{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_36572/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_36572","id":"gutenberg_36572","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/36572","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Christianity","God (Christianity)"],"text":"THE MACMILLAN COMPANY\nNEW YORK . BOSTON . CHICAGO . DALLAS\nATLANTA . SAN FRANCISCO\n\nMACMILLAN & CO., LIMITED\nLONDON . BOMBAY . CALCUTTA\nMELBOURNE\n\nTHE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD.\nTORONTO\n\n * * * * *\n\n\nWHAT AND WHERE IS GOD?\n\nA Human Answer to the Deep Religious Cry of the Modern Soul\n\nby\n\nRICHARD LARUE SWAIN, PH.D.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNew York\nThe Macmillan Company\n1920\nAll rights reserved\n\nCopyright, 1920,\nBy the Macmillan Company\n\nSet up and electrotyped. Published, October, 1920\n\n\n\n\n TO THE LOVED ONES\n OF MY FATHER'S FAMILY\n\n AND\n\n TO THE DEAR ONES\n OF MY OWN FAMILY\n\n SO TRULY A PART OF THESE PAGES\n I GRATEFULLY\n _DEDICATE THIS BOOK_\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nThe foreground of this book has largely to do with the answering of\nvital questions that have sprung from the suffering souls of men and\nwomen with whom the author has been sympathetically associated.\nConsiderable attention has been given to the natural sequence of these\nquestions in order that the answers might form a more or less orderly\nline of discussion. While the method of answering a particular set of\nquestions does not permit of a strictly logical treatment of the themes,\nyet in the background there is a definite and concrete picture of God,\nof the universe, and of man as he is enfolded in God's world.\n\nThe chapters on immortality contain a further discussion of God, man,\nand the universe as they move on in endless time. To know \"what and\nwhere\" God is, it is necessary to understand how man and the universe\nexist in God, and what God purposes to achieve through them.\n\nIf we are to reach people's minds, their questions are of supreme\nimportance because they show where the mind is focused. The average\nperson can, as a rule, proceed no farther with a subject until his main\ndifficulty is removed. Therefore, we have preferred the question to the\nnatural division of the subject, believing that the reader would be able\nto see the logic that is beneath it all.\n\nThe chapters on the Bible are not closely related to the rest of the\nbook, but as the Scriptures contain the \"specifications\" and\n\"blue-prints\" from God, it seemed important to include a description of\nhow we must approach them if we are not to misread their spiritual\ncontent.\n\nThough the material of this volume has been given in extemporaneous\naddresses, yet no part of it has been reduced to writing until now. Its\nappearance in book form is in response to many requests. Especially\nhelpful has been the encouragement of Professor Douglas Clyde Macintosh\nof Yale University who has kindly read the manuscript and made valuable\nsuggestions.\n\n R. L. S.\n\n 306 Golden Hill,\n Bridgeport, Conn.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n CHAPTER I PAGE\n\n LOSING GOD, OR THE HONEST ATHEIST 1\n\n This chapter is a case study showing how false experiences\n of religion and erroneous conceptions of God may result in\n agnosticism or atheism.\n\n\n CHAPTER II\n\n HOW SCIENCE SAVES RELIGION, OR MODERN KNOWLEDGE AND RELIGION 39\n\n Introduction 39\n 1. What is God? 43\n 2. Who is God? 48\n 3. Where is God? 53\n 4. What does God do? 62\n 5. If the Ancients made their gods, how do we know that\n we are not making our God? 71\n 6. May we not be communing with a mere idea? 73\n\n\n CHAPTER III\n\n DOES MAN HAVE A SOUL, AND WHAT IS HIS PLACE IN THE UNIVERSE? 75\n\n 1. What is man? 75\n 2. Who is man? 77\n 3. Would the absence of man cripple God? 84\n 4. What could an infinite God care for such a little speck? 87\n 5. Is not socialism the best religion there is? 90\n\n\n CHAPTER IV\n\n DOES GOD HAVE A BODY, AND COULD HE BECOME A MAN? 104\n\n 1. Introductory statement 104\n 2. The idea of the Trinity and how it came about 106\n 3. Was Jesus God or a good man only? 113\n 4. Can modern psychology any longer believe in the\n Deity of Jesus? 116\n 5. Where does Jesus belong in the religious, social and\n thought worlds? 132\n 6. Can God die? 135\n\n\n CHAPTER V\n\n LOSING THE SENSE OF IMMORTALITY 142\n\n A general statement 142\n 1. The contagion of doubt 144\n 2. The inability to make a religious use of modern knowledge 146\n 3. The loss of a satisfying conception of the future life 147\n 4. The growing habit of classifying the future with things\n unknown and unknowable 148\n 5. An inadequate conception of the kingdom of God 150\n 6. We automatically lose the assurance of the future when we\n lose the reality of the present 153\n\n\n CHAPTER VI\n\n FINDING THE SENSE OF IMMORTALITY 157\n\n How shall we find the assurance of immortality? 157\n 1. We automatically find the assurance of the future\n when we find the reality of the present 157\n Some reasons why the quest for reality is not more\n frequently and earnestly undertaken.\n a. The moral failure of Christians 158\n b. Because the average Christian cannot answer\n technical questions 159\n c. Antiquated forms irritating to sceptics 162\n d. The provincialism of sceptics 164\n 2. Equal striving for spiritual and material things is\n necessary 166\n 3. The final step in the effort to know God 173\n 4. Conscious of the existence of God, we become certain of\n immortality 176\n\n\n CHAPTER VII\n\n WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE WHETHER WE BELIEVE IN IMMORTALITY\n IF WE LIVE AS WE SHOULD IN THIS LIFE? 182\n\n 1. How can one live as he should? 182\n 2. The difference in social service 183\n 3. The difference in personal preparation 186\n\n\n CHAPTER VIII\n\n HOW SHALL WE CONCEIVE OF THE FUTURE LIFE? 193\n\n 1. Its relation to the present constitution of things 193\n 2. Where is heaven? 196\n 3. Will there be a Holy City? 198\n 4. Will there be music? 201\n 5. Shall we meet our loved ones? 201\n 6. Shall we see God? 204\n 7. Will there be burdens to bear in heaven? 205\n\n\n CHAPTER IX\n\n LOSING THE BIBLE TO FIND IT 207\n\n If the Bible contains errors, how do we know that any of\n it is true? 207\n A general statement 207\n The Method of Finding God's Word\n 1. The story of Creation 212\n 2. The story of the Garden 220\n 3. The Bible stories in general 223\n 4. The laws of Israel--moral and ceremonial 224\n 5. The Book of Job 226\n\n\n CHAPTER X\n\n LOSING THE BIBLE TO FIND IT (Continued) 232\n\n The method of finding God's Word (Continued)\n 1. The Psalms 232\n 2. The prophets in general 235\n 3. Jonah 241\n 4. The New Testament in general 247\n 5. The Book of Revelation 250\n\n\n\n\nWHAT AND WHERE IS GOD?\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nLOSING GOD, OR THE HONEST ATHEIST\n\n _Why does God leave His very existence in doubt by forever hiding\n Himself?_\n\n _If there were a God would He not make Himself known in such a way\n that no one could possibly doubt His existence?_\n\n _Why should we be expected to love and obey a God whose existence\n is still a subject of discussion?_\n\n _Could a righteous and loving Father leave any of His children in\n doubt of His existence?_\n\n\nWhile I was dining one day with a young minister and his wife, the\nlatter disclosed to me her religious state of mind. Said she:\n\n\"I have no God! They have taken Him away and I do not know where to find\nHim. My childhood conception of a Man-God on a throne in heaven is\ngone--and I think rightly gone; but I have nothing to take its place. I\nhear them speak of an immanent God; of a God who fills all nature. And I\nhave no objection to this except that it brings no relief. Nature is so\ninexpressibly vast and complex that, to my mind, a God who fills all\nnature is so infinitely big and spread out that I can neither know Him\nnor love Him. He is altogether too attenuated for me; besides, this\nmakes Him so much everywhere that He seems to be nowhere. Here I am,\nwithout a God, working myself nearly to death in a great Church; and my\nheart is breaking for a Father to whom I can go, as I once did, with all\n_my_ hopes and fears. Moreover, all my young women friends feel as I do.\nWe often speak of this among ourselves without knowing where to turn for\nrelief.\"\n\nThe distressing experience of this minister's wife is more common than\nmany think. With _her type_ of mind it was inevitable that she should\nexperience doubt while passing from the crude to the mature. Being\nbright, consecrated, and sincere she had simply hastened the crisis.\nThat the Church is not always present to take care of its own passengers\nwhen they arrive at these way-stations is the greater pity; because\nrepresentatives of various spiritual inns will be sure to meet every\nincoming train. And if the Church is neglectful of its spiritual\npilgrims, it compels them to spend their night of doubt in the depot or\non a bench in the park exposed to the tender mercy of religious fakers.\nWere the difficulties of this minister's wife met, it would be a great\nblessing to her and to thousands of other troubled souls; and at the\nsame time it would immeasurably enrich our common Christian life.\n\nBecause of our newly acquired knowledge of the physical universe\nmultitudes, both without and within the Church, are asking _what_ God is\nand _where_ He is that they may find Him.\n\nThe poverty of faith and confusion of ideas concerning God were recently\nbrought _to_ light by Professor Leuba in his questionnaire. Many seem to\nthink there is no place for God in their conception of the universe.\nHaving no longer a satisfying idea of God, the thought of Him is fading\nfrom their minds. And while some rejoice in their scepticism, others\ndeeply regret a waning faith.\n\nAll this only proves that the world is over-ripe for a finer conception\nof God and His universe; and that a better and more definite idea must\nbe obtained, or doubt will run into positive unbelief. Modern learning\nis thought by many to be particularly hard on faith. Some of us,\nhowever, have found the world of modern knowledge more congenial to\nfaith and much superior to the old unscientific world as a place in\nwhich to live the simple Christian life. This better vision should be\ngiven to the people with all possible speed. They should be taught to\nsee that as boulevards and steel bridges are superior to mud roads and\ndangerous fords, so the new Christian highway is better than the old.\nNevertheless, new knowledge in certain directions does present grave\ndifficulties for those who retain crude conceptions of God and erroneous\nviews of His relation to the forces of nature that envelop us. Until we\ndo the work that our times demand of us, even Christians may not hope to\nremain immune from the devastating influences of doubt. There is a deep\ncry in the modern soul that must be met.\n\nWhile our hope of knowing God rests on His immanence yet the idea of\nimmanence has not been sufficiently clarified to meet our practical\ndemands. If we continue to teach the beautiful doctrine that God is\neverywhere, in the vague way that is now so prevalent, an ever\nincreasing number will surely come to believe that He is nowhere.\n\nLovingly and faithfully our mothers taught us that God was everywhere in\nall majesty and power. But it was different. They believed that God had\na form, or nucleus, in heaven, and that His spirit radiated from this\nform to the remotest particles of matter in the universe. They also\nbelieved that when transported at death to His central abode they should\nlook with rapture upon His ineffable being. They expected to see the\nglorious presence of the Father distinct from the glorified body of\nJesus. In their thought, the visible Jesus was literally on the right\nhand of a visible Father. However, this conception of a visible and\nlocalized God in heaven is either gone or going; and for the average\nmind there remains a Deity, if any, as attenuated as stellar ether, and\nscarcely more personal than the forces of nature. No one ever made a\nmore rational demand than the minister's wife when she asked for a\nparticular God to supplement a universal God.\n\nWe must get on common ground with our fellows, if we really wish to\nhelp, and sow our seed in the soil of living minds. The supreme need of\nthe hour is for someone to help the masses to move out of the old\n\"shack\" of an unscientific world into God's beautiful, expanding\npalace. Though some new frames are needed for the old pictures, yet no\ntreasure should be left to perish in the old \"shack\"; because the ampler\nworld of modern knowledge will never be home until the pictures of our\nchildhood hang on the wall and the fire burns in the furnace. The larger\nabode of a scientific universe is a veritable prison when we have cast\nout the God of our fathers. But whether we would or not, we must learn\nto do business in the new world; and sooner or later we shall learn that\nwe can not do business in one kind of a universe and foster religion in\nanother. Religion must thrive in the new world or perish. Neither is it\nenough for a few scholars to see their way in the new order; they must\nshow others how to be religious without stultifying their intellects. In\nother words, men must see before a religious appeal can reach their\nconscience.\n\nThere are as many ways of becoming a sceptic as there are of becoming a\nChristian. We must admit, however, that careless living has multiplied\nthe difficulties of faith for every one of us. And yet, a sincere effort\nto make religion real in one's own personal experience often hastens\nunbelief. Those who think that no one honestly doubts the existence of\nGod have a poor knowledge of the facts; because, in many minds, this is\nthe only serious doubt. If only they could make this point secure,\neverything else would fall in line as a matter of course. To a singular\ndegree this has been true in my own case. The one word \"God\" is a creed\nlarge enough to burst all little worlds, if the word stands for a fact\nwhich has any worthy meaning. Some people, always wondering whether God\nis good to them, or whether He really thinks of them at all, are greatly\nshocked if some one else doubts God's existence. Whereas, to believe in\nChrist's God and at the same time doubt His goodness is a flat\ncontradiction. For many of us this would be impossible.\n\nFollowing the advice of friends--whose judgment I trust--I venture to\ngive a simple history of my own early religious life. This is for the\nsake of finding a point of contact with those who have little or no\nfaith; and with the hope of stating some of the real problems. Some may\nthink this a dangerous thing to do. But unless we know the problems of\nsuffering souls, how are we to solve them? Besides, the knowledge of\nanother's difficulty with its solution, should enrich the faith of one\nhaving no serious difficulties of his own; and certainly it would make\nhim more useful among people differently constituted from himself.\n\nMy father became a Protestant at twenty years of age to the great\ndistress of his Roman Catholic mother. At twenty-two he married Sarah\nElizabeth Carr of Great Dalby, England. They were married in the quaint\nold church of the town by the Episcopal rector. Later, my father\npreached in England for the Wesleyans. However, on coming to America in\n1857 he identified himself with the United Brethren and remained with\nthem until his death. As he located in what was then the frontier of\nthis country, I can duplicate out of my own life much that is to be\nfound in \"Black Rock\" and \"Sky Pilot.\" In the midst of much irreligion,\nmy parents put vital religion into the very marrow of my bones.\n\nGoing far and near to preach in little schoolhouses, my father left us\nmuch alone in the old log cabin of one room; especially in the winter\nseason when he preached nearly every night. His home-coming about once a\nmonth was a great event. In the summertime he would ride thirty miles on\nSunday, preach three times, and be back home Monday by one o'clock to\ndelve into every kind of rough work as a true frontiersman. I pity the\nlittle boy who has never had the privilege of rifling a pair of\nsaddlebags on the return of his father. Sometimes my father was detained\non his way home by overflowing rivers that were too mad for the horse to\nswim. And once he was detained by watching all night to prevent a rough\ngang from hanging one of his dearest friends. The long, long Sundays\nthat I spent alone with my mother in the old cabin are indelibly stamped\non my memory. Sometimes I thought I should die with loneliness. At such\ntimes my mother would try to comfort me with stories, or with letters\nfrom her invalid mother across the sea; and then we both would cry. Once\nwhen I refused to be comforted, and bitterly complained because my\nfather left us alone, my mother explained to me in a simple,\nawe-inspiring manner the tragedy of the World's sin and sorrow together\nwith the suffering love of God. How my father was going forth in God's\ncompelling love to help Him save His children from the impending doom\nof sin, she pictured so vividly that I felt glad to live and suffer in\nsuch a cause. This was, probably, the most effective sermon to which I\never listened. And then my mother gathered me into her arms and made me\nconscious of the greatest thing in the world; a love that is infinitely\ndeeper than words; something so like God that we need look no farther\nfor a fitting symbol of Him.\n\nAs a child I was very susceptible to fear. I remember one bitter cold\nnight when the winds howled and the thieves prowled. Every nerve in me\nached with fear. That night my mother kneeling by her bed, with her\nlittle children at her side, prayed in a low tremulous voice, and with a\nsweet English accent, until God seemed nearer than the raging winds, and\nmore powerful than the evil forces that were abroad to do us harm. How\nhappy I was the next morning to find that the wind had subsided, and\nthat the horses were not stolen, and that no evil had befallen us! When\na little child, religion was as real to me as my parents, or the\natmosphere I breathed, or the food I ate.\n\nI am not certain of ever having been in a church until I was almost\ngrown. But when I was probably five years old, I accompanied my mother\nto a revival meeting in an old schoolhouse. This schoolhouse, even to\nthe lathing, was made of black walnut that was sawed at a local mill.\nWhich of the many denominations was conducting the services I do not\nknow. But one night there were probably ten people kneeling at what they\ncalled the \"mourner's bench.\" During the evening such a psychic wave\npassed over those at the altar that the packed congregation, to see what\nwas happening, rose as one person. At this point, my mother lifted me\nonto the desk before her which afforded me a plain view of all those who\nwere kneeling at the front. A young woman with head thrown back and hair\ndisheveled, was wringing her hands and crying in piercing tones, \"O God,\nsave my poor soul from hell!\" Just beyond, a man lay in a trance. And\nthen another woman, with perfectly rapturous face, throwing her head\nback, clapped her hands and shouted \"glory.\" Other seekers were groaning\nand pleading with tremulous voices. The Christians who were assisting\nthe seekers alternated their groanings of intercession with \"amens\" and\nshouts of praise. As it appeared to me the realms of the blessed and the\nrealms of the damned were mingling their voices in that tumultuous\nscene. Heaven and hell seemed veritable realities before my eyes, and\nthe picture was burned into my soul.\n\nThe religion of my parents was simple, loving, and thoroughly ethical.\nThese meetings were not criticized by them except that my father\nsometimes remarked at home that he liked the quiet meetings best.\n\nMuch of the time there were no meetings in the community. Yet betimes\nservices were conducted by all kinds of ministers, \"descript and\nnon-descript.\" It was not uncommon to hear these ministers say that no\none ever got to heaven except by way of the \"mourner's bench.\" One\nminister remarked that there was not a converted person in the\nPresbyterian Church except a few individuals who were converted outside\nat such meetings as he was conducting. Never having seen any of them, I\ntook his word for it that the Presbyterians were an ungodly set.\n\nAltogether it became a fixed thought in my mind that I should need to\nget \"old people's religion\" or be lost. Indeed, that belief was very\ncommon throughout America when I was a child. Even the Presbyterians\nbelieved it, though they kept their mourner's bench out of sight.\nAccordingly, when I was fifteen years old, and getting to be a big boy,\nthe crisis came; because temptations were coming in thick and fast.\nGoing to a revival one night in the schoolhouse and finding the seats\nall full, I took a board from under the stove and placed it on the coal\npail for a seat. As I sat there the thought came to me, \"When are you\ngoing to get religion?\" This was followed by another, \"Wouldn't it be\nstrange if I went to the mourner's bench to-night?\" \"Not for five years\nyet,\" my heart quickly responded. \"Not until I am twenty years old.\"\nBeing a bashful boy I felt terrified at the mere thought of taking such\na step before that crowd of \"rowdies\" who were openly scoffing. \"But,\"\nmy mind said, \"if you make a start in five years it will again be now.\"\nIt seemed plain to me that one \"now\" would be about as embarrassing as\nanother. \"Wouldn't it be strange if I just went forward to-night without\nany regard to my feelings?\" was a question that kept asserting itself.\nMy mind swayed and tipped first one way and then the other until finally\nit literally fell on the side of a decision. \"It is to-night.\" To me\nthis seemed deeper than any other decision I had ever made,--than which\nno firmer decision could be made. Being thoroughly aware of its ethical\nsignificance, my heart involuntarily said, \"You see, O God, what I have\ndone.\" Not to have regarded myself a bound person from that time forth\nwould have meant the perjuring of my deepest soul. It was an\nawe-inspiring decision at a time when God was to get either a great deal\nmore or a great deal less of my life as the days went by. It would have\nbeen an irreparable loss to me if this great decision had not been made\nat that time. Even now, I thank God with a growing gratitude for helping\nme to make that decision. So far, the experience was perfectly normal\nfor a Christian boy in the adolescent period,--though at that time I had\nnever known a Christian boy. This experience of an unconditional\nsurrender to the will of God should have brought me peace and strength;\nbut it did not, because I utterly discredited my previous religious life\nas being no more than moral development. Real religion, in my thinking,\nwould not begin until I had experienced the miracle of regeneration at\nthe \"mourner's bench.\"\n\nThe die had been cast. And now the great miracle must be achieved! So I\nwent forward. The knowledge that I was observed by mocking eyes hurt\nlike the thongs of a whip on a bare back. For a few moments I could\nthink of nothing else. Then I tried to feel sorry for my sins; and not\nsucceeding in that, I tried to feel sorry because I was not sorry. Those\nkneeling with me asked whether I believed in God. No one could have\nbelieved it more fully than I did. Then they asked me if I believed that\nHe sent His Son into the world to save sinners. This I believed without\nquestion. Did I believe that He came to save me, and that He wanted to\nsave me now? This, too, I believed. \"Do you feel that He saves you now?\"\nI did not know. \"Well,\" they said, \"you will know when He saves you,--so\nyou must make no mistake there.\" And thus we went the rounds, over and\nover again. While I believed everything, yet I did not experience the\nmiracle. Things seemed to grow worse and more confused as time went by.\nAs they pleaded, first with God to save me, and then with me to\nsurrender all to God and believe, I became utterly bewildered and\nhardened. There seemed to be no reality in anything. The groans and\nsighs, the pressure of the hand, the pats on the back, the rhythmic\nmusic, the loud and fervent prayers, became a meaningless jargon. I was\nheartily glad when the hour was over so that I could be alone. Once\nbeing alone, I did pray earnestly and continuously for God to save me,\nand felt a great depression of spirits without further results. The next\nnight I repeated the experience of the previous evening with like sad\nconsequences. The next day I was greatly depressed, but made up my mind\nthat I would get religion or break a blood vessel in the attempt;--and I\nnearly broke the blood vessel. In the afternoon while carrying a heavy\nload of corn on my back, I stumbled over something which caused me to\nsay \"Oh!\" and as I added the word God, it sounded like profanity. But\nit was not, for prayer had become automatic. This incident caused me to\nsmile,--the first time, I believe, in two days. As I continued to pray\nwithout ceasing, there came to me after awhile a little suggestion of\ngladness which caused me to exclaim, \"Oh, I believe I am getting\nreligion!\" Though the burden seemed to be lifting, yet it was some\nminutes before another feeling of gladness came. During the supper hour\nit seemed almost certain that I was getting religion. Nothing, however,\nwas said about it as I wanted to be perfectly sure.\n\nAfter supper I started for the schoolhouse across the dark fields.\nDuring that journey of over a mile, the psychic lights came on making\nall things beautiful. At the same time I was made inexpressibly glad.\nThe great change appeared to be in the universe rather than in myself. I\nlaughed and cried for joy. Recalling the Psalm, \"For ... by my God have\nI leaped over a wall,\" that, I thought, would be an easy thing to do if\na wall were there. What with laughing, making speeches, and thanking\nGod, I soon completed the journey.\n\nAs the schoolhouse was seated to face the door, on arriving late, I\nconfronted the whole congregation. This arrangement of seats made it\nunnecessary for the people to turn and strain their necks to see each\none who entered.\n\nIn pioneer days it was customary to take a candle with you to church. On\narriving at the schoolhouse you would take your penknife, push the small\nblade through the candle, stick the protruding blade into the window\nsash, and there you were, as nice as could be. Or else you would stand\nthe candle on the desk in some melted tallow.\n\nThough the schoolhouse was but dimly lighted, and the people whom I\nfaced that night were an ordinary crowd, yet in my psychic state I saw\nthe people as angel figures under limelight. And as the only vacant\nseats were in the \"Amen corner,\" I sat facing the congregation during\nthe entire service. The sermon was wonderful to me beyond words to\nexpress; and yet I seemed able to understand it and to see all around\nit.\n\nAfter the sermon an invitation was given to \"mourners.\" As none went\nforward, the minister then came to me to inquire of my condition. When\nwith great joy I told him that I was converted, I was asked to relate my\nexperience. This unexpected request shattered my beautiful world as\ncompletely as a hammer stroke would have shattered a piece of crystal.\nSuch a stage fright seized me that I could neither move nor speak before\nthey were compelled to go on with the service. This embarrassing\nexperience sent me from the highest state of bliss to the deepest state\nof gloom. Peter's denial seemed trivial in comparison with mine; he had\ndenied the Lord under trying circumstances, but I had denied Him while\nsitting in glory.