to live as such, but are enemies to the cross.

There are dozens of other verses that I can quote, which in my opinion, debunk this concept of “Christ wiped away all sins, heaven awaits”. Men have created, in my opinion, the idea that a simple belief in Jesus Christ and a mere ‘trying’ is all that is needed. In fact many, I surmise, think that because they are unhappy with their sin and believe in Jesus, that it will be enough. I don’t think so - I think this is a subtle example of rationalization for failing to obey the commands of Christ. Now, the reason Christianity invented the concept of 'Believe in Jesus, get out of jail free card" is because most Christian’s of their time were not doing the will of Christ. What better way than to invent a method to ‘secure’ you salvation? The Bible pleads and pleads for men to endure, carry on, avoid lawlessness. But that is HARD WORK. It is… We must all carry our cross and follow Him. Anyone who doesn’t do that is not WORTHY of Him. His own words. May God grant us the grace to carry our cross and follow him. But either way, if we fail to make It in the first go around, it isn’t His fault. It is our fault. This is the beauty of Christian Universalism. God lets us decide when we are coming into his Kingdom. We will all make it eventually, but those who desire and take by force (that is, forcing their cross on themselves. starving the lower nature, feeding the higher nature) will receive it first!

I agree, that is a very good post. One I mainly agree with, too.

One question that will inevitably arise - and one that has gotten attention on the forum - is: what does it mean to say that “Christ died for us”? What did that accomplish, if we have to pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps anyway?

Dave, I don’t think anyone posting in this form claims that “we have to pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps.” It’s not monergism. We cannot be consistently righteous by self-effort. And God will not make us consistently righteous unilaterally. We can become consistently righteous when we coöperate with the enabling grace of God. That’s synergism. I think your first question refers to the following clause:

…but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Romans 5:8)

A lot depends upon how we understand that little word “for.” Does it mean that Christ died in our place as a substitute? If so, Paul would not have used ὑπερ (for the benefit of), but would have used ἀντι (instead of) or (in the place of). But by using the preposition ὑπερ, it’s clear that He was saying, “While we we still sinners, Christ died for our benefit”!
And what is that benefit? Somehow His death releases God’s enabling grace (Titus 2), so that we can live a consistently righteous life. Nearly every scripture which gives us a reason for Christ’s death avers that this is the very reason for His death. Here are some examples:

Thanks Paidion. Actually I do not think that anyone was posing the question as I put it - I was asking the question as it has been put to me, and I thought it would be good to get an answer or three out there on the record.
Your clarification of the word “for” was very good.

I voted “temp pun for everyone.” There’s some crap that I can’t seem to get rid of that I just don’t to hang onto for eternity. But I guess there could be some that won’t have to get rid of their crap.

i don’t think it’s going to take God ages to correct us. Remember the workers and the wages…just because the work day was shorter for some and longer for others, it didn’t change the wages they earned. if so for the good things, why would it be different for the bad things?

Sin brings death, and that is the end of it…God brings life. it’s the fallen me that wants Pol Pot to stew for a while before joining us…or to make it more personal, if someone who was mean to me in school “got theirs” when the day of the Lord came, i’d be pretty happy if i didn’t think a little deeper about it, and realise that if they get theirs, i most definitely get mine for the times i did the same. but would i learn from that? no! and i don’t think they would either. i’m not sure i believe anymore that God punishes…i think we punish ourselves, or endure natural consequences. i no longer need hell to be yet another “natural consequence”. We are broken, flawed, afraid and alone…we all act out of that, and God doesn’t get angry, He pities us. He offers healing (which sometimes could be tough love, i guess!), but He doesn’t repay evil with evil. God is gentle, kind, patient. But He can do anything, even cleanse the chief of sinners (me, from my perspective, if i’ve been paying any attention at all to Christ’s words!) in an instant. Even if i am a baby goat…the Shepherd will show me compassion, as i will be one of the least of these, as Jason’s pointed out many times!

I went for the second option (with Paidion’s correction/discipline modification) as, folks in the church will, probably, still need some purifying and correction.

I think Godfrey Birtill’s song When I look at the blood sums up what a lot of people / churches are like. That stuff can’t be allowed in “heaven” and must be dealt with at some point.

Mike

When I look at the blood
All I see is love, love, love.
When I stop at the cross
I can see the love of God

But I can’t see competition
I can’t see hierarchy
I can’t see pride or prejudice
or the abuse of authority
I can’t see lust for power
I can’t see manipulation
I can’t see rage or anger
or selfish ambition

But I can’t see unforgiveness
I can’t see hate or envy
I can’t see stupid fighting
or bitterness,or jealousy.
I can’t see empire building
I can’t see self importance
I can’t see back stabbing
Or vanity or arrogance.

I see surrender, sacrifice, salvation,
humility, righteousness, faithfulness, grace, forgiveness
Love Love Love…
When I Stop!..at the cross
I can see the love of God.

Godfrey Birtill
2004 © Whitefield Music UK Admin Copycare

James,

I don’t really see it as being about punishment, or about someone needing to “get theirs,” but rather about healing, and about the cooperation of the “patient” with the healing process. Any punishment is incidental to the curative process, imo. Even if the patient cooperates, it might take quite a lot of treatment to fully eradicate the sin disease (it does here, no matter how much we want to hurry it up, after all). If the patient refuses to cooperate, is not willing to let go of the sinful, self/others-destructive behavior, I could see it taking a very long time depending on the degree of stubbornness and pride.

