Good point, and I believe Paul, and Peter, and Jude all had something to say about that.
Aug,
Again, you minimize what has been said regarding devine punishment. Lack of joy is the least of distress that befalls the sinner.
Rom 13:1-4
1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4 For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
Paul points out that the government is God’s agent bringing wrath and punishment upon the sinner; even to the point of the death penalty in some cases. And what about Romans Chapter 1 in which Paul describes how God allows the sinner to progress into ever-worsening levels of corruption if they continue in their error bringing untold misery.
I also believe that the advent of the Holy Spirit brought an even greater awareness or conviction of guilt upon every sinner or doer of unrighteousness.
John 16:7-8
7 But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8 When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment:
This conviction of guilt, I believe, is an ever-present tormentor to the evil-doer. The Holy Spirit is at work within everyone as a blessing or a curse; blessing to those who do good, but tormentor to those who do evil. Just as John the Baptist, speaking of the Spirit, said the following,…
Matt 3:12
His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
Also, don’t forget what happened to Ananias and Sapphira.
Acts 5:3-5
3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.” 5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened.
Todd
Not to speak for Aaron, which I am certainly incapable of doing; but the latter part of your post raised some points that I felt able to chime in on. I’m sure Aaron will have more to add to this, or at least a slightly different perspective.
Ah, but that isn’t how the Corinthians passage is worded, Aug. It says “In Christ, all.” Not, “all in Christ”.
1Co 15:21 For since, in fact, through a man came death, through a Man, also, comes the resurrection of the dead."
1Co 15:22 For even as, in Adam, all are dying, thus also, in Christ, shall all be vivified."
1Co 15:23 Yet each in his own class: the Firstfruit, Christ; thereupon those who are Christ’s in His presence;"
1Co 15:24 thereafter the consummation, whenever He may be giving up the kingdom to His God and Father, whenever He should be nullifying all sovereignty and all authority and power."
1Co 15:25 For He must be reigning until He should be placing all His enemies under His feet.
1Co 15:26 The last enemy is being abolished: death.
But why would Jesus even refer to the “land of Sodom” if the land was irrelevant to the judgment of which he was speaking?
If the “location” isn’t important, why would Jesus even refer to “the land?” And no, I deny that the point is that Sodom is going to be judged by God again after being judged by him previously. You have not yet proven that Christ is even speaking about a future judgment for Sodom. As noted before, it is just as possible that Christ was simply speaking of Sodom as if the city and its citizens were still in existence (just as Ezekiel did) to be judged alongside the Jewish cities for the point of emphasizing to his listeners how less tolerable it would be for those cities in comparison. It’s simply not necessary to read post-mortem punishment into these passages.
Evidently any lack of joy and peace the citizens of Sodom experienced during their lifetime did not constitute their divine punishment. That is, God did not consider negative happiness an adequate punishment for them; hence, the fire and sulfur from heaven. Now, where is your proof that this judgment “served ONLY as an example” of a second judgment which they (not others) would experience? To argue this from Jesus’ words is merely begging the question in debate.
Again, it seems evident to me that their lack of joy and peace was not considered by God to be their punishment. Though this may be an adequate punishment for others, it would appear that the nature of their sin and the degree of their guilt required something more severe (though not as severe as that which would fall upon the Jewish cities of which Christ spoke!).
As stated before, it is God who determines what is and what isn’t an adequate punishment for someone. So whereas a lack of joy and peace may be perfectly adequate punishment for one person, it may not be for another. Their guilt may make them deserving of a premature death, for instance. So where is your proof that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the great flood, were but “shadows” of a “reality coming?”
Actually, I’ve nowhere stated that “they will see him and repent and thus receive immortality.” That’s neither my position nor that of UU in general. What I’m saying and have been saying is that the dead are going to be raised in a sinless condition, and those who are still alive will be made sinless when they are changed at the same time the dead are raised. Repentance does not secure our sinless state as immortals; Christ does when he subjects all to himself. What UU affirms is that there will be no immortal human sinners at any time, for the Bible doesn’t teach it. Moreover, repentance is but a change of mind about something; one doesn’t have to be sinful to realize they were wrong about something in the past. Do you deny that it’s possible for a person to be raised in a sinless condition by God and then (as a sinless being) realize they were wrong about their past sins? That’s all I’ve been affirming. If you don’t think it’s possible, then fine; but I feel like you’re misunderstanding my position.
Where is it taught in Scripture that people will even be in need of further correction after they are raised immortal? That’s what you need to be trying to prove.
What leads you to believe that Paul “did not have Universalism in mind” in these passages? 
Indeed…?