\n\nA little later, when the minister rose and stated that they would \"open\nthe doors of the Church\" for any who desired to join, there ensued a\nterrible struggle within me. During the few minutes of exhortation that\nfollowed I seriously questioned my heart. I knew that candidates were\nexpected to answer the question, \"Have you found God in the pardon of\nyour sins, and do you now have peace with God?\" But being in a state of\ntorment, how could I claim peace with God? Though my conversion still\nseemed like a miracle, yet never before had I been in such a humiliated\nor distressed state of mind. Before ever I tried to \"get religion,\" I\nhad plighted my soul and honor that I would follow God from that time\nforward. Even now I knew that I should follow Him, but how could I say\nthat I had peace with God when my burden remained in spite of my earnest\nprayer to be forgiven? Had I in that act of denial become a\n\"backslider,\" and was it necessary for me to be converted again? As a\nlarge percentage of the Christians present had been converted two or\nmore times to my knowledge, a second conversion was not strange to me.\nNever doubting that I had been converted, and knowing why I was in\ndespair, and believing that my suffering was wholly deserved, I\ndismissed the thought of a second conversion. \"How can a person know\nbeforehand,\" I reasoned, \"that he will feel at peace with God at the\nmoment the question is asked?\" By \"now\" do they not mean something more\ngeneral; to-night, for example? Deciding that there must be some\nlatitude to the word \"now\" and that God would understand my honesty of\npurpose, I went forward and united with the Church. As I look back upon\nit, it still seems a most wise decision.\n\nThough fully expecting to be happy again after joining the Church, yet\nmy misery only increased. _This was inevitable._ I had identified\nreligion with an _abnormal psychic state_. And such a state would not\nreturn without another terrific effort.\n\nThe next night, with an embarrassment that caused my cheeks to burn like\nfire, I rose before the scoffers and told them that God had converted\nme. Again I expected to feel happy. But, naturally, my sorrow only\ndeepened as the abnormal state did not return. For the next two weeks I\ntried with all my original earnestness to get back my happiness; but\nwithout success. One day while in a valley far from any human being,\nwhere the woods covered the hill before me, I was looking up into the\nsky and still pleading with God to restore my happy state of mind. Then\nthe thought occurred to me, \"Where is God?\" At that time I was so\nignorant of the universe that I thought the earth had a ceiling, and\nthat the ceiling of the earth was the floor of heaven. It seemed to be\nabout three rifle shots away. I thought that if one could get through\nthe ceiling of the earth he would be in heaven, and there would be God.\nAs I stood there gazing into the sky my mind said, \"Why does God not\nshow Himself?\" That He could part the clouds and show His face seemed\nthe most natural and reasonable thing in the world. Why, then, did He\nnot do so? Since He neither blesses me in answer to my prayers, nor\nshows Himself, possibly He does not exist. My wonderful experience may\nhave been nothing but a highly wrought state of feelings.\n\nI then recalled that ministers based their belief in the existence of\nGod on certain arguments. But suddenly this seemed the strangest\nprocedure imaginable. Why had God left us to argue and reason about His\nexistence? Should He not settle so great a question beyond all argument?\nHow strange it would be if my earthly father should stay away from us\nuntil we did not know whether he was dead or alive! We had the\nsatisfaction of loving and obeying our father without ever a chance to\ndoubt his existence. If our Heavenly Father would make me equally\ncertain of His existence I should follow Him through flood and fire.\n\"Then why does God not show Himself?\" \"Isn't it strange that He has\nhidden forever and forever!\"\n\nHere I remembered the Scripture which says, \"No man can see God and\nlive.\" But my heart quickly responded, \"It is one thing to come near\nenough to kill us, and quite another to come near enough to convince us.\nOh, isn't it strange that He hides forever?\"\n\nThen I thought of Jesus. But my heart replied, \"Maybe Jesus was\nmistaken.\" If He had a rapturous feeling like mine, and was able to\nsustain it, He would continue to believe in God even if He did not\nexist. Nothing short of God's personal appearance, it seemed to me,\ncould settle the question. \"Then why does God not show Himself? There is\nno sense in hiding; and if no sense in it, then it is wrong; and if\nwrong, then there is no God. Because God, if He exists, must be good and\nsensible.\"\n\nTherefore, when my reasoning led me to say, \"There _can't_ be a God,\" I\nfound that unbelief had entered the marrow of my being. I felt that God\ncould not possibly do such a foolish and wicked thing as to hide from\nHis children.\n\nHaving reached this conclusion, I felt alarmed at my wicked thoughts.\nThey were not, however, to be driven away. From that day forward the sky\nbecame more gray, and cold, and Godless. An awful crisis had come into\nmy life. It seemed an irreparable loss if there were no God. My life,\nalso, would go out in eternal night. If there was a God, and I gave up\nfaith, then I should go to an endless hell of inexpressible torment.\nThere was no comfort in either alternative. The problem was no longer\nthe problem of the Church; it was my personal problem. And the battle\nhad to be fought to a decisive issue. Being impaled on the two horns of\nthe dilemma, I found it increasingly difficult to reproduce the exalted\nstate of feeling on which I still relied for assurance.\n\nNever having met a college graduate, of course I had not heard one\npreach. It was in the college chapel, four years later, that I first\nlistened to a sermon by a college man. My impression was that he made\nneither noise nor light. That he made but little noise I knew. But I am\nnow willing to admit that he may have shed more light than I saw.\nPreaching often fails to make any connection with the fundamental ideas\nand difficulties of doubting minds.\n\nIn my new state of doubt, the first impulse was to confide in my father\nand Christian friends. But then I realized that I knew all the stock\nphrases, and that none of them met my case. If confronted with the old\nphrases would I not argue, and might I not confirm myself in a possible\nerror? Was it not safer to fight it out with God, if He existed, than to\nargue with those who could not feel what I had felt? The insistence of\nthese questions caused me to keep my secret wholly to myself, and to go\non with the struggle. Twenty-two years later during the last visit with\nmy father, as we rode together over the hills, I told him this story.\nWith a look of tenderness I shall never forget, he replied, \"I believe\nthe story because you tell me, but I am glad you did not tell me at the\ntime. I could not have helped you.\" Said he, \"I do not recall ever in my\nlife doubting the inspiration of the Scriptures, or the existence of\nGod. I have often doubted my worthiness and acceptance, but nothing\nmore.\" Still believing that I did the wise thing under the\ncircumstances, I was glad to have his approval. If an honest doubter\nasks for bread, he is not infrequently given a stone by well-meaning\nChristians,--and neither can understand the other.\n\nAs this is a _case study_, it should be said that my first mistake was\nin _discrediting_ my early religious experience. My second mistake was\nin identifying religion with an _extreme psychic state_. And when my\npsychic state failed me, then my _utterly false images_ of God and the\nuniverse completed the destruction of my faith. If I could have\nreproduced the psychic state readily, my false images of God and the\nuniverse would not have troubled me for many years.\n\nThe ministers who created these false impressions in my mind were not\ndeserving of censure, because they did not understand the forces with\nwhich they were dealing--and the community was in great need of\nsomething. Even for me, it was best that I did what we thought was right\nregardless of what followed.\n\nHaving entered upon the vigorous adolescent period, I greatly needed to\ntake my stand as an adult Christian. I needed to realize such a new\ninfluence as a thorough commitment of myself would bring. This, however,\nno one in the community understood.\n\nWe now know that one may be genuinely converted and hypnotized at the\nsame time. That is, he may enter God's service with the noblest spirit\nof loyalty, and at the same time submit himself to a process that will\ninduce the hypnotic state. Likewise, it is possible for one to be\nhypnotized under religious influences without being converted. This is\nthe case with those who wish religion only if it will give them more\npleasure than their sins. Though they may not deeply analyze it, yet\ntheir conversion is an experiment to see which they like the better; and\nwhen their hypnotic happiness leaves them, they return to their greater\npleasure in sin. Or, when the idea and method are rational, one may be\nconverted without being hypnotized. In this case a complete dedication\nof self to the will of God is trusted to bring its own rich reward in\nnoble enthusiasm and fine appreciation.\n\nSince I had always been a Christian, it was not conversion that I\nneeded, but a deeper commitment of myself to the will and work of God.\nAnd as I have already explained, this I did before trying to \"get\nreligion.\" The moral will is the spiritual spine. If it stands erect in\nits duties toward God and men, the whole spiritual life will come into\nnormal feeling and action. My unconditional submission to the will of\nGod was normal, beautiful, and necessary. But the experience which came\ntwo days later should be characterized as _a super-normal psychic\nstate_, _self-induced_. While the psychic state lasted my true religious\nfeelings cooeperated vigorously; but when it subsided, as it was bound to\ndo, my true religious emotions likewise disappeared. For years, all\nreferences to spirituality were understood by me to mean an exciting,\nnervous thrill; such a thrill as I had once felt. This led me to study\nthe feelings, a few years later, to see if I could determine their\nvalue. I found that I was able to hypnotize a man so that he thought he\nsaw God; and then I could cause him to fall down in adoration before his\nimaginary deity. Or, by taking ether, I could reproduce the glory world\nof my own so-called conversion. Feelings alone are not to be trusted,\nfor the objects which they often create do not exist. On the other hand,\nreal objects, valid and knowable, produce appropriate feelings when we\nare rightly related to them. Never have I been in such a state of pain\nor dejection but that I knew that I loved my children if my attention\nwas called to it. I still demand, therefore, an objective, knowable God\nbefore I can love Him.\n\nWhile greatly deploring such religious exercises as are calculated to\nproduce extreme psychic states, yet I bring an indictment against the\naverage Church of this generation because its religious feelings are\nsub-normal. The latter condition is probably as dangerous as the former.\nEven our physical temperature must be allowed to run neither too high\nnor too low. If in everything but religion we feel warmth and\nenthusiasm, we reveal a deplorable religious condition. For if one\nintelligently and fully commits himself to the will and service of God,\nappropriate feelings will come to him as surely as color comes to\nripening fruit.\n\nWhen prayer availed me nothing in bringing back the spirit of God--as I\nconceived of it--I first questioned my own heart. And when it no longer\ncondemned me, I then questioned God. As I understood it, to produce a\nrapturous feeling was God's part. My part was to believe and obey. If\nonly the hand of faith could succeed in laying hold of God the spiritual\ncurrent would come on with a thrill. A great deal of this sensational\nreligion still exists. It is to be found in all our great cities as well\nas in rural communities.\n\nLet two errors like false experiences and false images of God unite and\nthey will bring forth a whole brood of errors. So far as I am able to\nanalyze, I always had a perfect sense of God's character. If He existed\nat all, He was infinitely great and wise and good. But these\ncharacteristics simply meant the _quality_ of God and not God Himself.\n_Character without being was like a smile without a face._ It was this\nGod behind the character that I utterly misapprehended. My _false\npicture_ of God's being, of the universe, and the relation between the\ntwo was the cause of my religious vexation. If we add to these the\nfickleness of a sensational experience--labeled, true spiritual\nreligion--we may begin to understand my religious undoing.\n\nI dare say that the subject of extreme religious experience will not\ntrouble many of my readers, but half the population is vexed by false\nimages of God and the universe. These false images are so prevalent that\none trembles for the future of religion in a scientific age. As to\ncertain aspects of God's existence, the confusion is becoming greater\nevery day,--and there are good reasons for it. Since the masses are\ncoming to have a fairly accurate conception of the main outlines of the\nuniverse, their false images of God's being are faring badly in this new\nworld. Many are casting out their unsatisfactory image of God without\nanything to take its place. Some claim that we are much better off to\nthink of God's character without trying to form any conception of His\nbeing. Generally, however, when His image goes God goes with it. Those\nwho have been steeped in religion from their youth, may continue to\nworship God after He has almost disappeared; but succeeding generations\nwill have little interest in such an evasive God. They will wish to know\nthat God is before they attribute character to Him.\n\nThe various psychic cults are trying to find a more satisfying idea of\nGod; but they are simply making a bad matter worse. Over against this,\nhowever, is the popular phrase of the day, \"No one can possibly conceive\nof what God is like! So do not advertise your ignorance by trying.\"\nThis, probably, is the saddest of all.\n\nThe religious dynamo is in the heart, or moral feelings, while the\ncircuit is in the head, or formal ideas. If the circuit is broken the\nlight goes out. As long as one's ideas are not discredited by himself,\nhe may get some light with a very poor circuit. But once let him\nthoroughly discredit his own mental images, and the light will cease to\nshine.\n\nThe dynamo may be run long after the circuit is broken, and the light\nhas gone out. I ran mine for many years. The minister's wife previously\nreferred to was doing the same thing. Many students reported to\nProfessor Leuba that they continued to pray, through habit or sentiment,\nbut that God had so faded from their minds that prayer no longer meant\nanything to them. Many learned scientists revealed the \"broken circuit\"\nof their thoughts by giving their crude conceptions or no conceptions of\nGod. These men have long since ceased to run their religious dynamo.\n\nIf the lights refuse to come on, after a while one grows tired of\nstoking the furnace merely to keep the dynamo running. Therefore, in the\nsucceeding chapters my aim will be to show how I mended my circuit.\n\nAfter continuing my fruitless struggle for two years I became desperate.\nFor one thing, I had no religious young people with whom to associate.\nWhen not alone, I worked with vile men who never allowed much time to\nelapse without indulging in obscene conversation. Living in a community\nwhere we had never seen a railroad, or a piano, or an organ, I found\nlittle to entertain or comfort me. And my religion added greatly to my\nburden. There was just work and privations and fruitless prayers. So it\nis not strange that at the end of two years I wished that I might die.\nThis feeling came to me with such force one day, when I was working in a\ndistant, lonely place, that I gave audible expression to the wish. Not\nthat I wanted to die on that particular day! I have never seen the time\nwhen I wanted to die to-day. But hoping that I might die in ten years, I\nresolved anew that I would just stiffen my neck, and grit my teeth, and\npray on until the end came--which I hoped would not be too distant.\nDuring these two years I was very faithful to every known Christian\nduty. Once I even tried to pray in prayer meeting, but broke down with\nfright in the middle of the first sentence. I regularly bore testimony,\nhowever, to my determination to go forward in the Christian life.\n\nSoon after the time of my deep depression it was announced that a series\nof revival meetings was to be held in the community. An uneducated old\nminister, rather feeble in body, was to conduct the meetings. As there\nwere but few Christians to help him, it looked like a great undertaking.\nThis question rose in my mind, \"Would it be wrong for me to take an\nactive part in persuading others to become Christians while I myself am\nin doubt of God's existence?\" I had not then heard of people doing\nChurch work to gain social standing. And if I had, it could not have\nbeen a motive because socially I already belonged to the \"four hundred.\"\nSome men were reported to have joined the Church to beat a neighbor in a\nhorse trade or an ox trade--and this I knew to be very wicked. But as I\nhad neither horses nor oxen to trade there were but two motives that\ncompelled me to go forward. The first motive was the hope that in this\nway I might find God. The second was that I might help someone else to\nbe religious,--since other people appeared to have more faith. I decided\nthat the proposed course was justifiable because if God did not exist it\ncould make but little difference, and if He did it was very important\nthat people should be brought to Him. Consequently, I selected a young\nman of my own age. He was on his way to the schoolhouse with a band of\nhilarious young people when I called him aside. We were very late in\nreaching the services because out in the dark I labored long and hard\nwith my friend and used every art of persuasion that I could command\nbefore I brought him to a decision. Finally, however, he promised to go\nto the \"mourner's bench\" if I would go with him. Then we entered the\nschoolhouse, and each one kept his promise. My friend became so\ndesperately wrought up at the altar that his parents, who were not\nChristians, did not know what to do with him when the services were\nover. They therefore asked me to take him home with me for the night. My\nfriend continued to weep all the way home, and frequently requested that\nwe stop to pray. That journey of a mile and a quarter across the fields\nI shall never forget. But before we went to sleep, suddenly clasping my\nhand, he exclaimed, \"Oh, I am converted.\" Knowing how he felt I was very\nglad for him, but at the same time my heart cried within me, \"I do\nwonder if there is anything in it! It is wonderful to him now, I know,\nbut how will he feel to-morrow, or next week, or in six months?\"\n\nHowever, I next persuaded his parents to go forward, and the minister\nasked me to pray for them at the altar--which I did. They, too, were\nconverted, but no blessing came to me. During the two weeks, I led\neleven people to the altar, and was asked by the minister each night to\noffer prayer for the seekers.\n\nOn the last night of the series, near the close, the minister said:\n\n\"Now there is a little business to be attended to, and will Brother\nRichard Swain please withdraw from the room?\" I was so surprised and\nexcited that I arose and went out into a temperature below zero without\neither overcoat or hat. Leaving the reader to judge of my ethics and\nmanners, I will confess that I put my ear up to the wall and listened\nwith all my might. The minister said:\n\n\"Some of us have been considering the matter, and we are convinced that\nBrother Richard Swain has a decided call to the ministry. We want you,\ntherefore, if you think it is wise, to recommend him to the conference\nfor license to preach.\"\n\nThis was such a shock to me that a little cry went up from my\nheart,--\"And I don't even know that there is a God!\"\n\nAs there was no dissenting vote the minister said, \"You may now call him\nin.\" If only my coat and hat had been with me I should not have been\npresent when the door opened. However, with the temperature below zero,\nand neither overcoat nor hat, even a young candidate for the ministry\ncould not refuse to enter. But it would have been more to his comfort if\nthe congregation had not been seated to face the door.\n\nThrough this vote of the Church I was compelled to grapple with a new\nquestion of ethics. Would it be right for me under the circumstances to\nappear for examination? I had not asked for license to preach. The\nmatter had been thrust upon me without my knowledge and consent. How\ncould I know but this was the road over which I was being led to the\nlight? Besides, eleven people had responded to my appeal. Would I care\nto be a minister? It seemed to me that there was nothing in the world I\nshould so much like to be as a minister if only I could know there was a\nGod. This feeling decided me to accept the invitation and appear for\nexamination.\n\nWhile my education had not gone beyond that of the common country\nschools, and while I was but seventeen years of age, yet the average\nminister of the community had even less education. Not until three years\nafter I was licensed to preach did I learn that there was such an\ninstitution in the world as a Theological Seminary. However, in those\npioneer days all the ministers, missionaries, Irish pack-peddlers, and\nhorse thieves who passed through put up at my father's house for the\nnight without ever being charged a cent. They more than paid their way,\nthough, I can assure you, by having to talk religion and theology until\nmidnight with my father who was a born theologian. Though my father was\nnot an educated man, yet he had picked up an immense amount of knowledge\nalong certain lines, and always enjoyed a friendly debate more than a\ngood dinner. At such times, from early childhood, I had been allowed to\nsit in the chimney corner and listen until the last word was said. It\nwas my motion-picture show. And no child ever had more pleasure than\ncame to me when I saw that my father had \"wound up\" his man in the\nargument. Then, with the greatest cordiality, my father would show the\nguest to bed. As there was but one great room, and beds none too many, I\nusually slept with the guest. And according to the guest's report in the\nmorning, I had given him the completest kicking he ever had in his life.\n\nWith such training, and in such a community, it is not strange that my\nbiblical and doctrinal examination was pronounced entirely satisfactory.\nAfter I had gone to school for ten years it, probably, would not have\nbeen so satisfactory. Indeed, I was strongly advised not to go to\ncollege, as it was likely to rob me of my spirituality; and besides,\nmany souls would be lost while I was getting an education.\n\nThough I continued for a time on the farm or in the coal mines, yet I\nwas told to go out and preach somewhere on Sundays. Accordingly, I would\nride ten or twenty miles on Sunday to preach in different schoolhouses.\nPutting the rein over the horn of the saddle, I would plead before the\ncold gray sky for an unknown God to renew my happy feelings as a token\nof His existence. But no happiness, or assurance, came to me. When the\ntime came to preach, I felt the importance of not throwing our lives\naway in sinful living, and so was able to give them some very earnest\nadvice. Then on the return trip I would continue to pray to an\nunsympathetic sky. Nothing, however, ever came of it except a deeper\ndepression of spirits. Though the dynamo was running at a terrific rate,\nyet the circuit of my thoughts was broken beyond my ability to repair.\nSo I decided to go to college at any sacrifice.\n\nBoarding a train for the first time, I went two hundred miles for my\npreparatory course in connection with the college where I expected to\ngraduate. But no religious experience came to me until the middle of my\nsophomore year. Then while studying Mark Hopkins' little book, \"The Law\nof Love, and Love as a Law,\" I got a new insight into the human soul. I\ncould see that if one would bring all his powers into harmony, and then\nrelate them to the beautiful enfolding universe, all things must work\ntogether for his good,--if by his good one meant the perfect unfolding\nof his life. Instantly there came a great joy in living. It took shape\nin the thought, \"All things work together for good to them that love\nGod.\" I felt that no proposition in geometry was more capable of proof.\nA life with its powers united in the will of God must unfold to match\nthe harmony without, even as the rose unfolds to the light and warmth of\nthe sun. Besides, I now had entertainment and beautiful friends. Almost\nany good thing seemed possible. \"This,\" I said, \"must be what\nintelligent people mean by Christian experience.\" The only remaining\nquestion was the old one, \"Is there a God?\" Is God \"The Allness of\nthings about us?\" This, however, seemed too pantheistic. And the\npersonal God still evaded me. So I decided that the question of God was\ntoo much for me, and that I would just wait until I should meet the\n\"wise men\" who knew. In the meantime I would assume that there was a\nGod; for the college president believed that there was, and prayed to\nHim every day at chapel.\n\nAs the happy unfolding of my life continued I tried to commit all to God\nwhose will, if He existed, I very well knew. At any rate there was\nsomething in the universe that matched my need. I would just call it God\nuntil I met the \"wise men\" in further courses of study which by this\ntime I had fully resolved upon. So the last two and a half years of my\ncollege course were very beautiful; they constantly increased my joy in\nliving. No small part of this better experience was due to the influence\nof the Christian gentleman and fascinating preacher who became our new\ncollege pastor.\n\nHere it becomes necessary to relate something more delicate than\nanything that has gone before. While I was in college my younger and\nonly brother passed through a great moral crisis. As I dearly loved him\nhe was much in my mind. During my senior year I dreamed night after\nnight that he was killed. In these dreams I was always with my two older\nsisters hunting our brother in the woods. Feeling certain that we should\nfind him dead, we usually came upon him by an old log cabin where he lay\ndead and mangled. I have no theories about the dreams, but the\nimpression made upon my mind was so deep that when I went home, after\ngraduating from college, I felt that I must do something to help him.\nAccordingly it was planned that I should spend three or four days with\nhim in the harvest field where he was running a heading machine. There I\nhoped we should have a pleasant time, and find an opportunity to shed\nsome light on the deeper meanings of life. Then some evening we would\nhave a quiet little talk when I might persuade him to be a Christian. As\nI was going a long distance to a theological school, and did not expect\nto see him again for three years, I hoped to accomplish my purpose\nduring the week at my disposal. For two and a half days we worked\ntogether with many pleasant little chats. It then being Saturday noon,\nmy father wanted me to drive fourteen miles with him and preach for him\nthe next day. I could return Monday and be with my brother one or two\ndays before the long journey. But Saturday afternoon a great storm\narose, and at midnight my host awakened me saying, \"Your brother is\nkilled by lightning.\"\n\nThough we started home immediately, the mud was so deep and sticky that\nit required till daylight to make the journey. There had been a\ncloudburst, and such an electric storm as is seldom seen. From midnight\ntill dawn we dragged through the mud under an indescribable electrical\ndisplay. Forked lightning splitting the sky in every direction made the\nwhole heavens lurid with light, while the low thunder like distant\nartillery scarcely ceased to roll. No pen can describe that journey.\nNature seemed omnipotent and awe-inspiring. At first my heart was dazed\nand dumb. Then it cried, \"Why did God kill my brother at this little\nnick of time when I was hoping to bring him to Christ? Was there ever\nanything like this? Why _did_ He take him?\"\n\nThen while I was fixedly watching the omnipotent display before me my\nmind asked:\n\n\"Did God kill him or did the great and terrible machine, called the\nworld, kill him? What is the world, and what is God? When does God act,\nand when does the universe act? Would they not be squarely in each\nother's way much of the time? The world I know, and its activities I\nbehold, but where is God? Does He have an abode, or is He a sort of\nspiritual ether that pervades the universe?\" And my heart responded,\n\"Oh, you have never yet settled the question of whether there is a God!\"\nSo once more God faded into a dream, or a guess, while the elements\ncontinued to display their terrifying power.\n\nAt daylight I stood with a broken heart beside my dead brother,\nbelieving either that there was no God, or else that my brother had gone\nto endless torment. A few moments later I saw my father kneel by his\nside, and heard him say, \"Oh, my son, my son, would to God I had died\nfor thee!\"\n\nIn a short time we were invited to breakfast, and my father being unable\nto speak motioned to me to say grace. However I managed I do not know,\nbut out of a choking throat I said grace to as empty and Godless a world\nas any human being ever faced.\n\nTwo weeks after my brother's death I entered the theological seminary.\nThe deep, vast, and unshakable verities from which I could not escape\nwere sorrow and love. All else was chaos. As a hungry man seeks for\nfood, so I sought for light. Much of the theology in the books which I\nread irritated me so that I could scarcely eat my food at mealtimes. Yet\nit was important that I should learn the history of human thought. All\nof my professors I truly loved and respected, but the attitude of\ntheological schools more than thirty years ago was not wholly suited to\nthe needs of one on the border of a \"new world-awakening\" whose faith\nhad suffered so much and so long. The theological world was not quite\nready to give the help that it now gives to many suffering minds.\n\nDuring my first year in the seminary I frequently dreamed of seeing my\nbrother in torment. Sometimes I would wake trembling, and even when I\ncould throw off the thought and go to sleep, I was liable to repeat the\ndream in some new form.\n\nOnce when I was walking with one of the professors, as true a Christian\nman as ever I knew, I told him of the circumstances of my brother's\ndeath. He asked me if my parents were Christians. I told him that they\nwere very good Christians. Then he counseled me not to go off into any\nheresies, but to feel comforted concerning my brother; for \"The promises\nwere to the parents and to their children unto the third and fourth\ngeneration.\"\n\nWhile I listened to this in silence, yet the following thoughts went\nthrough my mind:\n\n\"Then God would save my brother who had not improved his privileges,\nwhile He would consign to endless torment our poor play-fellows who were\nnot blessed with the good influence of Christian parents.\"\n\nMy mind instinctively felt what I had discretion not to say: \"I should\ndespise a God who had no more ethical sense than that. God should be\nharder on my brother than on them.\"\n\nMuch of my philosophy and theology was worked out during my seminary\ncourse; but there were gaps that I could not fill. So I next went to\nYale to study philosophy. In postgraduate work, through the guidance of\nprofessors, I expected to find the \"wise men\" for whom I had waited so\nlong. However, these \"wise men\" are not readily understood in a few\nweeks. They have a poor faculty for making connection with all the ideas\nthat still linger in the mind of callow youth. At any rate it soon\ndawned upon me that there was no such God as I was looking for or else\nthese men were unable to give Him to me. When this conviction came to me\nI went out from a recitation one night into the dark and once more\nfought the old battle. Standing on the New Haven Green and looking up\ninto the pelting sleet I said:\n\n\"Now I have met the 'wise men,' and still I do not know whether there is\nan inspired Bible, or a heaven, or a God.\" But I exclaimed, \"O God, if\nyou are, and if I should ever meet you anywhere in eternity, I would run\nto you as a little child runs to a father. I would tell you how weak and\nsinful and ignorant I am, and I know you would love me.\" That night on\nthe old Green, while in the dark and pelted with sleet, I went out onto\nthe last crag where any human soul can go, and cried into the infinite\ndepths, \"O God, if you are there, some day I shall know you and love\nyou.\" In that act I passed beyond all men and all institutions, and took\nmy stand with the final reality, whatever it might be, and at least I\nwas free and not afraid. Though thoroughly agnostic still, yet I could\nquietly work and wait.\n\nReturning to my studies and resolving to appropriate whatever I could\nunderstand, I was surprised to find how much of the teaching ministered\nto my needs. Before long I came to see that God did not have a central\nnucleus, or ghost form in heaven; neither did He resemble a refined\nsubstance like ether. Spirit was something quite different from what I\nhad supposed. My mind was hitting the trail. Then I understood that God\nhad not revealed Himself to the world according to my demand, because no\nsuch God existed in heaven or earth. So one day in class I asked a\nprofessor, who is now dead, if he thought we should see God in heaven as\nwe see men and trees here. At the same time I assured him that I did\nnot. His answer was, \"I think your position would be a very dangerous\ndoctrine to teach.\" But my own conviction was that it was becoming a\nvery dangerous doctrine not to teach. Time has proved that I was right.\nMillions of people are suffering to-day from false images of God or from\nno image of God. Not long ago when I related this class incident to a\nYale man, he remarked, \"Well, Professor ---- made great growth before he\ndied.\"\n\nMy categorical answers to the four questions at the head of this chapter\nare: When we have rational ideas of God and the universe we shall see\nthat He is leaving nothing undone to reveal Himself. To an enlightened\nunderstanding it does not seem possible that God could reveal Himself so\nthat no one could doubt His existence. Though the existence of God is a\nquestion of doubt and discussion with many, yet we may achieve deep and\nsatisfying assurance if we go about it in the right way. I think it\nwould be morally wrong for God to leave His children in doubt of His\nexistence if He were able to reveal Himself.\n\nThis chapter is largely excavation. We have dug the hole deep so that we\nmay commence in the next chapter to lay the foundation on solid bottom.\nAnd this was necessary if our proposed structure is to stand.\n\nAllow me this closing word. When I began to get on my religious feet at\nYale, I unexpectedly received a call to a college pastorate. And though\nthe usual number of sceptics were found among the students, yet in many\nrespects they were the most savable men in college. Usually, if you\ncould hit the keys of their souls they would ring back and ring true.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nHOW SCIENCE SAVES RELIGION, OR MODERN KNOWLEDGE AND RELIGION\n\n _What_ is God?\n\n _Who_ is God?\n\n _Where_ is God?\n\n What does God _do_?\n\n _If the ancients made their gods, how do we know that we\n are not making our God?_\n\n _May we not be communing with a mere idea?_\n\n\nMODERN KNOWLEDGE AND RELIGION\n\nChristian character, the Christian college, and Christian civilization\nhave been very important factors in the discovery and development of\nmodern learning.\n\nExpecting to derive much benefit from the sciences, Christian people\nwith fine enthusiasm strove to promote them. Nevertheless, there came a\ntime when the allied sciences threatened to turn upon and destroy the\nreligion that had so carefully nurtured them. When the scientific\nimagery of the Bible began to clash with the clearly ascertained facts\nof science, many people concluded that science and religion were\ncontradictory; however, the crude conceptions of the material universe\nfound in the Bible are no integral part of religion.\n\nThat religion may discard its wornout clothes for new and better ones\nhas not been an easy lesson for believers, or unbelievers, to learn.\nThinking that religion must stand or fall with the scientific accuracy\nof the Bible, some drew back from modern science preferring religion;\nothers clung to the new learning forsaking religion. For a time,\ntherefore, it was inevitable that religion and her foster daughter,\nmodern science, should not be on the best of terms; because the daughter\ncould not approve of the mother's dress, and the mother thought the\ndaughter utterly lacking in becoming reverence. However, with their\ngreat need of each other, let us believe that they are now settling down\nto a lasting friendship of mutual helpfulness.\n\nUnfortunately, the opinion is gaining considerable credence that modern\nChristians are believing less and less, and that finally they will cease\nto believe in religion altogether.\n\nBut this is the very opposite of the truth, for they are still believing\nthe old religion, though in a vastly bigger and better way. For, at the\npresent time, where its help is welcome, modern learning is rendering a\nbeautiful service to Christian faith. And this is the grateful testimony\nof thousands of intelligent, consecrated people. No well-informed\nperson, however, would deny that science has injured, and will\nincreasingly weaken, the faith of those who do not know how to make a\nreligious use of modern learning.\n\nWhile religion and science have distinctive fields to cultivate, yet\nneither may disregard the claims of the other with impunity.\nNevertheless, we do rejoice to see science tearing down the \"old cabin\"\nof an unscientific world in which the Church has lived too long. But\nwhen it proposes to shut God out of the _new mansion_ of a scientific\nuniverse, those who know and love Him will seriously object,--especially\nsince the new knowledge makes God better understood, and more needed\nthan ever.\n\nIt is likewise pleasant to see religion standing for spiritual verities\nand duties, but when it demands that the Christian shall live in a world\nthat is crude and half false, the modern man resents it. He simply\ncannot do it. Yet, to-day and always, religion should be a simple story\nthat anyone may understand; but it should not be clothed in such crude\nand antiquated forms as to antagonize the man of modern knowledge.\n\nDuring these introductory statements, we may as well admit that the\naverage scientist appears to have as poor a knowledge of religion as the\naverage Christian has of science. Too often he is still resisting\nreligious conceptions that all intelligent Christians have long since\noutgrown, or else he is adopting philosophical theories that are only\nhalf thought through. This is amazingly true of some men who are superb\nin their own chosen lines of research. No one is hit by this statement\nunless he is standing in the line of the shot. Whether or not the reader\nis hit, I beg of him to keep friendly with me until he has heard my\nsimple story of God in His world.\n\nCould we but free the religion of Jesus from the crude psychology and\nthe antiquated science of other days, and see it at home in the fairer\nworld of to-day, it would shine with new luster; and at the same time\ngive a rich, new meaning to the world itself,--such as it can never have\napart from religion. Science, and not religion, was responsible for\ncrude science.--Religion will be responsible if it retains a science\nthat has become antiquated.\n\nTaking our stand then in the midst of modern knowledge, I shall endeavor\nto _picture_ religion both at home and happy in the new world. I shall\nnot have much to say directly about scientific subjects, but shall\nconstantly try to keep in mind the man with modern information. The\nnearer I can make this book resemble a primer, the better satisfied I\nshall be. If one could so write that the learned would approve, and the\nignorant understand, his joy should be full. To give a simple\n_description_ of God in His world congenial to the scholar, while\ncomprehensible and acceptable to common busy people, would be the\nhighest possible service one could wish to render. In these days there\nis great need of a clear presentation of God; a presentation that is\nfree from the entanglements of technical learning, and at the same time\nconsonant with the known facts of life. Practical men would like to see\n\"the mended circuit of our religious thoughts,\" since their circuits, in\nmany cases at least, seem broken beyond repair. They are asking for a\nsimple and satisfying gospel that is cognizant of the facts and forces\namong which they live and toil. We shall begin, therefore, at the very\nbeginning.\n\n\n1. What is God?\n\nThe discussion which immediately follows does not concern itself with\nwhy we believe in God, but aims to give a definite idea of how we\nconceive of Him. For those who have a natural sense of God, or a\nreligious nature, a satisfying conception of Him will be ample for their\nspiritual needs. And, furthermore, those who doubt God's existence need\nfirst of all a definite idea of what we mean by the term Deity.\n\nIt is a pleasure, therefore, to answer in the words of Jesus, \"God is a\nspirit.\"\n\nThis might very well be regarded as a final answer but for the fact that\nspirit means all sorts of things to different minds. When I once asked a\ncompany of intelligent people if I were a spirit, they promptly answered\n\"no,\" but supposed I should be when I died. They seemed to think of\nspirit as a ghost, as something that might appear or disappear through\nlocked doors. The same idea apparently obtained universally in times\npast, and that doubtless accounts for the fact that the Greek word,\nmeaning spirit, was translated \"Ghost\" in the Scriptures and Apostles'\nCreed. But the idea of a _visible_ spirit should perish. Spirits are\nneither evil ghosts nor Holy Ghosts. Even if there were a ghost, that\nwhich appeared could be no more than the instrument of the spirit, and\nnot the spirit itself. However refined and ghostly the form, the spirit\nwould remain as invisible as when it had a gross human body.\n\nAs further evidence of confusion on this subject, a young man from one\nof our good colleges seeking membership in my Church, informed me that\nhe had peculiar views. Spirit, whether applied to God or man, had no\nmeaning for him. He wanted to join the Church because in that way he\nbelieved he could render a better social service. In his thought, God\nwas neither a person nor a spirit, but a force. Having no satisfactory\nidea of spirits he had banished the thought of them entirely from his\nmind.\n\nAll through my own period of doubt I conceived of God's spirit on earth\nas something emanating from a glorious spiritual _form_ in heaven.\nThinking that this form in heaven was a spirit made it only the easier\nto believe that God himself could appear to men if He cared to do so.\nThat He did not care to appear to His children and thereby settle the\nquestion of His existence beyond all doubt seemed preposterous. And it\nwould still seem so to my moral sense, if I retained my former\nconception of spirit. Of course He should not come near enough to\n\"consume us,\" but He might come near enough to convince us.\n\nThe \"New Thought\" people, struggling with the meaning of spirit, have\narrived at the conclusion that there is just \"_One universal substance\ncalled spirit_.\" So, God is not to them _a_ spirit, but simply spirit,\n\"a universal substance.\"\n\nTwo or three other cults believe that man's spirit is simply his\nphysical breath.\n\nTo say that God is a spirit, then, with any of these gross conceptions\nin mind, is sadly to misconceive Him.\n\n_Whether we say God is a Spirit, a Soul, or a Person, our meaning is the\nsame._ Of these three expressions, however, the word _Person_ is the\nbest because, being the scholar's term, it is clearly defined. So when\nwe have learned the signification of the word _Person_, we shall\nattribute the same meaning to all three words, using them\ninterchangeably.\n\nIn speaking of God as a person the scholar never has in mind either form\nor substance, however rarefied. He does not know even that there is\nmaterial substance, much less spiritual substance. He knows very well\nwhat personality is as experience, but beyond that he knows nothing\nabout it. Personality, to him, means _a Will that knows itself_, and\nthen knows _Other Wills_. When we say that God is a Spirit, or Person,\nwe should mean that He is a _Loving Intelligent Will_. In speaking of\nGod as the Soul of the universe we should have in mind the same idea.\n\nThere is no harm in thinking of God as a force if the force is\nintelligent, and knows itself; but a force that does not know that it is\na force, is not God. A progressive Jewish rabbi expressed the wish that\nwe could get rid of the word God altogether, and substitute some such\nword as \"Cosmos.\" When asked if the \"Cosmos\" knew that it was a cosmos,\nor that we were talking about it, he replied that he did not think so.\n\"Then I would rather worship you,\" I said, \"than your cosmos, for you\nwould at least know that I reverenced you.\"\n\nAn intelligent lawyer friend of mine once said to me, \"Of course I do\nnot believe in a personal God.\" I asked him if he meant that he did not\nbelieve in a God who has a _form_ in heaven. But he answered:\n\n\"Oh, no, no, I have been beyond that for twenty-five years! God, if He\nmeans anything, means the infinite, while a person means the limited.\nNow, who ever heard of such a childish thing as a limited infinite? No,\npig-iron, as much as anything, is God.\"\n\nI replied, \"With all your intelligence, you haven't the remotest idea of\nwhat constitutes personality. You are not aware that by personality we\nmean a certain type of experience, and not a substance. Personality is\nrealized only as the experience of self-knowledge is achieved. You are\nnot as yet much of a personality, you are hardly more than a candidate\nfor the office, but by making a good campaign you may get elected. You\nare not very personal because you are not very self-knowing, and if you\nshould drop the plummet into the depths of your experience to sound\nyourself, by that very act you would acquire new depth, and would need\nto try again to fathom yourself. So at best, you are only becoming\npersonal. None but the Infinite Experience can know itself perfectly,\nand therefore, God alone is completely personal.\"\n\nMy friend had no idea either of God's personality or his own, and his\nphilosophical conception of nature was only a little less crude.\n\nIt was a long step in the right direction when I came to realize that I\nhad never seen my mother, with whom I lived for so many happy years. Yet\nthere was one thing that I felt sure I knew--absolutely, as I knew\nnothing else--and that was my mother. Not her face, not her voice, not\nher attitudes nor her actions, though all these I knew too and loved.\nBut back of all these there was a real mother, of whom these were only\nmanifestations. And this real mother, that I knew as I knew nothing\nelse, was silent, and invisible. And then I found that I knew myself\ntoo--hardly as well as I knew my mother, but in the same way, and I knew\nmyself also to be invisible and silent. My spirit, or personality, is as\ninvisible and silent as God. I have no more seen myself than I have seen\nHim. Neither has my naked soul ever made a sound. All the words that my\nsoul desires expressed are produced by a sort of animated phonograph\nwhich we call the mouth. At the wish of my invisible self the physical\norgans of speech set the air vibrating, but my self-conscious Will is\neternally silent. There is much to be said about the relation of\nPersonalities to their instruments, but this must be left until a little\nlater. It will avoid confusion if we try to take but one step at a time.\n\nGreat scholars may think that such ideas as I have endeavored to\nillustrate are too simple to require statement, nevertheless the\nrecognition of these simple facts concerning my mother and myself\nunlocked my prison door. It revolutionized everything within me, and\nwithout me. During the thirty years of my active ministry, it has been\nthe moulding thought of my life. Once realizing that God was a \"Loving\nIntelligent Will,\" I no longer thought of Him as sitting on a throne, or\nshowing His face through parted clouds. This conception of spirit gave\nto everything new shape and color. It was the idea around which a new\nheaven and a new earth took form. The rest of this book must further\nexplain what it then meant, and still means, to me. As the result of a\nbetter conception of spirit, my world was relieved of intolerable\nintellectual burdens. Simply to get the idea, however, is not enough;\none must follow it out logically to see where it will lead him.\n\nTo the question, \"What is God?\" I once more answer that He is a Loving\nIntelligent Will. And, apart from His instruments, He is silent and\ninvisible, here and everywhere, now and always.\n\n\n2. Who is God?\n\nFirst, allow me to say that He is _not_ the Father of our bodies, though\nHe is the Creator of them. God created trees, but He is not the Father\nof trees. Fatherhood, in addition to creation, implies likeness so close\nthat father and child classify as members of the same family. Our bodies\nwere not made in the image of God.\n\nWhile passing through my Sunday school where a college woman was giving\nsome supplementary work, I heard her teaching the young people that we\nwere made in the image of God because we had two legs instead of four,\nand stood on end. \"Why in the name of conscience,\" I thought, \"do we\npermit anyone in our churches to retain such detrimental and absurd\nideas?\" This woman was what the young men and women called a\n\"crackerjack\" in her college line. So I was amazed at her crude\nconceptions, until I realized that she had never heard an exposition of\nthe primitive story in Genesis. I also remembered that I had heard it\npreached from a pulpit, that man was in the image of God because he had\na face, and walked upright instead of going on all fours. Those churches\nthat believe man has no spirit except his breath are necessarily\nconfined to this monstrous idea; while many in our regular churches are\nin a maze of tangled thoughts.\n\nAccording to Scriptures, _God is the Father of spirits_. The \"Loving\nIntelligent Will\" is the Father of other loving intelligent wills. This\nmakes every created spirit a God-child, or a child of God. These terms\nmust be interchangeable, unless we are playing at \"make-believe,\" when\nwe say that a spirit is a child of God. Were not all spirits members of\nthe God family, it would be useless to teach them about God; for, being\nof a different order, they would not understand. It is impossible to\nteach a horse the things of a man, because he has not the spirit of a\nman. I believe in an anthropomorphic God, simply because I believe in a\nTheomorphic man. God must be in man's image, because man is in God's\nimage. But it is not the animal man in whose image God is.\n\nI should never believe in a religion that I was incapable of\nexperiencing. Neither could I experience a religion that was contrary to\nmy reason. Nevertheless, mine is not a private religion, because I am an\ninfinite debtor to the world's best thought, and to the world's best\nexperience. Without the help of the ages I never could have thought or\nfelt that which I cannot avoid thinking and feeling at the present time.\nThis is not an effort to prove anything, but simply an attempt to\npicture what I see and feel, with the hope that someone else may see and\nfeel in the same way.\n\nThe great pity of it all is that so many people have never _known_ the\nworld's best religious thought and experience. There are those, a\nthousand years behind their age, who are launching new religions or\nfostering old ones, who are utterly oblivious to the strata upon strata\nof human achievement above them.\n\nYes, God is the Father of _all spirits_, whether they reside on earth,\nor in heaven, or in hell. When once the meaning of spirit, or\npersonality, is realized there is no dodging the issue. If a horse goes\ndown the street keeping company with himself after this manner, \"Now I\nam an old horse, and I ought to be a good old horse, and I wonder what\nthe end will be,\" then he too is a son of God and our brother, though he\nhas four, instead of two legs. I do not think a horse so keeps company\nwith himself, but if he does, then we must own him and hope for the time\nwhen our brother will have something better than a quadruped for an\ninstrument.\n\nI am often asked what angels are like. That is an easy question. An\nangel is very much like my wife. For they both are spirits, and children\nof God. My wife is a sister of all the angels, and if Milton's great,\nclassical devil exists, he also is our brother, and a child of God. All\nspirits are children of God, whether good or bad, just because they are\nspirits.\n\nIn speaking of sons, the Bible usually means the good children of God;\nyet it clearly teaches that prodigals are likewise sons. Earthly parents\nare our older brothers and sisters, honored and much beloved; but only\nGod is the Father of our spirits. No one need fear that natural sonship\nto God makes it less imperative that we should become good sons. To be a\nbad son of God is a most wretched and deplorable thing in itself, and\nleads inevitably to all deserved punishment. A good Father will not be\nslack in discipline. And furthermore, the rebellious sons of God are not\nslow to make hell in this life, and that they will make no more hell\nafter death we may not dare to believe.\n\nIf the truth about the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of all\nspirits could enter the minds of the people with all that it involves,\nit would break the heart of the Church, and, we may believe, the heart\nof the world as well. As yet, however, this truth is but dimly realized.\nI once had a dear old friend, a saint, whom I greatly appreciated. With\nher white hair and charming accent she was beautiful. Her mind was\nrichly stored with beautiful poetry, and her apt quotations often\ntouched me deeply. Loving all the saints, she was equally loved by them.\nBut one day I learned that my dear old saint was a saint only in\nspots--yet she was a saint. The discovery came about in this way; I\nasked her if she knew of the family with four children across the way,\nwho had lately come to her neighborhood, suggesting that she might be\nuseful to them. Now, what do you think my dear old saint said? With a\nspasmodic jerk of the elbow, and a toss of the head, she replied, \"No! I\ndon't want to know such folks!\" This was a case in which caution was\nunnecessary, and where real service might have been rendered. For the\ntime being my friend had completely forgotten that her neighbors were\nGod's little ones and her own brothers and sisters. She had forgotten\nthat her Father was over there struggling and suffering to save His\nchildren from sin and harm, and that He sorely needed His older daughter\nover the way to help Him. My dear old saint would not go across the\nstreet to help her Father whom she thought she loved so dearly. She did\nnot realize that God was the Father of all spirits, and that all they\nwere members of one family. My dear old friend has long since gone to\nher home beyond, and has learned how sadly she failed to comprehend the\nFatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. This knowledge doubtless\ngives her many a heartache, and drives her forward with new zeal to\nlearn the lesson that God is the Father of _all spirits_.\n\nWe may be proud of our family name and social standing; we may think\nthat we are different and apart, but we should remember that no one\never had more disreputable children than God. All the bad people are His\nsons and daughters. True, they have dishonored His name, and grieved His\nheart, yet He does not disown them; rather He follows them into all the\ndens and haunts of vice asking them to return home. And as fast as we\nbecome good sons, we join the Father in His love quest for His prodigal\nsons, who are our brothers.\n\nPossibly I am a direct descendant of King Swain of Denmark who conquered\nEngland in the tenth century. There is no evidence to that effect, but\nhe is the first Swain of whom I know in history. However this may be,\nwith every other self-conscious being I can lift my head and say with\njustifiable pride and gladness of heart, \"God, who makes the world, is\nmy Father.\" How wonderful you are, O God-child! and what a pity it would\nbe if anything should drag you down from your divine possibilities!\n\n\n3. Where is God?\n\nWhen I once asked a company of young people where my spirit was they\npromptly answered,\n\n\"In your body.\" I inquired,\n\n\"In a part of my body, or in all of it? Am I to understand that my\nspirit is just the shape and size of my body, and that when I am thin of\nflesh my spirit is not as large as when I am fleshy?\"\n\n\"No,\" said they, \"we do not like that.\"\n\n\"Oh! your spirit is in your brain,\" remarked one young fellow.\n\n\"Now, then, I have it,\" said I, \"my spirit is just the shape and size of\nthe cavity in my skull.\"\n\n\"No,\" he replied, \"we don't know how it is.\" And they did not know,\nbecause no one had explained it to them. This is what I told them:\n\n\"The spirit is not in the body as a hand is in a glove, for that is one\n_thing_ inside another _thing_. Spirit has no dimensions. If any boy has\na rule in his pocket let him measure my 'conscious will,' and tell me\nhow long it is.\" They promptly replied that it could not be done. So I\ncontinued:\n\n\"If my self-conscious will occupies no space, then I, the spirit, am\nneither in my body nor out of my body. I am nowhere. 'Where' applies to\nthings and not to spirit. The book is in the room because it occupies a\ndefinite space. When we say that our spirits are in our bodies we simply\nmean that our wills are capable of commanding our bodies and making them\nact. _While our spirits are nowhere, yet they do get expressed\nsomewhere._ For all practical purposes, spirits are where their\ninstruments express them in time and space.\"\n\nAt this point in my remarks, I turned aside, and poked sharply with my\nforefinger a friend who stood near. In reply to his inquiring look I\nsaid:\n\n\"I did not poke you. It was this finger.\" (Then to the boys) \"Did I poke\nhim? My finger touched him because I wished it. My will got expressed\nright at the end of the finger, and therefore that is where my spirit\nseemed to be.\"\n\nAgain I punched my friend, but this time with a long stick, and when he\nturned sharply about, I said:\n\n\"I did not jab you, it was the stick. But the stick,\" I explained, \"had\nbecome the instrument of my will; therefore my will got expressed at a\ngreater distance from my body. The stick was really the lengthening of\nmy finger.\"\n\nI then told them of the man in Virginia who was talking by wireless\ntelephone. It is reported that when he spoke, one man in Paris, and\nanother in Honolulu, replied at the same time, as if he were in both\nplaces:\n\n\"Hello, Jake, is that you?\" Had there been a million receivers in the\nencircling space with people listening, it would have seemed to every\none of them that he was present. Though expressed in a million remote\nplaces at one time, he would not have been divided into a million\npersons; neither would he have been spread out to reach all the places\noccupied by his listeners. His instruments would have been spread out,\nbut not his soul. His soul would still have remained sharply\nself-conscious. That concentrated, self-conscious will is what we mean\nby the soul. The soul is always a definite, personal will, to itself and\nto the one or the many with whom it is communicating, however short or\nextended its instruments.\n\nThat the young people grasped this conception of spirit, was made\nevident in a subsequent review.\n\nSo to the question, \"Where is God?\" we must answer that, as naked\nspirit, He is not anywhere, but that His instruments may express Him\neverywhere. Where His instruments end, or whether nature ends at all, no\nscientist knows. The Divine Spirit is no larger than the human spirit,\nfor neither of them has any largeness at all. God is simply more\nconscious, more loving, and more intelligent than we; and His\ninstruments are infinitely more vast than ours. Developing a soul is not\nmaking it larger, but making it more loving, intelligent, and\npurposeful. However, the development of the soul does require the\nenlargement of its instruments. An undeveloped person may be very\nconscious of his body and its wants and scarcely at all aware of his\nsoul and its needs. To be infinitely self-knowing, like God, is the most\nconcentrated and intensified reality conceivable. So the minister's wife\nof whom we have spoken, was mistaken in thinking God a rarified\nsubstance like ether, spread out to fill all nature. With her\nmaterialistic conception of God, she thought Him so spacially big that\nshe could neither know Him nor love Him, whereas He is no more spread\nout than the mathematical point that has no dimensions. To give complete\nsatisfaction to our friend, it will be necessary to show her the various\nways of approaching this Loving Will, the Father of her own invisible\nself; but for this we are not yet ready.\n\nDr. Lyman Abbott tells of sitting at the table one day with his little\ngrandson when the latter said, \"'Grandfather, how can God be in Cornwall\nand in Newburgh at the same time?' I touched him on the forehead and\nsaid, 'Are you there?' 'Yes.' I touched him on the shoulder, 'Are you\nthere?' 'Yes.' I touched him on the knee, 'Are you there?' 'Yes.' 'That\nis the way,' I replied, 'God can be in Cornwall and in Newburgh at the\nsame time.' He considered a moment, and shyly smiled his assent.\"\n\nI am well aware that we have not said enough about God to make Him\nsatisfyingly near and personal to our love; but it is a start, and we\nstill have the pleasure of traveling together over a beautiful road\nuntil we shall stand face to face with Him whom our souls seek. We\nshould reach this desired goal in the fourth chapter. But if we become\nimpatient, we shall spoil the journey, for we are traveling as fast as\nwe can go without having a wreck.\n\nHere, a little incident from actual experience may be helpful. My eldest\nson, when a little child, would not say a prayer. This, beyond doubt,\nwas abnormal, because most little children are willing to pray. As my\nown religious life had given me so much trouble, I concluded that he had\ninherited my frailties, and not his mother's virtues. Being perplexed by\nhis attitude I would sometimes take him out to see the stars, when I\nwould speak of the greatness and goodness of God. Then, once in awhile,\nthough not often, I could get him to pray. We did not wish him to be\nunduly serious, certainly not solemn, but it did puzzle us to know why\nhe would not say a prayer. So one day when he came into my study I\nthought, \"Now is my chance.\" Taking him up, I set him on the desk before\nme, which permitted him to look out of the window upon the apple trees\nthat were a bower of beauty in their spring blossoms.\n\n\"Isn't this a beautiful world?\" I said.\n\n\"Yes,\" was his reply.\n\n\"Who made it?\"\n\n\"God.\"\n\n\"Well, wouldn't it be nice to pray a little?\" I asked.\n\n\"Oh,\" with a tone of aversion, \"I don't want to pray!\"\n\n\"You don't like to talk to God?\"\n\n\"Huh!\" scornfully. \"I can't _talk_ to God, He's up in heaven.\"\n\n\"No, God is in your heart.\" At that he rose to his knees and said, with\nan incredulous look on his face:\n\n\"Well, I guess I can't jump into my mouth!\" This made me feel that he\nwas born a little pagan, but at the same time it gave me one clue to the\ndifficulty. He made a difference between talking and praying. That he\nliked to talk, I knew, but now it appeared that, to his mind, offering\nprayers to some one so far away was quite a different thing. Then I\nasked him if he thought I loved him.\n\n\"Yes, I know you love me,\" he said, putting his arms about my neck, and\ngiving me a squeeze.\n\n\"Well,\" I asked, \"can you see my love?\"\n\n\"Yes.\"\n\n\"Are you sure you can see it?\"\n\n\"Why, of course.\"\n\n\"Well, then, put your hand on it.\"\n\n\"I can't _see_ your love, but,--I know you love me, though!\"\n\n\"Yes, you do know that I love you, but you can't see my love, neither\ncan you see _me_.\"\n\n\"Yes, I can!\"--and his hand literally flew to my cheek.\n\n\"Oh, no, that is not papa; that is flesh. You didn't think I was flesh,\ndid you? No, you can't see me because I am love, or spirit.\" Here I\ncarefully felt of his head, saying, \"Now, that is a bone box, but I\ndon't talk to a bone box when I talk to you.\" Next, feeling of his ear,\nI remarked, \"Isn't that a funny little thing, a piece of gristle!--but I\ndon't talk to gristle when I speak to you.\" Bringing my hand down over\nhis face, I continued, \"Here is some flesh with bones under it, but I\ndon't talk to flesh and bones when I talk to you. No, I can't _see_ you.\nYet, my love _knows_ your love, and your love knows my love. When my\nlove feels your love, then we say you are in my heart; and when our love\nfeels God's love, then He is in our hearts. Isn't it beautiful, that my\nlove knows and likes to talk to your love, and your love knows and likes\nto talk to my love, and that we like to talk to God's love?\" He didn't\nwait for me to ask him to pray, but at once began in a loud whisper,\nsaying:\n\n\"O God, help me to be a good boy, and to love papa and mamma, and\neverybody, and to do everything that is good.\" Then looking up with a\nsmile, he asked, \"Do you know what I was doing?\" I said:\n\n\"I think you were talking to the Lord.\" With evident satisfaction he\nadmitted that he was.\n\nTwo days after this he came into my study while I was reading a book and\nput his hand on my knee. Giving my knee a hard shove, he said:\n\n\"This isn't papa, is it? This is papa's _body_.\" My book went out of the\nway in a hurry, I can assure you, and there was a dear little upturned\nface smiling, which said, \"We are spirits, aren't we, papa?\" Never after\nthat did he refuse to pray.\n\nSome years ago a successful minister, about forty-five years of age,\nconsecrated, eloquent, and revered by his people, asked me how I\nconceived of God when I prayed. The conversation revealed the fact that\nhe was struggling with all the questions that troubled the little boy.\nThis unhappy condition was due to the fact that theology begins too far\ndown the stream, leaving unanswered and unconsidered the best questions\nof all, the questions of children and fools.\n\nOnce, when a little child, I was told by my mother that God saw all my\nnaughty thoughts. Immediately, I asked, \"Where is God?\" She answered,\n\"Everywhere.\" \"In the sky?\" \"Yes.\" \"In this house?\" \"Yes.\" \"In the logs\nof the walls?\" \"Yes.\" \"In the table leg?\" \"Yes.\" \"If I were to saw the\ntable leg off, would I hurt God?\" \"Sh-h, be careful what you say about\nGod.\"\n\nThat last question was as legitimate as the previous ones, and was asked\nwith equal sincerity. It clearly revealed my materialistic conceptions\nof God. My present opinion is that it would not give Him pain to saw off\nthe leg of a table, but that it would give Him pain to amputate a human\nleg. God knows the thrill of a nerve better than we do, or else He has\nmuch to learn.\n\nA relative, visiting in my home, remarked that she was utterly confused\nabout God; and that she had been reading some of the new cults of the\nday with the hope of finding something satisfying. Consequently, a\nlittle conversation followed on how God was immanent in all nature. So,\nwhen she put her little boy to bed that night, she told him that God was\nnot away off in heaven but near, and in everything that was good. To\nthis the little fellow replied, \"Oh, gee! then He is in strawberry\nshortcake, isn't He?\" The poor mother was at the end of her wits, and\nfelt that the devotion which followed was not very successful. We teach\nthat God is in everything, without comprehending how He is in anything,\nand herein lies the difficulty.\n\nThe question of how God is in nature was again before us. Some one\nsuggested, \"If He is in strawberry shortcake, is He likewise in the\ngarbage can?\" \"Horrors!\" exclaimed another. A third voice, \"_Now_ where\nare we!--do we believe, or do we not believe that God is in all nature?\"\n\nA garbage can may be most repulsive if allowed to breed life; yet\nchemically and biologically viewed, its contents are more beautiful\nthan any fairyland ever described. The odor and sight are repugnant to\nus, because the refuse is not wholesome food for human beings; but to\nsome other animals it is more delicate than a perfume bottle. The other\nanimals would probably think the perfume horrid stuff. The \"Loving\nIntelligent Will\" is not in nature in the same way that strawberries are\nin shortcake. After that manner God is neither in nor out of anything.\nThis, however, will be made more plain in the consideration of the next\nquestion.\n\nWhether or not the reader likes these illustrations, at least they are\nout of the raw experience of life, and reveal the crude conceptions that\nlinger concerning God and His relations to the universe. A child can ask\nmany of the vital questions concerning religion and life before he can\ncount ten; and if his questions are answered, he will ask almost all the\nreligious questions before he has learned the multiplication table. This\nis because nothing else is so near to him as life and religion. The\nmathematical faculty is a later development.\n\nI should never crowd a child in his acquisition of religious knowledge;\nbut when he wants to know, if we ourselves know the way, it is much\nbetter to start him on the right track.\n\n\n4. What does God do?\n\n\"What does God do all day?\" asked a little boy of his mother.\n\nWe used to think that He made the universe in a week, and that ever\nsince He had been keeping Sunday. During this long Sabbath we believed\nHim to be engaged in religious work; though He may have regulated the\nuniverse a bit now and then. Now, however, we see that nothing is\nfinished. Even new worlds are being formed, and the old ones are\nconstantly being changed. It is deeper truth to recognize God as making\nthe universe all the time, to think of nature as God at work. For,\nshould God cease working there would be no world. We used to say, and\nrightly, too, that the world is crammed so full of meaning and purpose\nthat it must have had a wise Creator; that there never could have been\nsuch a world without a God. With equal propriety, we may now say that\nthere could no more be a God without a world than a world without a God;\nbecause a God who was so indolent and purposeless as to think nothing,\nand feel nothing, and project nothing, would not be worthy of a second\nthought.\n\nAt last we have come to the point where we can see how science, in a\npeculiar way, has saved religion. Men have always been pondering over\nGod's relation to the wonderful forces of nature that envelop us. They\ncould get along pretty well with either a God or a world, but found it\ndifficult to harmonize both thoughts. There appeared to be a spirit\nworld over against the great lump of a dirt world. The _bulk_ of things\noften seemed such a hindrance that men dreamed of deliverance by\nultimately getting rid of the material universe altogether. Even God,\nit was thought by some philosophers, did the best He could with the\nstubborn clay at His disposal. When my brother was killed, I could not\ndecide whether God or the great machine world killed him. Just when the\nworld acted, or just when God acted, was to me a profound mystery. For,\nin my thought, the world was a great automatic machine, that ran\nentirely by itself, except when God occasionally interfered. Whether He\nwas a sort of spiritual ether penetrating all things, or what, I could\nnot at all decide. But like the Yale professor, I still believed that if\nHe existed, He must have a _visible_ nucleus all His own in heaven. God,\nat the center, was a ghost, whom His ghost children would find only\nafter death. According to the common teaching, Jesus had left His Father\nand happy home in heaven, having come to this sinful earth to be clothed\nwith a physical body. Of course, the Father's spirit was represented as\nbeing with Jesus, but the Father Himself had remained in His far-away\nhome. So my confusion was worse confounded by thinking.\n\nDuring many centuries, scholars were grappling with the thought of\nspirit; and they did some good thinking in spite of their mistakes.\nSpirit was being more and more clearly defined. It increasingly appeared\nto be a self-conscious will, but how this Infinite Will was related to\nthe great lump of nature, was the supreme difficulty.\n\nFinally the scientists took the lump into the laboratories, when behold!\nit melted as quickly as a lump of sugar melts in the mouth of a boy.\nThey discovered that nature was no lump at all, but a bundle of\nbeautiful, complex energies. Nature as _substance_ scientists have\ndriven to the vanishing point; so much so that no great physicist would\ndare to say that there is any substance. Yet nature was never so potent\nin the lives of men as since it has been reduced to invisible energies.\nThe knowledge of these invisible forces and the power to manipulate them\nmake men almost like gods in their achievements.\n\nThe present situation, then, is a little like that of putting the tunnel\nunder the Hudson. One gang beginning on the Jersey side, and another on\nthe New York side, they bored down and onward, sometimes going far below\nthe water; but when the workers came together under the Hudson, they had\nvaried from each other only by the least fraction of an inch. Just so\nthe philosophers and theologians began on the spirit side, reducing\nspirit to purposeful energy; while the scientists began on the nature\nside reducing it to purposeful energy; and when the two sets of workers\nbroke through, they were apparently at the same point. The Christian\nscholar looked up with joy and amazement, saying, \"Why, this invisible,\npurposeful energy of nature is simply what God is thinking, and feeling,\nand willing. Whether there is any _substance_ we do not know, but\nwhether there is, or is not, _nature is Will in action_. God continually\npurposes all these energies and they go forth. Light-energy, and all\nother beautiful forces constituting nature, are the modes of God's\ncontinuous will.\"\n\n\"What does God do all day?\" Why, everything that is being done in the\nuniverse, except that which other wills are doing. And the child will is\nonly combining his Father's energies and thinking his Father's thoughts.\nThe child never works apart from his Father's enfolding powers. If we\ncould comprehend all the dynamics of the universe, we should know what\nGod is doing on _that plane_ of His activities. Or, if we could know all\nHis loving thoughts and higher purposes concerning His children, who are\nstriving and building in the midst of these simple, enfolding energies,\nwe should know what God is doing in the _moral realm_. The wall of\npartition is broken down, the veil is rent in twain; we live in the Holy\nPresence, since there is no other place to live. With Browning, we feel\nthat the atmosphere \"Is the clear, dear breath of God who loveth us.\"\nThe pavement on which we walk is the power of the Great Will bearing us\nup. Likewise, the buildings along the street are more of His beneficent\nenergies, providing shelter and rest for His loved ones. Our bodies are\nalso His energies, highly sensitized, through which we become\nbeautifully aware of our surroundings. All the vitality in the quivering\nbeams of ships, and all the propelling force in their engines, is but\nthe power of a Will, and that Will is the Father of our spirits. Leaving\nout of mind for the present the thought of the vast universe, measure,\nif you can, the ocean in its breadth and depth, which in its ceaseless\nrising and falling raises and lowers ship-cities as if they were\nsnowflakes; and then remember that, if rightly applied, there is power\nenough in each cup full of water to destroy a ship, and that all the\nenergy of the boundless worlds is but the will of Him in whom we \"live\nand move and have our being.\" Having done this, if you are not something\nless than a man, you will fall down and adore in wonder, love and\npraise. To be brought face to face with God in the beauty and awfulness\nof nature is the only cure for the irreverence of this generation.\n\nBut some one says, \"This makes God too great. Have you looked, and\nstaggered before the limitless heavens?\" Yes, but is it not claimed that\nGod is Infinite?--and we have not yet found the equal of infinity. With\nall our insistence upon the infinitude of God, perhaps it offends some\nto think of Him as being equal to His universe,--or even to the little\npart of it that we can imagine. However, God must be greater than all\nHis works.\n\nThis is pantheism, says another. No, pantheism though containing many\nbeautiful truths is, nevertheless, a golden mist. Its advocates have\neliminated personality, they have broken the mast of their ship, and all\nthe riggings have fallen down with it. Being the perpetual cause of all\nthings, Self-conscious Will is the greatest fact in the universe. There\nis a clear distinction between God and His deeds, even as there is a\ndistinction between myself and what I am now thinking and doing. This\nCreative Will is what the intelligent Christian means by the term God.\nHe conceives of this Will of the universe as being the Father of all\nother wills. We are not to think of God as making a dirt planet which He\nhas tossed off into space as something separate from His will. He never\nput His children on such an isolated Earth as that would be, to roam\nabout and care for themselves as best they might. The world is the\ncomplex energy of His will never-ceasing, with which He enfolds His\nchildren. He carries them in His loving powers and will not let them go.\nThis is His cosmic relation to us; but it is by no means the only\nrelation which He sustains to His children. His more personal\nrelationship is equally beautiful and necessary.\n\nSomething like this twofold relationship exists between man and man. We\nknow that it is best for us to build railroads, though many are sure to\nbe killed by them however careful we may be. Yet we should be something\nmore than railroad operators; we should be personal friends and, if\noccasion should arise, minister to the wants of those who are injured by\nour railroads.\n\nSo God must either will a cosmos, or not will it. He cannot obliterate a\npart of the world, every time one of His wilful or ignorant children\ngets in the way. It is not even best for His children that He should do\nso. It is far better to have a definite and orderly world, though it may\nhurt many. Yet God never forsakes His injured children, but leads them\nout of their injuries into something better, if they are willing.\n\nComforting as these thoughts are, we must yet travel a long way before\nwe come to a completely satisfying idea of God. However, this is not\ndiscouraging, because we like to travel when the prospect grows more\npleasing at each stage of the journey.\n\nSome think there must be a dirt world because they see it. In a way I\nseem to see my wife when I look at her picture; yet I only see a bit of\npaper irregularly faded. Likewise a shining light appears to be a\ncomplete thing in itself, whereas the sun, doubtless, is as dark as\nblackness. The light which the scientist studies is waves of energy,\ntraveling at the rate of one hundred and eighty-six thousand miles per\nsecond, but that is not the sweet something that we experience as light.\nThe light coming from the sun is not shiny until our sensations are\nadded. And even then, it is our feelings that are brilliant because our\nnerves were struck by these rapid waves of energy. When we think we see\na real face, it is only a shadow on the retina of the eye; which eye is\nonly another bundle of energies, and not the substance that it appears\nto be.\n\nWe live in a picture world, produced by God's energies beating upon\nother energies which He has intimately associated with our wills. We\nthank God for these pictures because they are the visible language of\n\"loving intelligent wills,\" wills that in themselves are silent and\ninvisible. Yet these wills are known in consciousness as a bit of final\nreality. They are like unto God who causes the vital energies that\nresult in the pictures of a living, rational experience. Experience,\ntherefore, with its inner consciousness and its outer symbol, or\npicture, is all we know. So when they would take us out of personal\nexperience into a universal \"substance\" called spirit, they are offering\nto take us out of the known into the unknown; for they do not know\nwhether there is any substance.\n\n\"Why, then,\" some may ask, \"does God combine His energies to form a\npoisonous rattlesnake?\" God has expressed everything imaginable; the\nbeautiful and ugly, the safe and harmful, the pleasant and painful, the\ngentle and terrible, and all these are but the alphabet of a soul. If He\nhad given us nothing but abstract definitions, we never should have\nlearned the meaning of anything; and scarcely more, if He had given us\nonly the beautiful and pleasant without their opposites. But He has made\nus _feel_ the meaning, so that it may be real to us. From this marvelous\nalphabet which He has provided, we learn to spell, then to read, and\nfinally to live. When we have learned the meaning of poison and its\nopposite, we may kill the rattlesnake, or cause its energies to dissolve\nand pass into something more beautiful and safe. Thus we become more and\nmore immune from all that is ugly and harmful, and more appreciatively\nattached to all that is beautiful and good. The ugly and harmful were\ndesirable things to know in contrast with the beautiful and good, that\nwe might reject the one, and cleave to the other. The deeper meaning of\nthings thus learned will give significance to our beautiful world long\nafter we have passed beyond the evil which we have come to loathe. I am\nentirely convinced that this so-called evil world with its epidemics,\nearthquakes, and cyclones is the best conceivable place in which to\n_begin_ a soul; not the best possible world as yet, for it is our\nbusiness to help make it better. Neither should we forget that the\nterrible is often the overture to us of some mighty, beneficent energy\nwhich we have not yet learned to use.\n\nAgain we affirm that God is doing everything that occurs in the\nuniverse, except those things which are being done by His children.\nNothing ever occurs that is not directly or indirectly the act of some\nwill.\n\n\n5. If the Ancients made their gods, how do we know that we are not\nmaking our God?\n\nDoubtless, the great fallacy in this question is the supposition that\nthe Ancients made their gods. No one ever made his God or his gods; for\nall men have the same identical God, living and moving and having their\nbeing in Him. They have Him regardless of whether they know either His\nname or His character. Since there is no other God or thing to have, all\nmust have Him. Neither can they avoid being conscious of Him, nor escape\nhaving opinions concerning Him. All religious opinions, however sane or\ngrotesque, are about the same God. The Ancients, being conscious of our\nGod and their God, were sometimes comforted by His presence, while at\nother times they were greatly frightened. As they could not escape Him\nthey tried to explain Him; and in the act of explaining, they made a\ntheology and not a god. Whoever expresses a religious opinion is guilty\nof starting a theology. Even the Ancients were moved by an objective\nreality, and not by a mere idea. Though their idea often failed to\ndescribe the reality with accuracy, yet if the reality had disappeared,\nthe idea would have perished from among them. It seemed to them that\nthere was a god of thunder and, according to our interpretation of the\nuniverse, there was; for if our God had not been there thundering, they\nnever would have thought of a god of thunder. Neither were they mistaken\nwhen they thought there was a god of harvest; because our God was there\nmaking their harvests grow as He does ours, and was feeding them as He\nfeeds us. We all make worse mistakes than that. These crude men may be\nexcused for thinking that a crashing thunderstorm was a big enough task\nfor one god; or that the fructifying of all vegetation was ample\nemployment for another.\n\nThose early men worshiped our God in divided form simply because they\ncould not think of a God great enough to carry on all the diverse\nactivities which they beheld. Another reason why these crude children\nconceived of Him as many gods was that they could not understand how one\nperson could be so gentle and terrible at the same time. Nevertheless,\nthey would not have had gentle and terrible gods if our God had not been\nboth gentle and terrible. They, therefore, no more made their gods than\nthey made their stars. Their gods were our God, and their stars were our\nstars. We call their theology mythology, and their astronomy astrology.\nYet mythology is crude theology, and astrology is unscientific\nastronomy. Astrology arose because men were influenced by real stars,\nand were impelled to offer such explanations as they were able. Without\nastrology we never would have had astronomy. In like manner men were\ndisquieted by the same Infinite Power that disturbs us to-day, and were\nmoved by that Power to offer their best interpretation. But without\ntheir mythology we never would have had our theology. The development of\nastronomy will never cease while there are intelligent men for stars to\nshine upon. Nor will the idea of God cease to expand while men are\nenfolded in the vast purposeful energy called the universe.\n\nOur early brothers were trying to comprehend and interpret our God who\nwas as present to them as He is to us. And here we are in the year\nnineteen hundred and twenty, A. D., still trying to expound Him; because\nthe need is not less now than then. Those who know most about God best\nrealize the need of knowing more. When we no longer try to increase our\nknowledge of God, we shall cease to love Him.\n\n\n6. May we not be communing with a mere idea?\n\nNo, that is impossible. Because, whatever it is, it is at least an\nobjective reality. Its grip is that of the universe. We can not let it\ngo because it will not let us go. We are worshiping more than an idea;\nwe are worshiping what we live in; we call it God; we think it is\n\"Loving Intelligent Will.\" We believe that the power that enfolds us\nknows itself and us. And that we are not mistaken in this, our assurance\ndeepens as our knowledge increases. We find that if we do not neglect or\nstultify any portion of our nature, our insight grows. If we invest our\nall on the conception of a spiritual universe we get astonishing results\nto the individual and to society. Then follows more insight and the\nincentive to invest again our talents that have doubled in the using of\nthem. Of this, however, we shall have more to say later. For the present\nsuffice it to say, the object of my worship is the great reality; all\nthe reality there is, except my will and the other wills whom I call\nbrothers. To state clearly what we mean, before trying to tell why we\nbelieve it, is of the utmost importance. With an experimental knowledge\nof God, and with ideas of the universe that harmonize therewith, our\nheads and hearts are thoroughly anchored in Him. If our every line of\nvision converges to this end, our insight gives us God as the great\nenfolding reality. Our further task is to make the idea of God clear and\nto show how the lines of vision converge. In this task, modern knowledge\nis the Christian's best ally.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nDOES MAN HAVE A SOUL, AND WHAT IS HIS PLACE IN THE UNIVERSE?\n\n _What is man?_\n\n _Who is man?_\n\n _Would the absence of man cripple God?_\n\n _What could an infinite God care for such a little speck?_\n\n _Is not socialism the best religion there is?_\n\n\n1. What is man?\n\nWe do not fully know \"what\" and \"where\" God is until we know what man\nis, and how God and man are working through each other. Our knowledge of\nGod grows with our knowledge of man. We can understand neither without\nknowing both. At every stage of the discussion our subject is made\ncomplex by the intertwining of the human and the Divine. Hence, this\nchapter--while introducing man--takes us deeper into the life of God.\n\nMan does not have a soul. Neither does the sun set. Though we know\nbetter, yet for convenience, we continue to speak of the sun as setting.\nFor the same reason we still say that man has a soul when we mean that\nhe is a soul. Soul is person, body is instrument. The instrument does\nnot have the person, the person has the instrument. The soul is the\nchild of God. How strangely, therefore, it would sound to ask: Does a\nman have a child of God? The reverse question, however, is perfectly\nfitting: Does a child of God have a body?\n\nMan is a spirit, a soul, or a person. All men are alike in that which\nconstitutes them personalities, or self-conscious wills. It is in their\nindividuality that men differ. In the first place, some are more\ndeveloped than others; and then they have different tastes, different\nknowledge, different temperaments, and different occupations. This\ndiversity of individuality clearly distinguishes one man from another,\nand at the same time greatly enriches society.\n\nLike his Father, man is _a loving intelligent will_. Like Him, too, he\nis always silent and invisible, save as his instruments express his\nthought and wish in time and space. So far, Father and child should be\ndefined in the same terms; for however they may differ in other\nrespects, they are alike in being self-conscious. If either is below\nself-conscious will, he is something less than a person. Though man, as\nwe find him, is not always so very loving, nor so very intelligent, yet\nthat is what he is in his best estate. So far as we can understand, the\nsinless man soul lifted to the infinite power would be the same as God.\nThis spiritual definition does not imply that either God or man exists,\nor could exist, without form and outward expression.\n\n\n2. Who is man?\n\nWe think of Man, the soul, as a child of God, or a god-child. Therefore,\nhe is worthy of his brother's highest esteem, and his Father's tenderest\naffection. He is a very son of the infinite God; and all created\nspirits, being his brothers, are members of one family. Again we say, \"O\ngod-child, how wonderful you are, and what a pity it would be if you\nfailed to recognize your divinity, or allowed anything to drag you down\nfrom your divine possibilities!\" Man must know himself if he would\nattain unto the goal of life.\n\nThough man _is_ a soul, yet without the body he cannot so much as come\nto self-consciousness. Just how or when a soul begins, we do not know;\nbut it does not appear until some time after the body is born. A\nnew-born babe can neither see, feel, nor hear, with any intelligent\nmeaning of the words. It will stare into the most glaring light without\nintelligence enough to shut its eyes. It does not recognize objects for\nsome time, and when it does, misses the object for which it reaches. The\ninfant is likewise slow in distinguishing sounds or names. If the soul\nexists when the body is born, it is only a latent personality which has\nnot yet come to self-realization. Personality is self-conscious will,\nand this the child has not yet achieved.\n\nLet us here consider the relation of a new-born _body_ to God and the\nuniverse. God begins His creative activities in what the scientists call\nstellar ether, where His energies combine and recombine in a more and\nmore complex world, until the solar system appears with planets in the\ncondition of our earth. After more combinations and recombinations, out\non the surface of all things His activities blossom in the finest bit of\norganism, the sensitized thing which we call the human body. This body,\nthe flower of all God's activities in nature, requires all nature for\nits support. Furthermore, the chemical energies constituting the body\nitself are what God is thinking, and feeling, and doing. Strictly\nspeaking, it is His body, the first instrument in the whole order of\ndevelopment, the only body on earth capable of articulate speech and\nloving deed. If God did not continually will the body and all the\nsupporting energies of the universe, the body would cease to be. Before\nthe man soul appears at all, we have God's world culminating in what we\ncall the human body. When a man soul awakes, it is in God's own bosom,\nin His own body. Man awakens in God's enfolding energies, and not\noutside them; for outside of God he could not exist.\n\nIt is amusing to hear a little boy speak of his father's automobile as\n\"my car\"; but it isn't his, even though the father is pleased to see the\nlittle fellow spread himself in it and claim ownership. Yet it is his\ntoo, in the sense that the father gladly shares it with him. And some\nday when the child is too big to be a little boy, and too little to be a\nbig boy, he may take his father's car and run it into the ditch. But\neven the wreck is his father's wreck. In the same way, if we live at all\nit is in our Father's enfolding instrument. His body is ours because He\ngladly shares it with us. However, if we do not use it in harmony with\nHis will, we wreck it in the ditch.\n\nGod wakes His child to consciousness in His own body, by making all\nkinds of impressions upon the sense organs. There are many rappings on\nthe door, and flashes of light through the windows until the soul wakes.\nAnd when the soul becomes conscious, God may not cease beating upon the\ninstrument with myriad forces, lest His child fall asleep.\n\nSome morning when a loved form bends over the infant body, the baby\nsmiles, and the soul begins to appear. That is a wonderful day when the\nbaby gives its first smile. Little by little the child becomes aware of\nitself and of its mother. Should the baby be fortunate enough to have\ntwo or three brothers and sisters, he will learn some day, when he is a\nlittle older, that they all want the same thing at the same time. Then\nhe will be very conscious of _other wills_.\n\nWe know that other wills exist because they live in our enveloping\nworld, and constantly use it in a way that we approve or resent. If they\ndid not know and disturb our world, we should not be aware of them even\nif they existed. We know that other wills exist because they sell us\ncoats that they have made, and cut down trees in our forests, and shape\nthem into things that have meaning for us and them. They modulate the\natmosphere in which we live, producing sounds that stand for objects\nwith which we are familiar. They learn our words and facial\nexpressions, and use them to make us feel happy or uncomfortable. Nature\nis the common instrument of all wills.\n\nAs we cannot come to the consciousness of ourselves, nor of other wills,\nexcept through the body and its environments, _neither can we develop\nthe soul without cultivating the physical instrument and that which\nsurrounds it_. There is always a corresponding development between soul\nand body. As Browning says,\n\n\"We know not whether soul helps body more than body helps soul.\"\n\nWe simply know that soul and body develop together, and that if either\nis injured the other is harmed. A physical change in our bodies takes\nplace with every thought. We cannot silently love without disturbing the\ngray matter. We make paths through our nervous system with every thought\nand deed. If we had a means of photographing all the muscular and\nnervous conditions wrought in our bodies by our thoughts and actions,\nthey would correspond to every growth of spirit. The face becomes\nbeautiful with a beautiful soul, and the body becomes refined by every\nimprovement of the spirit.\n\nI once shook hands with the great French organist, Guilmant. When I\nclasped his hand I forgot everything else; the hand was so soft, and yet\nso firm! All the inspiration and purpose of his soul had been registered\nin his body. And what a hand it was! I shall never forget that touch. It\ngave new meaning to Tennyson's beautiful line, \"Oh for the touch of a\nvanished hand!\" Our looks, smiles, accents, and very gait become the\nexpression of the soul.\n\nWe once had a maid who came home in the dejected state following\nintoxication. When I appeared she said:\n\n\"I has me faults the same as others, but me heart is all right.\" Now,\ncould her heart be right and her body wrong? Can we have a pure soul and\nan unclean body? Can we have an honest heart and a pilfering hand?\nCertainly not. For as the pure soul cleanses the body, so the degraded\nbody pollutes the soul. Soul and body must grow together,--and alike.\nSometimes we speak of a purely spiritual experience apart from all\nphysical excitability; but such a thing is impossible, because every\nspiritual thought has its beautiful, physical accompaniment. The\nphysical may run riot, as with some musicians who are principally noise\nand bluster; but the fact still remains that the most bilious and cold\nphilosopher enjoys his gentle nervous thrill.\n\nAll worthy education means the spiritualizing of the body. Both before\ndeath, and after, the good man has a spiritual body. Not a spirit body,\nbut a spiritual, a refined and sensitive instrument of the spirit.\nThroughout eternity man will be spiritualizing his body, or else\ndegrading it.\n\nWe soon outgrow our immediate bodies, and find it necessary to augment\nthem with all the forces of nature. These enlarged bodies must likewise\nbe spiritualized or they will pervert the soul,--as is proved by every\ndegraded form of institutional life.\n\nThe early man dimly realized that if he could get a larger hand, he\nwould be a greater man. So, augmenting his hand with a club, he achieved\na new growth in mind and character. Finding himself a greater man, he\ntried once more to increase his hand. Next, finding a sharp stone with\nwhich he could hack down small trees, he created a new mental and moral\ndemand for a still finer instrument of his spirit. Then, in turn, he\naugmented his hand with bronze and iron until all great thundering mills\nand all cunning tools appeared as the mighty hand of the human will.\nThis required an enormous soul growth in knowledge and character, and a\ncorresponding growth in social consciousness and self-consciousness. To\nfurther our soul growth there is still a pressing demand for enlarged\ninstruments. So it must ever be an even race between soul growth and\nhand growth.\n\nIn the same way, man developed soul and legs. It became necessary to\nmake swifter legs or suffer a dwarfing of his soul. Consequently, he\nincreased his speed with camels and horses; but even these became\ninadequate for his soul's growth. Then ensued a race of soul and legs,\nuntil to-day automobiles, steam cars, and every means of swift\nlocomotion are but the augmented legs of man. The growing man soul is\nstill in quest of swifter means of locomotion, and as these appear\nsociety is changed to its very foundations. New trades, new mental\npowers, new moral conditions confront him everywhere; and still he is\nspeeding up.\n\nWhen man made for himself far-seeing eyes in the telescope, the heavens\nopened; and what he saw in the heavens made for him a new earth. Then\nmaking for himself a short-seeing eye in the microscope, he discovered\nwithin and beneath things a new world, which in turn was a vast\ncommentary on the heavens above. Likewise it may be truthfully said that\nsoul and eyes have made an even race in their development. The same is\ntrue of soul and ears. Said a great building contractor of Chicago\nthirty-five years ago, \"No man in the past ever dreamed of such a\nbusiness as we are conducting, for it would have been impossible without\nthe telephone.\" The telephone is but the enlargement of man's ears and\nmouth. This contractor moved men and materials, at will, over a radius\nof a hundred miles. Even the musical soul found a new incentive when the\nmouth was enlarged by piano, pipe organ, and orchestra. Every\nenlargement of the mouth calls for new musical skill in complex\ntechnique, and in finer inspiration and fuller elaboration. In short,\nevery man soul is in quest of omnipresence. Living as he does in his\nFather's enfolding energies, he can know himself, and grow himself, only\nso far as he makes the instruments of his Father's will the instruments\nof his own will. The man soul is in the process of taking on the whole\nuniverse as his enlarged body. Two hundred pounds is quite large enough\nfor the little body which he ever carries, and cares for, but to be a\ngrowing son of God he must progressively make the universe his augmented\nbody. At night he may lay off his big body and rest; but in the morning\nhe must put on his larger body, the universe, as he puts on his clothes\nand his boots, and go forth to live and work with God, his Father.\n\n\n3. Would the absence of man cripple God?\n\n\nYes, the absence of man would thoroughly cripple God. Without the\npossibility of a family, God would just as well never have been. This is\nnot an unbecoming or irreverent remark, but a statement that is very\npleasing to God; it vindicates everything that is highest in His Holy\nNature. His wisdom, character, and love are all involved in His purpose\nto have a family.\n\nIf we eliminate the thought of His family, what wisdom is there in\nanything God has made? The production of coal is a wonderful display of\nwisdom, love, and power; but apart from the thought of children who\nwould discover the coal and put it to all its marvelous uses, what\nmotive could there have been in such an act? God, as a solitary will in\nthe universe, never intended to mine coal, warm houses, cook food, or\nfire engines. All the marvelous by-products of coal could have no value\nor meaning apart from a complex society; but with a family in mind the\nproduction of coal becomes a sacrament worthy of a God, and lays the\nfoundation of a kingdom, all glorious in wisdom, love, and power.\n\nIron, likewise, has a rational, moral, and social significance beyond\nall power to express. Its uses, all the way from steel bridges and\nengines to the hair springs of watches, suggest the imagination of a\nmind infinite and loving. The human family never could have climbed to\nglory except on an iron stair; but take away the family, and iron means\nnothing.\n\nThe large part that wood has supplied in the development and happiness\nof the race is beyond the imagination of any but an infinite mind. To\nwhat infinite uses it has been and may yet be put, from the homeliest\nutilities to organs and violins! Soft woods, hard woods, and precious\nwoods have entered into the very warp and woof of human life. Wood is a\nmiracle, robbed of its wonder because the gift is so lavish. Yet what\nsense would there be in creating wood in all its varieties, with no one\nto put it to any of its sacred uses? These same thoughts would equally\napply to all the precious metals.\n\nWhy should God create a chemical world unless He had chemists in mind?\nWhat would it amount to if there were not those who could take nature\napart and recombine it to infinity for His glory and their happiness?\nBut there is no end to questions of this kind that might be asked\nconcerning God and His works. In short, a depopulated universe is robbed\nof all its meaning and glory. Without a family, God would be reduced to\na child god playing with a toy world. And being alone, He could not so\nmuch as complete His toy. At best the universe is but raw material until\nHis children have turned it into a finished product. When God and His\nchildren begin turning nature into finished products the highest\ncreation is just begun. By transforming nature into a social\ninstitution that reflects God's wisdom and love, common nature is\nglorified. Without a family there is no sense in anything, and God\nHimself would be without moral worth or meaning. To be sure, He could\nget along without a few of us if we should utterly refuse to cooeperate\nwith Him; but without a loving family, God would be completely defeated.\nHe \"So loved the world,\" and with equal propriety it might be said He so\nneeded the world, \"that He gave His only begotten Son.\"\n\nBefore God's family arrived He was simply getting ready to do the\nsupreme thing. But with His children about Him, loving and alert, the\nmeaning of all things from the beginning commences to appear, and the\nglorious end is dimly discerned. No greater travesty on the nature of\nGod could be conceived than that which makes Him independent of His\nchildren. And to think that God's desire for mere adoration is His chief\nneed of man is but slightly less a travesty. God yearns for the love and\nadoration of His children, and with no less desire, He calls upon them\nto help Him carry forward His work of creation. Love without work and\nachievement is first insipid, and then stale. God can no more fulfill\nHimself without children than men can fulfill themselves without Him. If\nGod's highest works fail Him, then God Himself has failed.\n\nThe permanent absence of children would stultify God's reason and\ncharacter by rendering useless all that He is and all that He has made.\n\n\n\n4. What could an infinite God care for such a little speck?\n\nIt would be interesting to know who originated this question, for he\nshould wear the badge of his own ignorance. In his mind, the little\n\"speck\" probably signified the human body. But as we have already seen,\nthat is not man; it is only his instrument. And besides, man may\nprogressively augment his little body, causing it to articulate with the\nwhole body of nature. Moreover, the human body is primarily God's, the\nflower of all His works in the vast unfolding universe. Does God care\nfor these myriad blossoms of his universe? One might as well ask, \"What\ncould a horticulturist care for the little blossoms on his apple trees?\"\nLet the insects sting them, or the frosts bite them, he has big _trees_\nto absorb his attention!\n\nUnless God's world could blossom into myriad, delicate forms, as homes\nfor man souls, the universe would be as useless as a barren apple tree.\nThe little flower is not something apart, its production taxes the\nentire strength and purpose of the tree. Neither is the human body\nsomething apart, its production taxes the entire strength and purpose of\nthe universe. As the flower is the tree's glory and promise of fruit, so\nthe human body is nature's glory and promise of souls.\n\nIf, however, the \"speck\" refers to the real man, the spirit, then the\nquestion is equally foolish. An intelligent will is neither a \"speck,\"\nnor something spread out like ether. Furthermore, that which can be so\ndeeply impressed by the vastness of the universe is not insignificant in\nitself. A mastodon would not be overwhelmed by the vastness of the\nuniverse. Neither is the great universe overwhelmed by a sense of its\nown magnitude. In his sense of awe, the foolish man who asked the\nquestion transcends the great universe itself. To be overwhelmed with\nour inability to know the universe is partly knowing it, or else we\nshould not be so completely overwhelmed. That is not insignificant which\ncan measure the distance to the stars, and weigh the planets, and mark\nout the shape and size of their orbits. That is not insignificant which\ncan discover the very elements of which the sun is composed. Man's\nprimary body may be relatively small, but it is so highly organized that\nhe can augment it until his instrument reaches the stars. Though the sun\nis approximately ninety-three million miles from our earth, yet the\nintelligent mind of man discovered helium in the sun before he\ndiscovered it upon the earth. This feat of His child must have given the\nFather keen delight.\n\nMan's body is potentially as great as the universe because, being so\ndelicately organized, it can articulate with the world elements to the\nfarthest sun that twinkles in the blue.\n\nThe Luther Burbanks are revealing our supremacy over the vegetable\nkingdom. The animal kingdom is known to be equally plastic under our\nshaping hand; for juggling with animal life is one of man's pastimes.\nBy using pressure, he has taken a single cell life and divided it into\ntwins. He has taken two separate cells and formed them into a giant.\nTaking off the head and tail of some lower forms of life, he has made\nthe head grow where the tail was, and vice versa.\n\nNo one mind can find time to learn of all the wonders achieved by the\nhuman family in the realms of nature and of social well-being. A simple\nstatement of man's achievements in the twenty or thirty allied sciences\nis more thrilling than all the romances ever written. Man's power for\ngood or evil is stupendous and overwhelming. It is in the realm of human\nlife that God Himself will be victorious, or else defeated. All creation\nwill fail if man fails. I here speak of man in the sense of God's\nchildren, wherever they may be in the universe. The people on this earth\nmight fail without bringing universal disaster; but if God's children\nthroughout the universe should fail Him, then all is lost. If God did\nnot \"care for\" His children, it would be the same as not caring for\nHimself, since all His aims and purposes culminate in His family. God\nhas crowned man with glory and honor, by putting all things under his\nfeet.\n\nThe world is as ignorant of man as it is of God; and the prevailing idea\nof either is a caricature.\n\nIt is doubtful whether a self-conscious moral will could be awakened\noutside of a body, or inside of one if it were less highly organized\nthan the human body. The higher animals share our sensations of pain and\npleasure, but it is extremely doubtful whether any of them share in our\nself-conscious, moral purposes. Possibly a soul _must_ appear in any\nsuch highly organized form of God's energies as a human body, and\n_cannot_ appear where the organization of His energies falls short of\nthis high standard. If we believe the body to be the integration of\nGod's own energies it would not be strange if the body proved to be the\nincipient soul. We have not yet sounded the depths of God's creative\nwisdom either in the soul or the body; we only know that soul and body\nare bound together, and that God's highest achievement and deepest\ninterest center in them. How infinitely precious in the sight of God are\nHis children, the crown and glory of all His wisdom, love, and power!