From the first there has been a wide differ ence of opinion as to the extent and object of the punishment inflicted. Some have argued, basing their arguments on a certain understand ing of a few Scriptural passages, and on certain theological theories, that the punishment of hell cannot be less than eternal in its duration. The satisfaction of Deity is the only legitimate ob ject of this future punishment. An infinite being could not be satisfied with less. This, whatever the actual sense of the word Sheol as used by the biblical writers, does not appear to have been the view entertained by the early Christian churchmen — Clement, Origen and others. Al though there have always been with the Church men of note who have taken issue with it, the eternity of hell's torments has been generally held and most ardently preached. But, at the present time the idea of punishing a soul eter nally finds a decreasing number of believers. During the latter half of the 19th century the civil courts in England decided that a clergyman of the Established Church of England was under no sort of obligation to believe or teach the doc trine of eternal punishment. The Presbyterian Church during the early years of the present century was much disturbed by a great demand from its own people that the doctrine of the damnation of non-elect infants be eliminated from its confession and the demand was suc cessful. All this is not a denial of future pun ishment but simply a disbelief in the eternal duration of that punishment. Naturally enough the men who nrotested against this punishment being eternal should argue that punishment in hell should be proportioned to the offense and that the object sought should be the redemption or reformation of the sinful soul. This idea
stands out prominent in the Persian conception of hell, and the institution of purgatory seems clearly to be an attempt to modify the terrible severity of eternal punishment and square it somewhat with the sentiments of the human heart by providing a future punishment that should purge the soul of its remaining unfit ness to enter heaven. Others press the point a little farther and argue that all future pun ishment must be of a reformative purpose. Hell thus becomes what might be called the final process in the divine plan of salvation. Still others there are who insist that eternal punishment is impossible. The souls that are purged in hell pass up to a higher sphere, those so confirmed in their wickedness that they grow worse there sink to lower levels until they virtually cease to be. This idea still has its advocates. Volumes have been written on the nature of the punishment inflicted. When it was generally believed that the earth was flat, fixed and at the centre of things, it was simple and inevitable to think of souls being tormented with the most frightful of physical tortures. With the definite establishing of modern astronomy "up to heaven" and "down to hells became mere figures of speech, and the old idea of hell's torments necessarily underwent a corresponding change. The present understand ing of the structure of the universe has en forced upon man a complete spiritual concep tion of things and so the idea now most gener ally held is that future punishment is essen tially the remorse and misery within the soul. In the words of Milton: