Man’s Nature and Destiny

27 THE JUDGEMENT

WE have seen how the grand doctrine of the future resurrection of the dead, demolishes with its ponderous weight the gossamer fabric of the immortality of the soul. There is another doctrine as scriptural and as prominent as the resurrection which opposed its impregnable battlements to the same anti-scriptural fable,-a fable, weak, though encased in the coat of mail with which heathendom furnishes it, and not very imposing in appearance, though adorned with the gorgeous trappings of the mother of harlots. We refer to the doctrine of the future general Judgment. MND 237.1

This doctrine, and the theory of the conscious state of the dead, cannot exist together. There is an antagonism between them, irreconcilable, and irrepressible. If every man is judged at death, as he indeed must be if an immortal soul survives the dissolution of the body, and enters at once into the happiness or misery of the eternal state, accordingly as its character has been good or bad, there is no occasion and no room for a general Judgment in the future; and if, on the other hand, there is to be such a future Judgment, it is proof positive that the other doctrine is not true. MND 237.2

We affirm, then, that the Scriptures clearly teach that there is to be a general Judgment in the future, at which time such awards shall be rendered to every one as shall accord with the record of his deeds. A passage in Hebrews may seem to some minds to afford proof that the Judgment follows immediately after death, and which may, consequently, demand a brief notice at this point. MND 238.1

Hebrews 9:27: “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the Judgment.” The sentence does not end here, but is continued into the next verse: “So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many.” From this it is evident that the death to which Paul refers is some death which illustrates the death of Christ as an offering for sin: As men die, and after this the Judgment, so (in like manner) Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many. It is not, then, the common death of human beings to which the apostle refers; for there is nothing in this death to show how Christ died as an offering for sin. MND 238.2

This language occurs at the conclusion of an argument on the priesthood of Christ, as illustrated by the priesthood connected with the Jewish service. Under that dispensation there was a yearly round of service connected with the worldly sanctuary. On the day of atonement, when the sanctuary was to be cleansed, a goat was slain for all the people. Their life was imputed to it, and in it they in figure died. The blood of this goat, representing the forfeited lives of the people, was then ministered in the most holy place, which was a work of determination and decision in their cases, which the word here rendered “judgment” signifies. So Christ, the antitype, was once offered; and if we avail ourselves of his intercession, his blood is accepted instead of our forfeited lives, and we shall stand acquitted in the real Judgment work in the sanctuary above, as Israel were acquitted when the same work was performed in figure in the worldly sanctuary of the former dispensation. This text, therefore, not referring to the end of individual mortal life, and its relation to future retribution, has no relevancy to the question under discussion. MND 238.3

But even if we give it the general application which might seem to be at first suggested, and apply it to death in common, it is still in harmony with the proposition set forth above; for the text affirms nothing respecting the time that elapses between death and the Judgment. It does not assert that men are judged immediately after death; hence it in nowise antagonizes the idea that there is a general period of Judgment fixed for all at the close of probation. MND 239.1

We return to the proposition that a future general Judgment is appointed. Paul reasoned before Felix of a Judgment to come. Acts 24:25. But as it may be said that this was to be experienced when Felix died, we will introduce another text, which not only speaks of this Judgment as future, but shows that it will pass simultaneously on the human race. Acts 17:31: “Because he hath appointed a day in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men in that he hath raised him from the dead.” Here it is announced in plain terms that the Judgment of this world is future, that it is to take place at the time appointed, and that a day, or period, is set apart for this purpose. MND 239.2

Peter refers to the same day, and says that the angels that sinned, and the unjust of our own race, are reserved unto it. 2 Peter 2:4, 9. Again he says that this present earth is reserved unto fire, with which it shall be destroyed in that day. 2 Peter 3:7-12. Jude says that the angels that kept not their first estate are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the Judgment of the great day. Jude 6. this is the day when Christ is represented as separating the good from the bad, as a shepherd divideth the sheep from the goats (Matthew 25:31-34); and the time to which John looked forward when he said that he saw the dead, small and great, stand before God, and the books were opened, and they were judged out of those things written in the books. MND 240.1

The Judgment also stands, in many lines of prophecy, not as something which has been going forward from the beginning, no as taking place as each member of the human family passes from the stage of mortal existence, but as the great event with which the probation of the human race is to end. Testimony on this point need not be multiplied. It cannot be denied that a day is coming in which sentence will be rendered at once upon all who have lived a life of probation in this world,-a sentence which shall decide their condition for the eternity that lies beyond. MND 240.2

This fact being established, its bearing upon the question of consciousness in death cannot be overlooked. For if every human being at death passes at once into a state of reward or punishment, what occasion is there for a future general Judgment, that a second decision may be rendered in their cases? Is it possible that a mistake was made in the former decision? possible that some are now writhing in the flames of hell, who should be basking in the bliss of heaven? Possible that some are taking their fill of happiness in the bowers of paradise, whose corrupt hearts and criminal life demand that they should have their place with fiends in the lowest hell? And if mistakes have once been made in the sentence rendered, may they not be made again? What assurance can we have that, though we may be entitled by thorough repentance to the happiness of heaven, we may not be sentence for all eternity to the damnation of hell? Is it possible that such foul blots of injustice stand upon the record of the government of heaven?-Yes, if the conscious-state theory be true! We arraign that theory face to face with this stupendous fact, and bid it behold its work. It destroys God’s omniscience! It charges him with imperfection! It accuses his government of mistakes which are worse than crimes! Is any theory, which is subject to such overwhelming imputations, worthy of a moment’s credence? MND 240.3

To avoid the foregoing fatal conclusions, is it said that sentence is not passed at death, but that the dead are held somewhere in a state of suspense, without being either rewarded or punished till the Judgment? Then we inquire how this can be harmonized with the invariable arguments which immaterialists use on this question? For is it not claimed that the spirit goes immediately to God to receive sentence from the hand of its Creator? Is it not claimed that the rich man was immediately after death in hell, in torment? Is it not claimed that the repentant thief was that very day with Christ in the joys of paradise? If these instances and arguments are abandoned, let it be so understood. If not, then no such after-thought can be resorted to, to shield the conscious-state dogma from the charges above mentioned. MND 241.1

We close this argument with a paragraph from the candid pen of H.H. Dobney, Baptist minister of England. In “Future Punishment,” pp.139,140, he says:- MND 242.1

“There is something of awkwardness, which the Scriptures seem to avoid, in making beings who have already entered, and many ages since, on a state of happiness or misery, come from those abodes to be judged, and to receive a formal award to the very condition which has long been familiar to them. To have been in heaven with Christ for glorious ages, and then to stand at his bar for Judgment, and be invited to enter heaven as their eternal home, as though they had not been there already, scarcely seems to look exactly like the Scripture account, while it would almost appear to be wanting in congruity. Nor is this all. There is another difficulty; namely, That the idea of a saint already ‘with Christ.’ ‘present with the Lord’ (who is in heaven, be it remembered in his resurrection and glorified body, wherewith he ascended from the brow of Olivet), coming from heaven to earth to glide into a body raised simultaneously from the ground, he being in reality already possessed of a spiritual body, would seem an invention which has not one syllable in Scripture to give it countenance.” MND 242.2