\n\n\n5. Is not socialism the best religion there is?\n\nWhen socialism means the Kingdom of God, it is the best religion\nconceivable. And it is a pity that either religion or socialism should\never mean anything less than the Kingdom of God; for when they drop\nbelow that standard, the one is spurious religion while the other is\ncounterfeit socialism; the former discarding society, and the latter\neliminating God, both alike become a menace.\n\nLast summer in Madison Square, New York, I listened to a socialist who\nwas ridiculing the very idea of God. Exhorting his listeners to have a\nlittle sense, he advised them to get rid of God, priests, ministers,\nchurches, and King Capital. He said:\n\n\"You have but one life to live, and it is short; if ever you get\nanything, you must get it now.\"\n\nThis type of socialism is a scourge, a pest, a bubonic plague.\nNevertheless we would not minimize the crime of withholding from men\ntheir rights in this life.\n\nAnother socialist speaking at a park in my own city said:\n\n\"In the past, the capitalist has taken it all, leaving the working man\nonly enough for the food necessary to do his work,--and not always that.\nBut we do not blame him, he had a right to take it because he could;--we\nshould have done the same if we had been in his place. That is what life\nmeans; 'the race is to the swift, and the battle to the strong.' Only\nthe fittest have a right to live. But our turn is soon coming when we\nshall be able to take it all,--and we will.\"\n\nNow, whoever teaches a theory like that, or acts upon it, is a cancer in\nthe social body. It makes no difference whether or not he is a church\nmember, whether business man, or laborer; such a man is a malignant\ngrowth in the body of humanity.\n\nIt is just because socialism means anything from the religion of Jesus\nto this putrid stuff, that the average well-meaning person is cautious\nabout identifying himself with any movement bearing the name of\nsocialism. Yet any religion that stands aloof from social well-being is\ndoomed,--as it ought to be. No man can love God while hating his\nbrother; and whether he loves his brother is proved more by his actions\nthan by his words. To love our brother, as we shall see, is enlightened\nselfishness as well as altruism.\n\n\"God in the soul\" has been rather a popular definition of religion. To\nmany minds this definition conveys a rich and ample meaning. To others\nit conveys gross error, for religious hysteria is often thought to be\nGod in the soul. A mere psychic state, a religious opiate, a mental\ndisease, may be so interpreted. It is a question whether any definition\nof religion is safe. A description of religion is far preferable to a\ndefinition, and has the advantage of being an easier task. When we\nidentify religion with the Kingdom of God, we have a perfectly clear\nidea. _The Kingdom of God is a loving, intelligent family organised\naround the Father's good-will, living in the universe as His home, using\nthe forces of nature as the instruments of His will, and making all\nthings vocal with His wisdom, love, and power._\n\nThis is true religion; this is a desirable socialism; this is right\nlife. For such an end God, man, and the enveloping powers of nature\nexist. Any loss of this vision, any lack of warmth or enthusiasm for its\nrealization, spells degeneration. Such a state of mind means the\nperversion of nature, the engendering of rebellion in the Kingdom of\nGod, and the making of prodigals. Religious experience does not mean\njust any kind of comfortable, private feeling, but a conscious love for\nthe family of God, and conscious interest in the work that God and His\nchildren are trying to accomplish _in the midst of nature's forces_.\nReligious experience means an active desire to brighten the great world\nhome, and to gladden the great world family. The idea is so simple that\na child can understand it; and a child's heart may glow with happiness\nwhile helping to brighten the world. To take one's place in the family\nof God as a member, loving, and beloved, is something infinitely better\nthan cold ethics. Character that does not root itself in friendship is\npoor character; it bears not the fruit of righteousness, love, and joy.\nOur debt of friendship to all men is no less binding than our financial\nobligations. Friendship is the great power for good in the world. \"I\nhave called you friends, and such you are.\" And because they were\nfriends, Jesus revealed to His disciples all the secrets of His soul,\nand threw over them the spell of His life. By interweaving their lives\nin some great purpose, or by promoting a common enterprise, friends lift\neach other into the finest vision. Simple, hearty, and unfeigned\nfriendship for God and men, is religion pure and undefiled. A wise man\ndoes not defer friendship until he is perfect, but seeks friendship\nfirst to learn what perfection is, that through friendship he may\nreceive strength to be perfect.\n\nThe new truths clearly manifest concerning God, man, and nature cause a\nnew heaven to dawn, and a new hell to yawn. Heaven is brighter, and hell\nis hotter, than we had been thinking. The relation that exists between\nGod, man, and the universe makes it perfectly plain that God does not go\nahead of His children to make either heaven or hell. There _is_ no\nheaven on either side the grave, except that which is made by the\ncooeperation of God and His children. Though there are plenty of heavenly\nsites in the universe, yet the building of a Holy City is never begun\nuntil some of God's children have arrived on the scene. They who\norganize around the good will of God build a heaven in time and place;\nout of God's energies in which they live, they make a beautiful home.\nHeaven is doubtless a place as well as a state, for souls that are in a\nright state will make a right place in which to live. More than likely\nthere are many heavens in the universe. In my city heaven may be on one\nfloor and hell on another, while the character of the third floor is\nuncertain. Souls cannot live outside of God's enfolding energies, and\ntherefore they cannot avoid making either heaven or hell out of His\ninfinite powers. Citizens of the Kingdom, under the guiding wisdom of\nGod, make heaven. Those who refuse citizenship, preferring their own\nway, make hell; but they make it out of the same mighty forces of which\nheaven is made.\n\nThe idea that God, independent of His children, made a pretty place\ncalled heaven, and an ugly place called hell, in order that He might put\ngood little people in the one, and push naughty little people off into\nthe other, is the idea of a fool's heaven and a fool's hell;--the facts\nare much more glorious and awful. There will be just as good a heaven as\nthe Kingdom of God builds, and no better. Likewise there will be just as\nbad a hell as God's disloyal sons make, and no worse. No dream can\npicture the paradise that God may make in this universe with the help\nof His good children. And the hell that His rebellious sons may create\nis something appalling. Since heaven or hell is simply the shape we give\nto God's enfolding energies, all of us are unavoidably engaged in\nconstructing the one or the other, and we have been so engaged every\nmoment since our conscious life began. No one dare think that all his\nwork is heaven-building. Altogether, through vice or greed, we have\nmanaged to produce of late the hottest Gehenna ever witnessed on earth.\nIt has taken longer to make this sad condition than most of us realize;\nand many who little suspect their responsibility and guilt have been\nactive agents in creating the fires of war and other fires in which\nthere has been of late so much writhing and gnashing of teeth. And at\nthe moment of the world's greatest anguish, there were those who were\ntrying to get rich out of the state of sorrow into which they had helped\nto plunge humanity. I refer to all profiteers and crooked dealers,\nwhether they were laborers or capitalists; to those who were willing\nthat additional hundreds of thousands of our boys should go down into\nthe lake of fire, if only they could fill their coffers. These were the\ndevils who stood round the boiling caldron with their flesh hooks, to\ntear the flesh of innocent boys if they rose to the surface of the\nboiling liquid. Some of these flesh-hook devils, having refined manners,\nposed as gentlemen. Others were lewd fellows of various sorts. But the\nflames which they fed were not hot enough for them. They were getting\nready for a fire that will burn much deeper, and they will be sure to\nfind it.\n\nDuring the war, many found their faith in God staggering before a\nperdition created by human beings. But their faith should not have been\nunsettled, because this war was as sure to follow the way the world was\nliving as the wheels of the cart are certain to follow the tread of the\nox. Some had the blindness and audacity to blame God for what we have\ndone. God gave us the raw material with which to build a heaven, and we\nconstructed a hell. Through His many prophets and seers God told us what\nwe were doing, but we would not believe Him. Thinking ourselves wise we\nbecame fools, and turned His good gifts into instruments of torture. The\nmajority of the people, believing that they could get along without\ngiving much heed to God, took His limitless gifts and made a grand\nholiday instead of a Holy Day, and then rode in automobiles and yachts\nto their doom. When a world is bad enough to make war, it needs war.\nThough I had three sons between my heart and Germany's steel, yet I\nrealized that America had to be hurt for her own salvation, for the\nsalvation of Germany, for the safety of the world, and for the utter\ndestruction of the German intriguers. If the people of the allied\nnations, however, had been shaping the instruments of their spirits into\nclean bodies, happy homes, honest business, and good governments, and\nall of these into the Kingdom of God on earth, Prussia could not have\ndreamed her dream of world dominance, nor would she have dared to throw\ndown the gauntlet before the world. But seeing our weakness, she scorned\nour threats. Being under tutorship to the god of power, in spite of her\nvices, which were equal to those of other nations, Prussia became\nshrewder and stronger than the nations that were too largely feasting\nunder a bacchanalian god, or softly enjoying themselves under a Santa\nClaus deity, or were piling up unrighteous gains under no god, or under\none that was capable of wicked favoritism. It was clear to the prophets\nof the Most High that something was due,--and it came. Bad as war is,\nthat state of society which makes war possible is even worse. When\nsociety grows its body into a monster, the corrective influence of hell,\nin some form, is the last hope. This does not, however, exonerate\nGermany from the crime of launching a ruthless war to gratify her lust\nfor world domination. God surely could not help it, since the human\nfamily shaped its body as it did against light and conscience; but if\nthere were no retribution for sin and ignorance He would lose His family\nutterly. Hell inevitably came when the tools were forged and the devils\nwere trained; but God neither forged the tools nor trained the devils.\n\nI am advocating no moral prudery, nor religious bigotry. Neither do I\nwish to imply that heaven has not been built up side by side with hell\nduring the last fifty years,--for it has. Those who have profited\nintellectually and spiritually by the revelations of modern learning,\nand by the new influx of power, and by the new social opportunities,\nhave made the last fifty years the grandest in human history. Of these\nnoble sons and daughters it should be said: their growth in the\nknowledge of God, their success in the discovery of man, their\nachievements in wresting from nature its deepest secrets, their grasp on\nthe meaning of God's Kingdom, their accomplishments in the practical\nlaunching of everything pertaining to a new era and a finer world order\nhave made this the golden age for all who have seen the vision and\nshared in the work. Yet over against this kingdom of light and love,\nthere has grown up a kingdom of darkness and hate. These two kingdoms\nhave grown up side by side in every civilized country. And finally the\nkingdom of darkness embroiled all the nations in a deadly conflict.\nSeeing all, and feeling all, God was the greatest sufferer in the awful\ncarnage of the contending armies. \"In Him we live, and move, and have\nour being;\" and therefore armies live, and fight their battles in God.\nThey fight their battles with God's own powers, and make gaping wounds\nin His own body. And yet, some will ask, \"Where was God?\" Not only was\nHe in the thick of the fight, but the thick of the fight was in His\nbeautiful, enfolding energies. We shall make heaven out of the selfsame\nenergies when we are done making hell out of them. And then, as now, God\nwill be in our midst; but He will be in our midst as a joyous, and not a\nsuffering God.\n\nIt would have been a pity if this war had ended before the nations\nopened their eyes to the higher purposes of God for future civilization,\nor before their consciences had been cleansed for the work of advancing\nthe Kingdom. God will come to our help with mighty power when we come to\nHis help with mighty obedience. General Sherman said, \"War is hell.\"\nThis has generally been taken to mean that war is as terrible as hell;\nbut it is more than that, it is hell literally, _because hell is never\nanything but war_. If there were no war of any kind there would be no\nhell. This is equally true either side the grave. If there were no\nindividuals in the universe to oppose God's will and so misuse His\nenfolding energies as to harm one another, hell would cease to be. The\nbeginning of hell is very pleasurable, and that is why men begin it. But\nit always grows more and more terrible until it becomes a lake of fire.\nIt is worse than brimstone, because men have found hotter materials to\nuse. It is curtains of fire, poisonous gases, shrapnel, bombs, machine\nguns, and mud mixed with blood.\n\nWar begins in selfish desire, and continues in the misuse of God's good\ngifts. Intensified desire diverts to its own use that which does not\nbelong to it; and becoming powerful, arrogant, and oppressive, it brews\nhell without knowing it. Thinking that it knows all, it refuses\ninstruction. To the perverted mind, imprisoned in a distorted body,\nJesus looks weak, while God seems a myth, or mere brute force. Finally\nhell breaks loose in all its fury.\n\nThe most pathetic thing in this whole affair is that the good have to go\nto hell with the bad,--at least in this life. But it was ever so. Jesus\ntruly \"descended into hell,\" only it was before He died. The same is\ntrue of God and all His good sons. There is no other way to save the\nsituation. Gehenna, as well as heaven, begins _here_ and _now_. It may\nbe that the rebellious sons of God have created a worse hell on the\nother side of the grave, but if they have, it is exactly the same in\nkind as that which they have made here. Every immoral and painful\ncondition in the universe is wrought in God. God was as closely related\nto the recent war as a man is related to the abscess on his finger; and\nHe is so related to all hells, in all worlds. For hell is never anything\nbut a painful disturbance wrought in God's body by the sons whom He has\nenfolded in His bosom. And since there are so many discordant and\nvicious elements throughout all the world, it is to be hoped that the\nnations are being purged by the awful fires through which they are\npassing.\n\nHas the earth had its last war? That is not at all likely. There is\nplenty of discord in society even now that the main war is over. Many\nwrongs must be righted and many problems solved or terror will break out\nsomewhere. Human society and human institutions have grown about as\nlarge and complex as is possible, unless they can be dominated by a\nlarger ideal and a more Christlike spirit. While I sympathize with all\nthe hopes and aspirations of the noble men and women of our day for a\nmore peaceful earth, yet I do so only on the condition that men will\nlearn to know and obey the truth. Nothing should be left undone that\nwill hasten the day of righteousness and peace.\n\nGod has two hands with which He is trying to save the world. The one is\na crucified hand, and the other is a great steel hand. The crucified\nhand, which is the pledge of forgiveness and good will, is both\nlogically and chronologically first. For nearly two thousand years God\nhas been extending this hand. Millions have accepted it and lived; but\nmany more have refused it, preferring the strife of the world. It is\nperfectly plain that society will not be saved by this means alone.\nWithout minimizing the worth of the crucified hand, or withdrawing it,\nGod is at last employing a hand of steel, as vast as the machinery of\nthe world, and identical with it. God is placing His great steel fingers\naround men and drawing them together. No longer may men live apart, for\nunder this new pressure nothing has value in isolation. Capital has no\nvalue without labor, neither has labor any value without capital; and\nthese may no longer work successfully together without uplifting the\nweak nations of the earth. The masses and classes can no longer escape\neach other. Bound together by bands of steel, they may do one of two\nthings--kill each other or love one another. There is no third\nalternative. I have faith that when men see themselves in the grip of\nthe steel hand, they will choose the better alternative and, by clasping\nGod's crucified hand, become brothers. As things have been going, scores\nof peoples on our little earth have lived in darkness and under the\nhand of awful oppression; they could have suffered and rotted for\nmillenniums without the prosperous nations knowing or caring. At last,\nhowever, we know, and our own salvation now clearly rests on our caring.\nThe articulate body of humanity has become as great as the nations of\nthe earth, and that body is made up of the infinite energies of God. We\nnow have the privilege of making this mighty body express more fully\nthan ever before the thought and love of God, or else we shall be\ncompelled to shape it into the most gigantic monster that ever stalked\nforth to do the foul deeds of hell. Were there a legion of leering and\njeering devils, plotting evil against our earth, the comprehending mind\ncould hear them say, \"We wish for no more awful instruments of torture\nthan these energies of the Infinite with which His children clothe\nthemselves. Only let us lead them to fall out by the way, and they will\ndamn each other by smiting with the infinite powers of their God.\"\nMen,--individuals and nations!--do we see it, do we know the simple\nrudiments of life, is it not clearly manifest that we must strive for\nthe Christ life or socially commit suicide and murder?\n\nMen have made such great mental and material growth that unlimited power\nis placed at their disposal. That fact makes this the greatest day in\nhuman history. I have already said that the man soul is in quest of\nomnipresence by progressively making the universe the instrument of his\nwill. The hour has struck for his supreme effort in that direction;\nthough simply creeping in the past, he may now run if only he will obey\nthe divine law. However, if he will not obey, the hour for\ndisintegration has arrived; and once more nations and empires must burn\nto the ground, and upon the ashes of the conflagration, the noble\n\"remnant\" must again begin to rebuild slowly and painfully the temple of\nGod on earth.\n\nIf our old men are dreaming dreams, and our young men are seeing\nvisions, let them come forth in this crisis. But thank God, they are\ncoming! Millions are coming! We believe there will be enough to save the\nday. And what a day it will be if, after all this dreadful upheaval, we\ncan reconstruct the world on such broad principles of righteousness and\nlove that the race shall start upon a new era of peace and good will! We\nmust not on account of ignorance or selfishness throw away this golden\nopportunity.\n\nGet ye up upon the mountains, O Israel, O Church of God, and look for\nthe day!\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nDOES GOD HAVE A BODY, AND COULD HE BECOME A MAN?\n\n _Was Jesus God or a good man only?_\n\n _Can modern psychology any longer believe in the Deity of Jesus?_\n\n _Where does Jesus belong in the religious, social, and thought\n world?_\n\n\n1. Introductory statement\n\nThus far our discussion of God has been largely in relation to physics.\nAt last, however, we are ready to consider Him on a higher plane.\n\nOur knowledge of both God and man is incomplete until we see their\noneness in Jesus and in the kingdom which Jesus proclaimed. In the life\nof Jesus, God and man are viewed from a higher spiritual level. The\nworld lies broken into fragments until these fragments become united in\nthe Christ type of life. Then the body, the human mind, God, and the\nwhole material universe coordinate to make one beautiful whole.\n\nStarting with the Scriptural idea that all things proceed from Wisdom,\nor God, then strictly speaking, God is the only person in the universe\nwho has a body of His own. All other spirits live in His bodies. This\nis necessarily so if all the way from its simplest elements to its most\nhighly organized forms, nature is but the expression of the divine Will.\nAs we have already shown, the human body is but a part of universal\nnature,--the finest part, the blossom. Therefore, what we call the human\norganism is primarily God's. Not only is it the very finest bit of His\n_workmanship_, but it is His to _use_, unless His child, the man soul,\nrobs Him of His own. In these highly specialized parts of nature God has\nnot merely one, but billions of bodies,--all the bodies there are. The\nInfinite Mind would find one such body utterly inadequate. With but one\nbodily form He would be incomparably worse off than an organist with but\none finger. If God could come to articulate speech and deed through but\none physical instrument, He and all His family might well despair. If as\nthe Scriptures teach, however, each and every physical body is His very\nown, in which and through which He may live, then every condition is\nprovided for a God humanly personal and infinitely satisfying. He may be\nas local and personal as our parents or neighbors. Though greater than\nall, He is yet in all and through all,\n\n \"Center and soul of every sphere,\n Yet to each loving heart how near!\"\n\nNot only is God lovingly present to every Christian heart, but at the\nsame time He is personally revealed by every human form through which He\nis permitted to live and love and serve. The pity of it all is that we\nso often prevent God from using His own body, in which we too live, by\ncausing it to express in word and deed that which is contrary to His\nthought and love.\n\nBefore we take up the subject of the Incarnation, it may be well to\nconsider what is meant by the trinity.\n\n\n2. The idea of the trinity and how it came about\n\nWhen we say that God is a trinity we do not mean that there are three\nGods. There is just one God who, as we have repeatedly said, is a Loving\nIntelligent Will.\n\nThe idea of the trinity came about in this way:\n\nThe early Christians were so deeply impressed by Jesus, and so warmly\nattached to their Master, that they instinctively adored and worshiped\nHim; for, somehow, He brought God to them even as He brought them to\nGod. Yet the Christians, like the Jews, strenuously opposed the worship\nof more than one Divinity. Their stout opposition to Polytheism provoked\nthe retort from their heathen neighbors that Christians should not be so\nparticular about the number of Gods, because they worshiped at least\ntwo, a Father God and a Son God,--and three, if they added a Holy Spirit\nGod. So it is not strange that the Christians, to justify their own\nconduct, were driven to a profound study of Deity. And though they made\nsome grave mistakes, nevertheless they discovered some vital truths\nconcerning the nature of personality which greatly enlarged and enriched\ntheir conception of God. It must be remembered that in the early\nChristian centuries many thought of God as something very remote and\nplacid, like a sea of bliss; being infinitely happy and self-contained,\nHe was at perfect rest. Such a One would not contaminate Himself by\nbeing identified with nature or man. To the Christian Gnostics and Jews,\nthe idea that God became incarnate and suffered death on the cross was\nrepugnant. Some believed that it was beneath God even to create a world\nlike ours. They, therefore, attributed creation to lesser divinities.\nHowever, in the third century Origen stoutly maintained that God must\nhave created the world. Yet so eminent a man as Origen believed that He\ncreated it for \"tainted souls.\"\n\nAfter much study, the Church Fathers arrived at the conclusion that God\nwas somehow Three in One, a sort of society within Himself,--and they\nwere right. For without something like a social experience in one's\nself, it is impossible to be a person at all. This is equally true of\nGod or man. To be a person one must know himself, and this he could not\ndo if he were not able to keep company with himself. The pen with which\nI am writing is not a person because it has no capacity for\nself-communion. But because I hold _fellowship_ with myself I am a\nperson. Since every human being keeps company with himself more than he\ndoes with all other persons put together, may God have mercy on him if\nhe is bad company, if he is not safe to be left alone with himself. A\ntree may stand alone in infinite solitude, companionless; but for\nbetter, for worse, a man must forever remain in his own company,\nhearing praise or condemnation from his own heart. How is this possible,\nunless there is something in a man's individual experience that\nresembles society? In self-knowledge, as in all knowledge, there are the\n_knower_ and the _known_. When we commune with ourselves we are, at the\nsame moment, the subject and the object of our own experience. The self\nthat sees may fittingly be called the father of our personality, and\nwith equal propriety the self that we see may be called the begotten of\nour personality. Thus something resembling father and son is experienced\nin our first step toward self-knowledge. Whether the capacity to be our\nown subject and object amounts to much or little, it was this that the\nFathers saw and rightly attributed to God.\n\nFurthermore, there is yet another step to be taken in the act of coming\nto true self-knowledge. By what power does one determine that the person\nwith whom he communes is himself? There is something in our experience\nresembling a third person, one who recognizes both subject and object\nand bears witness that they are one. The reader may say, \"I can see the\nfirst and the second, but I cannot see the third.\" The self that sees\nthe first and the second is the third. This power by which we complete\nthe unity of our being is by no means trivial, as some may think. There\nare abnormal personalities who successfully achieve the subjective and\nobjective in their experience and keep up an abnormal communion with\nthemselves from morning till night, who cannot witness true. So they\ninsist that they are \"General Jacksons\" or \"Jesus Christs\" or great\n\"railroad magnates.\" Their personalities have broken down, not because\nthey lack self-consciousness, but because they lack the power of coming\nto unity. A perfectly sane person, therefore, is subject, object, and\nwitnesser all in one. If God were not this kind of trinity He would not\nbe a person at all.