The question now is, What is to be considered the doctrine of future rewards and punishments to be gathered from the New Testament? It is clear that we must reject all material conceptions of both heaven and hell. It follows that the punishment must be a moral one, since there is no material entity to be dealt with. The sense of justice inherent in all mankind would seem to indicate that the punishment shall be commensurate with the offence. It must be assumed, therefore, that the true doctrine is expressed in Romans ii. 6, where it is said that God will "render to every man according to his deeds."
This satisfies the finite sense of justice, and perfectly accords with the highest human conceptions of the character of a God of love, mercy, and justice. The good man would ask nothing more, the bad could expect nothing less. Reasoning from analogy would lead to the same conclusion. We know from daily experience that every violation of the laws of our physical nature is followed inevitably by its adequate punishment. We have a right to suppose, therefore, that every violation of moral and spiritual law will be followed by its appropriate penalty. We know, indeed, from what we have seen of the teachings of Christ, that spiritual penalties follow a violation of spiritual law. In other words, the law of suggestion follows the soul across the boundaries of eternity. Spiritual death is the inevitable result of spiritual unbelief. It is not a vindictive punishment, it is the fundamental law of spiritual life. Just as the spirit quickens the flesh, so does faith quicken the spirit.
Again, we find a spiritual penalty following a violation of spiritual law in what Christ taught regarding the sin against the Holy Ghost. Just what that sin consists of, never has been satisfactorily defined. We are told that it is a sin which cannot be forgiven. It must, therefore, consist of a violation of some fundamental law of the soul's existence, the penalty for which is inevitable according to the fixed laws of God. It cannot be a moral offence, consisting simply in wrong-doing, for such sins can be atoned for. A moral offence so gross that a God of infinite mercy and love cannot forgive it, and, if the Scriptures are to be believed, does not stand ready to forgive it when proper atonement is made, cannot be conceived. Nor has it been mentioned in Holy Writ. We are therefore forced to the conclusion that, as before remarked, the sin against the Holy Ghost must consist of a violation of the fundamental law of the soul's existence. It must, therefore, be the sin of unbelief, and consist of a blasphemous denial of the existence of the soul and its Father, God. This would be in strict accordance with the fundamental law of suggestion, as it has been scientifically demonstrated to exist. The emphatic and persistent denial of the soul's existence must eventually prove to be a suggestion so strong as to overcome its instinctive belief in its own existence, and thus neutralize its instinctive desire for immortal life. It would, therefore, have the same effect as unbelief arising from a want of knowledge, or a lack of the intellectual power to conceive the idea of immortality. The soul, in either case, could not have a consciousness of its own existence or individuality.
It may be asked, What becomes of the soul when deprived of a conscious existence? Does it actually die, disintegrate, and return to its original elements? Is it possible that a human soul, created by God and endowed with the power and potency of immortal life, can fail of accomplishing its mission, and become extinct? Can a segregated portion of the Divine essence, once individualized, ever perish or lose its identity? All these questions, and more, will be asked. I do not know. Perhaps it is reincarnated. I do not know anything about reincarnation. I know as much about it, however, as any one else knows. I mean by this that no one can be said to know anything about the truth of any proposition that has not underlying it a substratum of demonstrable fact. The theory of reincarnation has no such basis; and I shall not, therefore, indulge in speculation on the subject further than to say that it is possibly true that reincarnation is the process of the soul's evolution. If so, reasoning from analogy, I should say that the process ceases when the soul reaches the status of a conscious existence. In the physical world we see that the process of evolution has gone forward progressively from the lowest form of animal life up to man. There the process ceases. All further progress is in the line of improvement in the human race. No higher type of animal life is developed, and in our pride of manhood we believe that there never can be any higher animal existence. It may, therefore, be true that the progress of a soul is through reincarnation from the lower animal life to the higher, until it reaches the human; and that it may still go on in the lower grades of human organisms until it reaches the dignity of a conscious human soul. Having reached that point, the law of progress will expend its force in carrying it forward to its ultimate destiny. Considered as the process of the soul's evolution, the necessity for further reincarnation apparently no longer exists after the soul has attained the power and potency of a conscious, self-existent entity.
I throw out this suggestion for the benefit of those spiritistic mediums and other trance-seers who have found out so much more than Jesus knew about the internal economy of the spiritual world and the laws which pertain to spiritual existence. But this is a digression into the forbidden field of speculation without facts.
The common experience of mankind demonstrates the proposition that appropriate physical penalties are the necessary result of a violation of physical laws; and it has been shown from the teachings of Jesus, confirmed by the inductions of science, that the violation of the laws of spiritual existence is followed by inevitable spiritual penalties. It now remains to be considered what facts are known to science which will confirm the doctrine that moral punishment will follow the infraction of moral laws, in exact accordance "with the deeds done in the body." In order to do so intelligently, we must first briefly consider the question as to what the nature of the punishments and rewards must be. It being manifestly impossible for us to know, affirmatively, the particular modes of spiritual existence, we can arrive at a conclusion only by the method of exclusion. We must, therefore, begin by excluding all idea of material penalties or rewards. All such conceptions of spiritual life must be relegated to the dark ages of human intelligence, when man was able to conceive of no joy apart from physical pleasure, and no punishment other than physical suffering. Our conceptions must, therefore, be limited by what we know of the nature and attributes of the soul, as exhibited through phenomena. The first question, then, is, What do we know of the attributes of the soul?
We know, first, that it is the seat of the emotions. It is therefore capable of being rewarded or punished through the natural affections.
Secondly, we know that it possesses the inherent power of perception of the laws of nature and of God, including the eternal, God-ordained principles of right and wrong. It will, therefore, after its release from the body, be able to estimate the value of every good deed, and realize the inherent infamy of every wrong one, as weighed in the scales of Eternal Justice.
Thirdly and lastly, we know of one attribute and power of the human soul more pregnant with weal or woe, with joy or sorrow, than all the others combined; and that is its perfect memory.
These are the essential things that we know of the soul from the observation of phenomena. Our conceptions of it, therefore, are limited to its intellectual, moral, and emotional attributes. We know it only as an intellectual entity, and our conceptions of the rewards and punishments adequate to the ends of Divine Justice must be limited accordingly.