On the other hand, it seems really unlikely to me that any but the most recalcitrant, rebellious, proud and stubborn will hold out for more than an instant in the presence of the fully recognized and revealed Love of God. You’d have to be a really hard case to be able to resist His manifest presence. So, bottom line, while I think there may be some who end up going the distance before they relent, that’s up to them, not because God (or we, if we’re truly regenerated) wanted it that way. Most people aren’t that hard-hearted, imo, to be able to hold out for very long. Especially if we rule out mental illness, which would have to be ameliorated before any effective treatment for sinfulness could be given.

Blessings, Cindy

I can get behind that way of thinking, Cinders But it can’t be denied that some even of the Universalist stripe want the sinners to “pay”. heck, even i do. i heard of some bad stuff recently and had to rant that i hoped they had something nasty to look forward to after death, and my technically non-Universalist wife brought me up short saying “what, like purgatory? why would God need to do anything like that? it’s only you wanting the bad guys to pay, and God has a different attitude”
so that’s what i was addressing.
if there’s “hospital” or even “asylum” time needed on the way to the Holy of Holies, well, that’s another matter. THAT i think we will ALL need, as we all have things to sort out within ourselves and between each other, as well as between us and God. But it needn’t take long, as you say. and i reckon some currently staunch religious folk will be the longest to hold out…i am sure Pol or Saddam or Napolean will be pretty quick to try to make thing right.

the thief on the cross disproves your point…he did not repent of all his sins…did not even seem to repent at all…he simply recognized Jesus as being innocent…yet, Jesus promised him paradise…why then should we who repent need to suffer even temporary punishment after death ?.9One of the criminals who were hanged [there] was hurling abuse at Him, saying, “Are You not the Christ? Save Yourself and us!” 40But the other answered, and rebuking him said, “Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41"And we indeed [are suffering] justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42And he was saying, “Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!” 43And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise." Luke 23: 39 - 40. The passage you quote, Revelations 21:7-8, refers to the absolutely unrepentant…not to repentant believers. No ‘born again’ believer will be put into ‘the lake of fire’…not even temporarily.

the thief on the cross disproves your point…he did not repent of all his sins…did not even seem to repent at all…he simply recognized Jesus as being innocent…yet, Jesus promised him paradise…why then should we who repent need to suffer even temporary punishment after death ?.9One of the criminals who were hanged [there] was hurling abuse at Him, saying, “Are You not the Christ? Save Yourself and us!” 40But the other answered, and rebuking him said, “Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41"And we indeed [are suffering] justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42And he was saying, “Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!” 43And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise." Luke 23: 39 - 40. The passage you quote, Revelations 21:7-8, refers to the absolutely unrepentant,who go into ‘the lake of fire’ to be chastised and cleansed…not to repentant believers. No ‘born again’ believer will be put into ‘the lake of fire’…not even temporarily.However, many ‘born again’ believers will have their works ‘burnt up’.

Your response is the kind of simplistic reasoning that my entire nature fights against. To say “X disproves your point” when it clearly doesn’t, is something I expect from the ECT crowd. Your argument is one of silence. Now, you are certainly free to believe that there is no post-mortem punishment, and in the end, you might be right. But, your case is anything but solid. The error in logic is that you knew the heart of the thief and that you assume that every word was recorded in the gospel account. We know this to be untrue. So my argument to you would be two-fold as to why the thief on the cross doesn’t disprove my point.

1. We don’t know the Thief’s heart. Jesus was real good at reading the hearts of people. It wouldn’t be a stretch of any sort to suggest that the thief truly did repent. Perhaps the thief repented long ago, but was still going to be executed for his crimes. The thief was receiving his ‘punishment’ during his confession. Perhaps that is all the punishment required for him. We just don’t know.

2. Just because we have two recorded sentences of the thief on the cross doesn’t mean that was the only dialogue between the two.

Essentially, my point is this: You can disagree, but the dogma of X disproves your point is faulty, in my opinion. You may be right. But you may be wrong. As far as I know, none of us can know for certain anything. It is possible Christ doesn’t exist, or that Allah is the true God. While I don’t believe these things, and neither do you, it doesn’t mean they can’t be true.

That aside, I am not too concerned over whether you agree with me or not. I quit caring quite a while ago when it comes to this stuff. It is between you and God, and me and God. God is great.

The error in logic is that you knew the heart of the thief and that you assume that every word was recorded in the gospel account. We know this to be untrue. So my argument to you would be two-fold as to why the thief on the cross doesn’t disprove my point.

1. We don’t know the Thief’s heart. Jesus was real good at reading the hearts of people. It wouldn’t be a stretch of any sort to suggest that the thief truly did repent. Perhaps the thief repented long ago, but was still going to be executed for his crimes. The thief was receiving his ‘punishment’ during his confession. Perhaps that is all the punishment required for him. We just don’t know.

2. Just because we have two recorded sentences of the thief on the cross doesn’t mean that was the only dialogue between the two.

.
you are reading stuff into the text that plainly isn’t there…“you assume that every word was recorded in the gospel account. We know this to be untrue”.Do we ?..how do we know it’s untrue?..anyway, according to the text and info we have, the thief didn’t go to the lake of fire but went straight to paradise to be with Jesus …unless of course he endured some kind of ‘quick’ cleansing first…but, that is hypothetical…we can only go by what we know we know.