\n\nTo grasp so clearly the significance of personality was a great\nspiritual achievement. The Church Fathers did more than they realized;\nthey described the elements inherent in all personalities. They saved\nGod to the intellect and to the affections by bringing Him out of remote\nobscurity into the blazing light of moral and spiritual personality. God\nis personal because He is triune; that is, because He is complex enough\nto keep company with Himself and to know Himself. If the reader asks\n\"What does all this amount to for us?\" my answer is, \"It amounts to the\ndifference between a personal God and the deity who is an 'immobile\nplacid sea of bliss.' In the second place it shows the difference\nbetween the God who is a Loving Intelligent Will and the materialist's\ngod who is no more than a blind Samson. It also discloses the essential\nlikeness between all personalities, however much they may differ in\ndevelopment.\"\n\nIf I were asked to put my finger on the greatest weakness in present-day\nthought I should unhesitatingly point out the subject of personality.\nMen are falling down like ten-pins before the intellectual difficulties\nof believing in a personal God; and many of them are even doubting the\nspiritual personality of man. And this is largely due to the fact that\nthey are unable to form any mental picture of personality. One of the\nbeautiful surprises for this generation is that the Fathers in working\nout the personality of God found the only conception of personality that\nis true to universal experience. They did not realize that they were\nanalyzing the human spirit as well as God, because their thought was\nwholly on Him. But they saw God through their own personalities, and if\nthey had not borne God's image they never could have analyzed the\npersonality of God. In this generation we turn their analysis of God\nupon ourselves and find that it tallies perfectly with our experience.\nWe at last see that the triune, or personal, man soul is the child of\nthe triune, or personal, God Soul; and thus a deeper bond is established\nbetween the Father and His child.\n\nThe use to which the Church Fathers put this analysis of God's\npersonality was both fortunate and unfortunate. It was fortunate because\nit enabled them to continue their belief in the deity of Jesus and, at\nthe same time, their belief in the oneness of God. They were still able\nto oppose polytheism, and yet come to Jesus as the fountain of divine\nblessing. They worshiped God in the face of Jesus. In other words, they\nbelieved in a genuine Incarnation. This was fortunate beyond all\ncalculation. Just how fortunate it was we shall have to illustrate to\nthe best of our ability when we come to the subject of Incarnation. Thus\nfar I have not discussed the Incarnation, neither have I had Jesus in\nmind while considering the trinity. For in whatever sense God is a\ntrinity, He was such before Jesus was born.\n\nBefore discussing the divinity of Jesus we must briefly call attention\nto the unfortunate use which the Fathers made of their analysis of the\npersonality of God. They thought they had solved the question of\nChrist's divinity when they took this objective element in the\nexperience of God and clothed it with flesh. Though they denied that\nthese distinctions in God were properly named by the word person, yet\nthey admitted their inability to think of a better term. Then they so\nwrenched God's personality apart as to send His objective self, which\nwas simply an element in His experience of self-consciousness, into the\nworld to be the Messiah. And though they stoutly maintained that these\nthree elements in God were indivisible, yet God's subjective self could\nstay far away in heaven while His objective self could go to earth as a\nman. At the same time each of the three elements in God's experience of\nself-hood could perform all the functions of a full personality. This\nwas doing the worst possible violence to the personality of God; and it\nhas wrought confusion from that day to this. As we have already seen, it\ntakes these three elements in God's experience to make Him any person at\nall. The common use made of the subjective, objective, and witnessing\nelements in the personality of God is pure Tri-Theism, regardless of how\nthey are united. God does not have three personalities that can be\nscattered about in the universe.\n\nThe idea that God's objective experience can go off on a journey, or\nthat it can return to heaven while His witnessing experience in turn\ngoes to earth, leaving the subjective and objective in heaven, is\nreligious illiteracy. Neither God nor any part of God ever goes or\ncomes. The triune, or personal God, is never far enough off to come\nanywhere. There is no place in the universe where for a moment He is\nnot. He is always the Father, and Creator, and Intelligent Will in whom\nall creation lives, and moves, and has its being. The _second element_\nin God's own act of consciousness did not become incarnate in Jesus; the\nconscious God Himself entered the life of man.\n\nThe baptismal formula, \"In the name of God the Father, the Son, and the\nHoly Spirit,\" has no reference to the triple element in God's\nself-consciousness. It beautifully represents the three ways that we are\nto look at God, if we are to see Him in the fulness of His glory. First,\nwe think of God as He is in Himself, and as He must be to His own\ninfinite thought. Second, we think of Him as He has expressed Himself in\nnature, in humanity and, best of all, as He has revealed Himself in His\nobedient Son Jesus. Third, we think of God as the still small voice\nwithin, the Soul of our souls, the One to whom we speak when we have\nshut the door; the one to whom we whisper our deepest secrets, and ask\nHim if He loves and forgives us. Beyond the fact that the trinity\nconstitutes God a person, it has nothing to do with the deity of Jesus.\nHow God became incarnate is another question; a question to which we\nnow gladly address ourselves.\n\n\n3. Was Jesus God or a good man only?\n\nAt a meeting of city ministers, addressed by one of their own number,\nthe speaker took from Jesus the last shred of divinity. According to\nthis minister, Jesus was a prophet sent from God, and the best of men,\nbut nothing more. A progressive Jewish rabbi asked if this were not the\npresent attitude of all intelligent ministers, and whether they did not,\nfor the sake of expediency, leave the pew in ignorance of their real\nbelief. In the opinion of the rabbi, Jesus was one of the greatest of\nJewish reformers, but not the founder of Christian religion. His\ncontention was that Paul founded the Christian Church on a peculiar,\npsychic experience which came to him on his way to Damascus.\n\n\"The Divinity of Jesus\" was then assigned to me as a topic for the next\nmeeting. Naturally, I turned to the Scriptures to see what they had to\nsay concerning the relation of God to man. Though expecting to find on\nthis subject a marked degree of difference between the Old and New\nTestaments, yet I was wholly unprepared for the facts as they appeared.\nBefore presenting my findings, I asked the rabbi to consider whether\nJesus was a \"Jewish reformer,\" or a Jewish fulfiller,--it being my\nconviction that He was the latter. I then stated that, having examined\nthe Old Testament on the relation existing between God and man, I\nfailed to find a single passage recognizing God within the human life;\nand that no greater surprise than this had come to me in my recent study\nof the Scriptures. In the Old Testament, the nearest approach to the\nimmanence of God in the soul was the following:\n\n\"I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh,\" and \"Is not my dwelling with\nthe humble in heart?\" But even here the divine Spirit was only _upon_\nthem or _with_ them. Never, so far as I could discover, did He dwell\n_in_ them. In some twenty-four hundred verses, God was represented as\nsustaining many beautiful and terrible relations to men. This\nrelationship was symbolized by birds, beasts, and natural elements, to\nthe very limit of the imagination. After the most solemn warnings and\nattractive promises, God would depart from His people for a season and\nthen return with rewards and punishments according to their\nfaithfulness. He scrutinized their inmost thoughts; in fact, He did\neverything except enter their lives.\n\nOn turning to the New Testament, however, I found a startling contrast.\nGod dwelt not only in the hearts but in the bodies of men. \"For know ye\nnot that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth\nin you? Yea, ye are the temple of the living God.\" \"Know ye not that\nyour bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit?\" \"Walk in the Spirit and ye\nshall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.\" Jesus said, \"He that hath\nseen me hath seen the Father; how sayest thou, show us the Father?\nBelievest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?\" \"The\nFather abiding in me doeth His works.\" \"In that day ye shall know that I\nam in the Father and ye in me, and I in you.\" \"If a man love me he will\nkeep my word: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him,\nand make our abode with him.\"\n\nAs a prospector seeks for gold, I sought in the Old Testament for God in\nthe life of man and did not find Him; but no sooner had I reached the\nNew Testament than all was changed. Here was a new country. The\nprospector was in the midst of that for which he sought. No mountain was\never as rich in gold as the human heart, according to the New Testament,\nwas rich with the indwelling God.\n\nThe religion of Jesus in contrast with that of the prophets is like a\ntree, which Luther Burbank has transformed into a new variety bearing\nstrange and luscious fruit. I wondered that I had overlooked for so long\na time the complete cleavage between the two parts of our Bible on this\nsubject. Jesus was truly a Jewish reformer, but to a much greater degree\nHe was a Jewish fulfiller. In revealing God's true oneness with man He\ncompleted the prophet's imperfect religious vision, and best of all,\nmade the vision a fact in His own experience. At the same time He began\nmaking it a reality in the experience of His disciples.\n\nI told the friend who in a previous meeting had stripped Jesus of all\nHis divinity, that he had very successfully demolished some antiquated\npsychology, but strange to say had completely overlooked the new\npsychology which, in my opinion, fully restored Christ's divinity. As to\nhis statement that \"Jesus was a good man only,\" I reminded him that\nthere is no such being. For, each one of us, in so far as he is \"only,\"\nis a bad man. It requires the oneness of God and man to make a _good_\nman. When a human soul is separated from God, he ceases to be a complete\nperson. God and the true self always come or go together; in order to be\na human soul, in any worthy sense, one must be both God and man in one.\nA man severed from God is but the fragment of a man, a limb broken from\nthe tree, a lifeless branch. To touch the living branch of a tree is to\ntouch the tree. The fruit of the branch is likewise the fruit of the\ntree. That any person can be a \"good man only,\" is an idea contrary to\nthe New Testament and modern psychology.\n\n\n4. Can modern psychology any longer believe in the Deity of Jesus?\n\nThe Scriptures certainly do not teach that Jesus was God only; neither\ndo they teach that He was man only. It is my own deepest conviction that\nJesus was very God and very man. Furthermore, I believe this to be the\nteaching of the Scriptures, and the idea that best conforms to modern\npsychology. To come to Jesus is to come to God; likewise to come to God\nis to come to Jesus. He is at once God in man, and man in God. I\nbelieve in the God of Jesus, and I believe in the Jesus of God. How\nmodern psychology can avoid believing in both the deity and humanity of\nJesus, I do not see. Some who believe in Christ's divinity do not\nbelieve in His deity. They say, \"Yes, He is divine, He is incomparable,\nHe is altogether lovely; but He is not Deity, because Deity is God\nHimself.\" But my thesis is that Jesus was \"very God and very man.\"\n\nTo picture this truth to our minds will be our next task. An old-time\nfriend, while reporting to me the installation of a minister whom I\nknew, said:\n\n\"Would you believe it! Mr. G. told the council that he not only believed\nin the divinity, but that he believed in the Deity of Jesus.\" Here my\nfriend threw his head back and laughed heartily, expecting me to laugh\nwith him. When he had finished laughing, I told him that I also believed\nin the deity as well as in the humanity of Jesus; and that if I did not\nbelieve in His deity I did not think I should believe in any religion at\nall. This proved to be quite a surprise to my friend. So to his puzzled\nlook of inquiry I replied:\n\n\"And I could make you believe it.\" As his curiosity deepened at this\nremark, I asked him,\n\n\"Do you know where I first met God--not an emanation from Him, but God;\nthe Will that formed the worlds,--all the God there is?\" \"No,\" was his\nreply. \"Fortunately,\" I answered, \"I do. It was in my mother. When I was\na little boy the great God at times enfolded me in human arms, and\nlooked into my face through benignant, human eyes, and spoke tender\nwords with a sweet accent. My silent and invisible mother was often so\nclosely identified with God that they would be thinking and feeling the\nsame thing concerning me. At such times the human form expressed their\ncommon thought and love; my heavenly Father, no less than my invisible\nmother, enfolded me with His arms. If in these supreme moments God was\nnot in my mother, then it is useless to look for Him anywhere in the\nUniverse. My mother was different from the non-Christian mothers in our\nrough frontier. Many times she so loved me _in_ God, and _with_ God,\nthat she became a channel through which God Himself had personal access\nto me through all the human modes of approach.\"\n\nI then told my friend of an experience with my mother at church in the\nlittle frontier schoolhouse. I was lying on the seat with my head in her\nlap, tickling my nose with her boa. When the time came for prayers, my\nmother bowed her head to the desk in front of her. While her lips moved\nin prayer, I observed that her dear face was troubled. As she was\nunconscious of my gaze, I continued to look into her sorrowful face.\nThough but a little child, I fully understood what she was doing, and\nwas able to mark the stages of her progress. My invisible mother was\ntalking with our invisible Father, and the face gradually changed until\nfinally I could tell that her will had merged completely with His will;\nand then her face, which was primarily His face, became radiant with\nspiritual beauty. I had seen the dear human face of God, and at the same\ntime it was the face of my mother.\n\nI called my friend's attention to the fact that once upon a time the\ninvisible God said to the invisible Clara Barton:\n\n\"Clara, let us go out onto the battle-field where the poor soldier boys\nlanguish and die;\" and Clara responded to His thought and love. Then the\ninvisible God and the invisible Clara Barton went to the battle-field in\nGod's body, because Clara had no body exclusively her own. So, when that\nform bending over the soldier boy wiped away the dust and blood and\npain, while whispering of home, of mother, and of God, it was the\nFather, as much as it was Clara Barton, who was performing the deed; and\nHe, not less than she, was visibly and humanly present. The ministering\nhand was as truly His instrument as it was hers; while the stronger will\nand deeper love were the Father's. Before Clara Barton thought of it,\nthe Father, knowing all and feeling all, suggested to her the kindly\ndeed; nor did He stop loving the soldier boy when she began.\n\nAgain addressing my friend, I said:\n\n\"It is impossible for me to understand you. You have always believed God\nto be immanent in all nature; you have seen Him in sticks and stones and\nstars; but you now fail to recognize Him in His highest, His only\ninstrument through which He is capable of coming to articulate speech\nand deed. How I pity your poor helpless God who is buried fathoms and\nfathoms out of sight. He can neither see, nor hear, nor breathe; nor can\nHe walk or talk. But you see, _my_ God can get clear to the surface in\naudible word, and visible deed. When my God finds a good, clean\nFrenchman, He begins talking and writing French. If you doubt this,\neither you are not familiar with French literature, or else you do not\nknow God. Under similar conditions God speaks all the languages. How\nbeautifully and abundantly He has spoken through the German and English\ntongues! While in Greek and Hebrew, God has uttered mighty words of\nwisdom, and has filled the earth with His glorious paeans. Human wisdom\nalone could never have spoken thus. If we but have eyes to see and\nhearts to feel we shall realize that all about us God is getting to the\nsurface through devoted Christians. When the true preacher lifts the\nsouls before him into the will of God, he sees a divine expression upon\ntheir faces; and if he is spiritually wise, he will realize that for the\ntime being these are the dear human instruments of God, as truly as they\nare the faces of human spirits; and when he has poured out his soul in\nbehalf of some great cause of God for which he would be willing to die,\nhe will find someone with outstretched hand ready to meet him and\nwilling to cooeperate, if need be, even unto death, and then it is his\nprivilege to know that, while shaking hands with a brother spirit, he\nwas at the same time shaking hands with the infinite God. In these rare\nexperiences of ours, the invisible God no less than the invisible man\nhas come to outward expression, and this He would always do, if our\nwills were not contrary to His will. Our feeble and infrequent\ninspiration is but intermittent incarnation, while full incarnation is\npermanent inspiration.\n\n\"Why,\" I asked, \"should you hesitate to think of Jesus as God and man?\nIf the Father-Spirit and the child-spirit were thinking and willing the\nsame thing, which one came to expression through the words and acts of\nthe body? If A and B were lifting an object, would it be truthful to say\nthat A was lifting it? The visible form that lived and taught by the\nshores of Galilee was as truly God as it was man, unless the\nchild-spirit did not know and do the Father-Spirit's will. Sometimes a\nwhole congregation of wills express themselves joyfully and forcefully\nthrough one written resolution. God never speaks an audible word, except\nthrough one of His bodies in which He has enfolded a child-spirit. When,\nhowever, the child-spirit rebels against the Father, and causes the\ninstrument to speak or act vile things, the Father is dumb. His child\nhas robbed Him of His body. We have grown so accustomed to this form of\nrobbery that we naturally think of human spirits as having bodies all\ntheir own, while we conceive of God as a vague, disembodied influence.\nWe speak of God as sending men, forgetting that He never sends a man\nanywhere without sending him in His own body and accompanying him with\nHis own spiritual Presence. And that which the messenger says is not\nworth hearing if it fails to express the Father's thought and will. The\nGod who, through beautiful chemical energies, makes the ear, hears; and\nthe God who makes the eye, sees; and He who makes the lips, speaks.\nEither God knows the thrill of nerves, or else He has an infinite amount\nto learn. Why then should we say that Jesus was only a good man, when\nthe body was God's very own, and the guiding will was that of the\nFather? A man is all God except the invisible human spirit; and in the\ncase of Jesus, even the human spirit rendered such filial obedience that\nthe Father, for once in human history, got to the surface through His\nown instrument in a steady flow of luminous words and loving deeds. If\nthe composite life of Jesus were named after its major elements, then\nJesus should be called God. However, as that would be both confusing and\nfalse, we state the truth as it is, and say that Jesus was both God and\nman, that is, a God-filled man, or a God-man.\"\n\n\"Oh well,\" said my friend, \"if you mean it that way!\"\n\n\"Did I not tell you,\" I replied, \"that you would believe it? The trouble\nwith you is that you forget it. You should be proclaiming it from the\nhousetop that God has got clear to the surface in human form, and that\nmen have clasped His hand, and heard His voice, and seen His face.\"\n\nIn the life of Jesus, religion reached a new and distinct stage of\ndevelopment. It was in Him that the essential _oneness_ of Deity and\nhumanity first became clearly manifest. To the friends of Jesus, God was\nno longer a disembodied spirit. The Christian's God is clearly the God\nof Israel, but He is the God of Israel become human and visible. The\nworld has been slow to grasp the meaning of Christ's life and teachings.\nTo maintain the uniqueness of Jesus, it has denied the universality of\nthe truth which He proclaimed: namely, the organic and moral oneness of\nGod and man. If the union of God and man as realized in Jesus was so\nbeautiful, a similar union between God and all men would be equally\nbeautiful. That God desires such a union with all His children there can\nbe no doubt; and that He is inspiring His disciples with the glorious\nhope of its accomplishment is equally certain. Yet for the present, even\nthe most devoted followers have not nearly attained unto the fulness of\nthe stature of Jesus; but some glad day they shall be wholly like Him\nwhose image they already unmistakably bear. This is the Christian's\nnoblest hope.\n\nIf God has ever united His personality with that of even one man, then\nthere is a way of doing it. And if there is a way, what finer goal is\npossible, than that such a union between God and every man be\nconsummated? Really, that is what the Christian Religion is about. Not\nonly may God and every man be similarly united, but the sin of man alone\ncan prevent such a union from taking place. If there were no sin or\nrebellion in a man's heart, he would instantly become a God-man on the\nplane of his present human development; and as he \"Advanced in wisdom\nand stature, and in favor with God and men,\" he would be a God-man on a\nhigher level. If the human side of the Christ has continued thus to\ngrow for more than nineteen hundred years, on what altitudes of\nknowledge He is a God-man by this time, we can but faintly surmise. And\nwith the possibility of a complete purging from sin, and the possibility\nof an infinite growth in wisdom, we, too, may yet be God-men on what\nwould now seem to us dizzying heights; we shall ever be attaining \"Unto\nthe measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.\" No matter what\none's conception of the trinity in God's personality may be, God is\ncapable of uniting with every man in the same way that He united with\nthe man Jesus. If we prefer to believe that God had an Eternal Son who\ncame to clothe himself in a man, the problem of union would in nowise be\nchanged. A Son-God, if He existed either in the Father or out of the\nFather, could not be less than a person, and the manner of uniting\nHimself with a man would be the same. My interest in the metaphysics of\nthe trinity is that it gives us a firm grasp on the personality of God\nand the personality of man. I rest on the fact that the Personal God\nbecame incarnate and still seeks the souls of men for his\ndwelling-place. I further believe that when we do not read a later\nmetaphysics into the Bible, the Scriptures wholly support the more\nmodern conception. In the beginning was the Logos, Word, or Wisdom.\nWisdom was with God from the beginning; that is, God was always Wisdom,\nand not a material thing. All things were made by Wisdom, or God. Life\nwas in God, and God's life was the light of men; and though it was\nshining into the darkness the darkness apprehended it not. The God who\nis wisdom, and not matter, was in the world, and the world was made by\nHim, but it knew Him not. Finally Wisdom, or God, became flesh, and\ntabernacled among us, and we discerned His glory, a glory as of an\nonly-begotten with a father, full of grace and truth. The author seems\nto me to believe that the Personal God became incarnate, and that the\none in whom He dwelt, in contrast with other men, looked like an only\nson of a father.\n\nNotwithstanding this glorious possibility, there is always a tendency\nfor religion to revert to a lower type; and this tendency is\nparticularly noticeable just now. Not being able to believe in the\ndivinity of Jesus according to the old metaphysics, multitudes are\nceasing to believe in Him as Emmanuel,--or \"God with us.\" At a time like\nthis, when a forward movement is the only hope of saving our great\nmaterial structure from becoming another Tower of Babel, a retrograde\nmovement is lamentable. What we especially need is a new interpretation\nof Jesus, followed by a finer devotion to Him, and a whole-hearted\ncommitment of ourselves to His ever-widening program. God is becoming\naltogether too hazy and inarticulate, at a time when the consciousness\nof His holy Presence is especially needed, if we are to shape and\nsustain a civilization that is quadrupling itself in weight and extent\nby reason of the growth and application of material knowledge. Any\nquickening of God that is to be highly beneficial must result in His\nfurther advent into human lives and human institutions after the pattern\nof Jesus.\n\nThat a mere God of nature is insufficient was forcibly brought home to\nme while I was watching a circus performer throw daggers and toss balls.\nThe performer, placing a man against a wide board, some ten feet\ndistant, hurled a bunch of daggers into the board on either side of the\nman, each time missing him by only one or two inches. Then he began\ntossing balls until the air seemed full of them, and not one ball fell\nto the ground. Having witnessed with amazement his great dexterity,\nthese thoughts occurred to me:\n\n\"I wonder what he is like when he talks? If he is married what does his\nwife think of him? If he has children how do they feel toward him? Or if\nhe is a single man, what would I think if he should wish to marry my\ndaughter?\" I then realized that I knew absolutely nothing about him\nexcept that he was a dexterous machine. Then falling into a homiletical\nmood I thought of the great skill of God. \"How wonderfully _He_ can toss\nballs, and strew the milky way, and hurl Pleiades and Orion! Before such\ninfinite skill the performance which I have just witnessed is\nridiculous.\" Then the thought forced itself upon me, \"What would God be\nlike if He were to talk? What kind of a person should we find Him to be\nif He walked our streets, and engaged in business, and sat at the table\nas one of the family circle?\" I then realized that if God could only\ntoss balls and direct atoms we should really know nothing whatever of\nHis character. If He were no more than the uniform power of nature's\nlaws He would too closely resemble gravity, or electricity, to be\nsatisfying to His children. The human heart demands that, in addition to\nall this, God be individual, and spontaneous, like other persons whom we\nknow, and with whom we hold fellowship. We enjoy seeing our friends run\nmachines, but what an awful life it would be if every person in the\nworld gave no heed to anyone or anything except the machine which he\nuniformly and incessantly operated! What a monstrous and oppressive idea\nit is to think of God, silent as a sphinx, spending an eternity with His\nmind so riveted upon the operation of His machine-world that He has\nneither time nor capacity for anything else. If such a God had time to\nthink of it, He surely would envy the little child who can prattle, and\nlaugh, and sing.