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 is future for the whole human family. 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 that it is to take place at the time appointed, and that a day, or period, is set apart for this purpose.

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 separate 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.

The Judgment also stands, in many lines of prophecy, not as something which has been going forward from the beginning, not 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.

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 sentenced 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?

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 from Fed. 12:7, that the spirit goes immediately to God to receive sentence from the hand of its Creator? Is it not claimed from Luke 16:23 that the rich man was immediately after death in hell, in torment? Is it not claimed from Luke 23:43, 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 afterthought as a suspension of Judgment in the intermediate state, can be resorted to, to shield the conscious-state dogma from the charges above mentioned.

We close this argument with a paragraph from the candid pen of H. H. Dobney, Baptist minister of England. He says:

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.