\n\nFortunately this higher demand upon God is fully met in the religion of\nJesus. For while our Father is a wonder-worker and a world builder, at\nthe same time He has myriads of human bodies through which He can live a\nthoroughly social life. He is the most social Being in the universe; His\ndesire and capacity for social relations are unlimited. He does not\nwillingly leave one individual outside the circle of His friends. All\nHis work in nature is for the purpose of providing instruments and\nconditions for a family of free children, among whom He may live as the\nfree and adorable Father. It is no wonder that men cease to pray, when\nin their thought God is divorced from everything individual and social.\nWhen men conceive of God as the mere operator of the cosmos, their\nhighest concern is to keep out of the way of the machine. It never\noccurs to such men that God is able to treat them as sons, after the\nmost personal and human manner. It is only in the laws of nature that\nHis actions are mechanically uniform. In social relations His moods and\nactions change to suit the feelings and conduct of His sons and\ndaughters. In _nature_ God sends the rain and sunshine on the just and\nthe unjust alike, but in _human-nature_ He smiles or frowns according to\neach individual's deserts. In Jesus, God might say, \"Come unto me,\" or\nHe might make a whip of cords and drive the people out of the temple.\nPrayer does not cause God to change His wise and loving purpose, but it\ndoes determine _how_ He shall execute His holy will. If the conduct of a\nchild does not change the father's actions toward him, then the father\nis both foolish and immoral. Men should learn that God is even greater\nin humanity than He is in nature. For in the one, He is uniform power,\nwhile in the other, He is Father, Redeemer, and Friend. In the world of\nwills, God is individual and human. And His inner communion with us is\ngreatly intensified and clarified when there is added to it His audible\nvoice from without. The voice of God speaking to us through human lips\nawakens the voice of God within us. How wonderfully clear was the Divine\nVoice in men's hearts when God spoke to them through Jesus! Likewise\nwhen the apostle Paul went to a new community, it seemed to receptive\nminds that God had come to town; and they were wholly justified in\nthinking so, for though God had been there all the time, powerfully\nthrough nature's laws and feebly in their darkened hearts, yet for the\nfirst time God was within their city in clear articulate speech, wooing\nthem to Himself. This not only made God seem real to them, but it made\nit easy for them to believe and be baptized. Though able to rejoice for\na time, yet heaviness soon came upon them after Paul's departure,\nbecause God too seemed to have departed from their midst. Neither were\nthey mistaken in this, for God had no instrument remaining through which\nHe could make Himself so humanly real to them, after His devoted and\ntried servant had gone away. As a result of Paul's early departure there\nwould follow unbelief and conduct unworthy of Christians. To meet this\nsad state of affairs in the mission churches, God would write them a\nletter, or better still, make them another visit in Paul.\n\nOnce there was brought home to me in a very beautiful and unexpected\nmanner the Christian truth about God's essential oneness with humanity.\nWeary from my afternoon calls, I had just returned home. Entering the\nside hall that was already dark, I saw through the door slightly ajar my\nlittle son and daughter at play. Philip, eight years old, was building\nup blocks on the floor, while Esther, two years younger, was standing\nunder the electric light with both arms raised as high as she could\nstretch them over her head. Seeing her dramatic position, and the\nunusual look on her face, I remained silent in the hall knowing that\nsomething was coming. With intense feeling she said:\n\n\"Oh, Philip! of course we would kiss God!\" To which Philip replied:\n\n\"Oh, you couldn't kiss God. He is a spirit. Why, God is in you,--and in\nme.\"\n\nStill standing in her dramatic position with the light shining full on\nher face, she began lowering her arms slowly, and as her expression of\ncomprehension deepened she said:\n\n\"Oh well then, Philip, if God is in you and in me, if we were to kiss\neach other we would kiss God.\"\n\n\"Yes, that is right, you would,\" was his response. Then said she:\n\n\"Let us kiss God.\" He arose promptly, and the children, throwing their\narms tightly around each other, kissed God.\n\nIf ever there was a glad father I was one. Standing there in the dark\nhall I thought:\n\n\"God bless the dear children, they have the evangel. That is the very\nessence of the Christian religion, 'Inasmuch as ye did it unto the least\nof these ye did it unto me.'\"\n\nOf course we all realize that there are certain proprieties which adults\nmust observe, but what could be more beautiful than for a little brother\nand sister so to recognize God in each other as to be able to kiss Him?\nThe idea here involved, if carried out in every relation of life, would\nbe the Kingdom of God realized. Furthermore, there is no other way of\nmaking the Kingdom of God a reality, either on earth or in the life\nbeyond. Doubtless God never will be seen outside the bodies which He\nprovides for Himself and His children to use in common. However, we\nshall have more to say about that later.\n\nA Christian woman has beautifully related an incident which brought to\nher Christ's idea and experience of religion. Said she:\n\n\"It was my custom to retire each day to my own room for devotion. On one\noccasion when my heart was deeply oppressed my prayers seemed all in\nvain. Nevertheless, I continued to plead, 'O Lord Jesus, reveal thyself\nto me.' After awhile there came a rap at my door. It was the maid\nseeking comfort. She had broken a choice piece of china. But I drove her\naway rather harshly, saying, 'You know you are not to bother me at this\nhour.' Then I continued, 'O Lord Jesus, reveal thyself.' After more\nfruitless prayer, my little girl came sobbing for comfort as she had\nbroken her first doll. I even drove _her_ away saying, 'My child, you\nmust not disturb your mother now.' After resuming what seemed to be a\nuseless petition, there came to me a suggestion as distinct and forceful\nas if spoken. 'Inasmuch as ye did it not unto the least of these ye did\nit not unto me.' I arose from my knees, unlocked the door, and went out.\nIn the kitchen I found the maid sullen and angry, to whom I spoke\ncomforting words. Seeing the light come to her face, I went on to find\nmy little daughter. From under the grapevine where she had already cried\nherself to sleep, I picked her up; and after kissing her and wiping the\ntear stains from her cheeks, I told her that I would get her another\ndollie,--one ever so much nicer than the first. Having comforted others\nfor His sake, and for their own sake, my soul was filled with\ninexpressible peace! And once more something spoke to my innermost\nbeing, 'Inasmuch as ye did it unto the least of these ye did it unto\nme.'\"\n\nLet no one draw the conclusion that her habit of devotion was worthless,\nfor it is not very likely that all this peace and revelation would have\ncome to her if she had been less inclined to pray. The intense desire of\nher prayer, coupled with the unpleasant incidents of the day, brought to\nher the fuller truth.\n\nThough a minister may not neglect his sermons, yet there have been times\nwhen I have grown so desperate in my effort to prepare a vital message\nthat I have thrown down my insipid and stupid manuscript to go out and\nfind some needy, suffering person whom I could bless in His name.\nWhenever I have done this I have found God and my soul and a sermon.\n\n\n5. Where does Jesus belong in the religious, social and thought worlds?\n\nWhen the God Soul and the man soul unite, they so lift nature's forces\nup into personal life that the universe no longer lies in broken and\nconfused fragments. Jesus is at the center of all things because all\nthings center in pure personal life. In Him, the Father-spirit, the\nchild-spirit, and nature's forces were so correlated as to be newly\nmanifest; the child was completing himself in the Father, and the Father\nwas fulfilling Himself in the child, while nature was serving as the\ncommon instrument of both. Separate the God Soul, the man soul, and\nnature's forces, and no one of them is revealed. Unite them as they were\nin Jesus and the meaning of all three appears. Christ's type of life\nbrings all reality into accord because it combines everything into a\ncomposite, personal life.\n\nIf you wish to know God in the most perfect way, go to Jesus; if you\ncare to know man as he should be, go to Jesus; if you would look upon\nGod, man, and nature's forces in one radiant, wooing personality, go to\nJesus. If it is the purpose of religionists, sociologists, and\nphilosophers to trace reality to its highest form of expression, let\nthem go to Jesus. Yes, let all men go to Jesus with their wealth of\ntechnical knowledge which they have gained in the wide fields of\nresearch; and in His presence, their treasures, like precious gems, will\nscintillate with a divine light. This conjunction in Jesus of all\nstreams of reality makes Him the light of the world. In the same way,\nand for the same reason, every person would be the light of the world if\nthe child-spirit rendered an obedience to the Father equally loving and\nintelligent. But this is the tragedy,--who has rendered such obedience!\nIt is the belief of many of us that Jesus was never disobedient, even as\na little child. Though it were admitted that this could not be proved,\nstill it would remain a fact that as Jesus \"Increased in wisdom and\nstature, and in favor with God and man,\" His filial obedience identified\nHim with the Father. The oneness of Deity and humanity was so certainly\nachieved in Jesus that no one can rob him of His glory nor of His place\nas the Messiah. He was the first to open wide the door to God; yea more,\nHe was the door. In Jesus, we come face to face with the personal God\nand with our Elder Brother who lived in God. In Him, the perfect God was\nliving in man, and the perfect man was living in God, while unitedly\nthey were living among men as a visible member of society.\n\nTaking the world as it is, the presence of God in humanity could but\nbring both peace and trouble; it brought joy to the pure in heart, and\nbitter hatred and strife to those who loved darkness rather than light\nbecause their deeds were evil. The weary and the noble were attracted to\nJesus, while the vicious and the self-willed hurled themselves against\nHim with mad fury; but it was ever so, from the beginning of human\nhistory until the present hour. Whenever God has made His approach in\nhuman life, the evil-in-heart have opposed Him; they have killed the\nprophets, and stoned God when He came unto them. In our own day, many\nwho speak beautifully of God in nature, are fiercely angry with Him when\nHe appears among them in a good man; they are willing to believe that\nGod is in that part of nature which soothes their senses, but they are\nnot willing to believe that He is in the man who irritates them by\nopposing their wicked ways, or by hindering them in their pursuit of\nill-gotten gains and illicit pleasures. Therefore, when God in Jesus so\nfully and perfectly entered society, it is not strange that they put Him\nto death. However, in killing Jesus they unwittingly exalted Him; in\nthis act they brought to light the heinousness of sin, the inexpressible\nlove of God, and the compassion of the child Jesus for his sinful\nbrothers. It is before the cross, if anywhere, that men are led to\nrepentance; it is there, if anywhere, that the heart is both broken and\nhealed. Before such wondrous love the world may well pause and sing:\n\n \"In the cross of Christ I glory, towering o'er the wrecks of time,\n All the light of sacred story gathers round its head sublime.\"\n\n\n6. Can God die?\n\n_Yes, God can die._ Three years ago after the Sunday morning service I\nreceived a telegram saying, \"Mother died this morning at six-thirty.\nCome!\" Now, what did my sisters mean by this information; did they\nintend to convey the idea that our mother had become extinct? Not at\nall, they only meant that she had lost the dear old instrument that we\nhad known for so many years in this earthly home. Death never signifies\nmore than this to the Christian. Though we said she was dead, we\nbelieved our mother to be more alive than ever. If death is simply the\nloss of our instrument, the body, then God too can die, for He may lose\nHis body. God died on the cross with His child, because the\nFather-spirit, no less than the child-spirit, lost His beautiful\ninstrument in which He had walked by the shores of Galilee, teaching and\ncomforting the people. If Jesus would not forsake the Father in the\nagony of the Garden, we may be sure that the Father did not forsake His\nchild on the cross. As they were united in life they were undivided in\ndeath. To think that Jesus any more than the Father was conscious of the\npain, is to make Jesus greater than God. The God who creates the body,\nmoment by moment, must know the thrill of every nerve, since they are\nHis own nerves which He shares with His child. Yet it is not the pain\nnor the indignity heaped upon the Father and His Holy Child that we are\nhere emphasizing, but the fact that He lost the instrument by means of\nwhich He had been a living person among men. The disciples scattered in\nsorrow and bewilderment, when God and His Child Jesus died on the cross.\nThe Father had no form left on earth through which He could continue to\nspeak _unerring_ words of wisdom and love. One year before my mother\ndied she enfolded me once more in her arms and blessed me, saying, \"My\nson, I shall never see you again on earth.\" Hastening home at the\nsummons of my sisters I looked again on the dear old instrument, but the\nhand of welcome was not extended, and the lips did not speak. In like\nmanner when the limp body of Jesus was taken from the cross, the lips\nno longer said, \"I and the Father are one, He that hath seen me hath\nseen the Father.\" Those lifeless hands were no longer outstretched, and\npleading, \"Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden and I will\ngive you rest.\" Yes, God can die; He can lose His human instruments on\nearth. He can likewise die to society by being _robbed_ of His highest\ninstruments. If no man, woman, or child in my city would let God come to\narticulate speech or deed through his body, God would be stone dead in\nBridgeport; He would be as dead as the spirits whose bodies lie in our\ncemeteries. As already indicated, I do not mean, even in that sad event,\nthat God would not still be in Bridgeport as the power of the\nall-pervading atmosphere, or as the mighty force of the waves that lash\nour shores. His energy would still be scintillating in the lamps of the\nwhite way, and shedding a soft light in the smaller lamps that brighten\nour homes; His would still be the energy propelling all the thundering\nmills of industry, and the power sustaining the nerves and muscles that\noperate the machinery; He would still be present in the blazing sun by\nday and in the twinkling stars by night; He would still wrap us round,\nand enfolding us in His great universe He would watch over us by day and\nbrood over us by night; and yet for all this, if we entirely robbed Him\nof all His human bodies He, as a member of society, would be completely\ndead in Bridgeport. If in his own life every one killed God, men would\nthen devour one another. As it is, God is partly dead and partly alive\nin my city, as in all cities; and hence we are sometimes a blessing and\nsometimes a curse to one another. God may be manifestly alive in one\nperson, and nearly dead in the same man's nearest neighbor; and He is\nmore or less dead and alive in the best of us. When God can no longer\nget to the surface through men's souls, and bodies, and institutions, He\nis dead in that locality. And when God is dead through the loss of men,\nsociety is spiritually dead through the loss of God. The _living_ God is\nnot one who is driven out of His kingdom and reduced to a mere operator\nof the cosmos. The living God is not one who is persecuted by His\nchildren and driven from home while His business is going to rack and\nruin. A living God must be active in His universe from center to\ncircumference. Until our bodies are God's obedient instruments there is\nno kingdom of God. There is not the slightest reason for thinking there\nis a kingdom of God anywhere in the universe unless God has children\nsomewhere who are permitting Him to live through the instruments with\nwhich He enfolds them. Until God is permitted to live in His own bodies,\nHe is dead and His children are languishing.\n\nIf the Christian religion were understood and believed and practiced,\nwhat a transformation it would work! For instance, if every man, woman,\nand child in my city rendered perfect obedience to God, then every human\nbody in Bridgeport would become His very own to use, and God Himself\nwould throng our streets. We should meet Him face to face in\nindividuals and crowds. It would be Emmanuel, or \"God-with-us\"\neverywhere. All faces would be bright with the wisdom and goodness of\nGod. Every individual would be our Infinite Father and our brother in\none. What a rapid human growth would ensue! Every living person would be\na window through which the light of God would shine. There would be\nyoung minds like the child Jesus in the temple, just waking to the mind\nof God, and ripe saints and sages flooding the community with God's\nvaster wisdom and profounder love. Not only would our immediate bodies\nbe cleansed and transformed, but our augmented bodies would be brought\ninto harmony with the divine Will. Our city would become a heavenly\nabode, and our industries would become the instruments of love and\nrighteousness. We should tap a thousand sources of power that now remain\nidle, and finding unlimited resources within ourselves and our\nenvironments, we would work wonders. While making God's energies our\nenlarged and purified bodies, we should at the same time turn them into\ninstruments of God's love. If God were permitted to come to the surface\nperfectly in all our lives, and in all with which we have to do, three\nyears would not pass until people would be making pilgrimages from the\nends of the earth to see the city \"where _God_ lives.\"\n\nIn a previous chapter I said that God, as a solitary person in the\nuniverse, would not mine coal, and run steam engines; but now allow me\nto say that if there is anything God wants to do it is to get into the\nrailroad business; and if He does not, it will be because men vote Him\nout. But in shutting God out of railroad corporations, what are we\ndoing? Though not fully aware of it, yet we are really saying, \"O God,\nyou may be the energy in the steel rails, you may be the power in the\nwheels, you may be the expansive force of the steam, you may manage the\nchemical combinations of the wheat or other cargo, you may furnish us\nwith our bodies, you may do everything but dictate terms of business.\nIf, however, you want to sit at the desk as the senior partner then our\nanswer is, 'Get down and out, O God.' We are glad to have you as our\nslave and lackey, we are delighted to use you and exploit you, but woe\nto the man or men who plead your cause in connection with our private\nbusiness.\"\n\nSuch is the enormity of our sin, and the denseness of our ignorance when\nwe shut God out of our business affairs. If God may not be in our daily\nenterprises He will not deign to be in our prayer meetings. This is the\nmessage of Jesus to all men, to employers and employees alike; this is\nthe will of God, that _in_ and _through_ His children He may make all\nthings vocal with His wisdom, and beautiful with His love. Scholars may\nlook into nerves and brain, but the spirit is fully revealed _before_\nthe face and not back of it. So the infinite God and Father of our\nspirits is fully revealed, if at all, in benignant eyes, friendly hands,\nwilling feet, and gracious words. It is the way we grow our bodies, and\nshape our institutions, and manipulate all the forces of nature that we\nreveal what manner of spirits we are. If our spirits are evil, then God\nis denied bodily expression. There is no use saying Lord, Lord, if we do\nnot the things which He tells us.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nLOSING THE SENSE OF IMMORTALITY\n\n\nA general statement\n\nThe \"what\" and \"where\" of God is still incomplete so long as we confine\nour thought to the mere fragment of time measured by this earth life.\nThough we have found the unity of all parts in the Christ life, yet that\nunity is and can be but imperfectly realized by society on earth. A\nlonger time and a wider sphere must be considered if we are really to\nknow what God and man is. Therefore, God, man, and the universe must be\nviewed in the light of endless time.\n\nIf in certain respects this generation is conspicuous for its lack of\nfaith, in other respects it is notable for its abundance of faith. The\nnew knowledge acquired along many lines instead of destroying our belief\nin immortality is going to enrich it immeasurably when we have\nthoroughly digested the facts. In the meantime some minds are bound to\nbe disquieted.\n\nIt is most fortunate that the majority of people seem able to accept the\nfact of a future life as something altogether natural and inevitable.\nThose who are not able to do so, however, appear to be increasing in\nnumber. Yet we may rest assured that whatever will save the faith of\nthe doubting ones will enrich the faith of those who find it easy to\nbelieve. And if those who doubt are not as numerous as sometimes\nappears, so much the better. Whatever the real situation may be, it is\nour privilege and duty to deepen and enrich our faith to the extent of\nour ability. That so many express doubts on the subject of immortality\nis something to be deplored and, if possible, remedied.\n\nAn old man, highly esteemed, despondingly said to me after the funeral\nof his friend:\n\n\"We hope there is something beyond, but we do not know.\"\n\nIn response to my word of assurance, he grew even more pensive and\nadded, \"No one has ever returned.\"\n\nTo say the least this life-long member of the Church saw nothing in\nfuture prospects to cheer his declining years. As I gave his feeble hand\na warm clasp, I painfully realized that the light was fading from his\nsoul as well as from his eyes.\n\nOn my first visit after the funeral of a senior deacon, his widow\nplaintively repeated the words of the old man:\n\n\"We hope there is something beyond, but we do not know.\"\n\nMy prompt response was immediately checked by a languid wave of the\nhand, and an emphatic, \"_No one_ can know.\"\n\nThis uncertain state of mind is in striking contrast with that of the\nsaints and martyrs; it cannot say, \"To me, to live is Christ and to die\nis gain.\"\n\nSome highly honorable people tell me that they have no desire to live\nagain, and express wonder that anyone has such a desire. The good\ninfluence we may leave behind us, they think, is immortality enough.\n\nA general loss of faith in immortality, I am confident, would work\nirreparable harm to society. It would completely destroy religion. The\nChurch, therefore, should do its utmost to keep alive a rational and\nheartfelt assurance of immortality. This, I am sure, can be done\nwithout, in any way, stultifying the intellect. In fact, the intellect\nmust be made our ally if we are to succeed.\n\nAt this point the remark of a woman ninety years old is very significant\nand reassuring. After reading a popular book of the day on immortality,\nshe said:\n\n\"I did not like it. I do not want anyone to try to prove immortality by\nscience, because he cannot do it. I grasp the reality of a future life\nwith my whole being.\"\n\n_Why are so many people losing their assurance of immortality?_\n\n\n1. The contagion of doubt\n\nThere is a contagion of doubt as well as a contagion of faith. With\nfacts still favorable to a victory, an army may lose morale. When the\ngeneral and all his officers keep hopeful, their confidence works its\nway down to the enlisted men. If the hopeful word is on many lips the\nmorale is saved, and the whole army is confident of victory. Witnessing\nto any belief has a tremendous psychic influence for good or evil. The\nfacts concerning any great subject are never deeply analyzed by the\nmasses; yet the people possess a rare power for sensing the spirit of\ntheir times.\n\nIn the fight for Eternal Life the morale of the Church is too low. The\nconfidence at the top is not always as rugged and commanding as it might\nbe. Too many college men are confused in a jumble of ideas, and some of\nthem, unfortunately, give their testimony on the side of doubt.\n\nNo one should give an insincere testimony for the sake of helping out a\nweak cause. Yet many college men are greatly remiss in not giving more\ncareful consideration to a theme that vitally affects all human\ninterests.\n\nAt all events, the masses hear many expressions of doubt, and are not\nslow to pass them on. A large number of people who stand aloof from the\nChurches hear a dozen denials to one affirmation of belief in\nimmortality. Many radical socialists carry on a determined propaganda\nagainst belief in immortality for political and economic reasons. They\nsay to the restless crowds:\n\n\"The Church is fooling you with the hope that the wrongs of this life\nwill be righted in another; but there is no other. If ever you get your\nshare of good things you must get it soon, for your life is short.\nTherefore, down with the Church and king capital!\"\n\nI am not fearful for the grounds on which the assurance of this great\nChristian belief rests, but I am disturbed over the prevalent ignorance\nand indifference manifested.\n\n\n2. The inability to make a religious use of modern knowledge\n\nThe Christian view of life in its relation to the whole body of modern\ninformation has not been adequately given to the people. And they are\nseriously affected in consequence of this neglect. That irreligion does\nnot tend toward assurance of immortality I regard as an incontrovertible\nposition. Yet to say that all doubt is due to a lack of Christian\ndevotion is not true. Many good Christians are confused, and seek help\nto regain the comforting belief that death does not end all. All clearly\nascertained truth about the universe should prove a help to faith, but\nuntil people know what to do with so many new facts, they prove a\ndecided hindrance.\n\nTake for example just one popular subject of the day, physiological\npsychology: When taught by men who have never grasped the Christian\nphilosophy of life, it affords the shortest possible road to atheism and\nthe denial of the human soul. This modern branch of learning, though the\nfinest of servants, is the meanest of masters. It has slain its\nthousands. Physiological psychology has its own field of investigation,\nbut it is never safe when it parts company with sound philosophy.\n\n\n3. The loss of a satisfying conception of the future life\n\nIn sharp contrast with former times, this generation has no satisfying\nconception of the future life. And naturally an indefinite and hazy\nfuture makes but slight appeal. Many instinctively turn from such a\nfuture to save their peace of mind. They prefer something that is\ndefinite and interesting. It is a matter of common experience that the\nheart will not glow if there is no picture on the canvas. Unless we can\nso adjust the lens of our minds as to project something more than\nconfused colors, we shall never bring back the former interest in a\nfuture life. Unfortunately, there has not been much striving on the part\nof the Church to construct a future that will harmonize with the newly\ndiscovered constitution of the universe. And without this end in view\nall striving would be in vain; nothing will avail that does not relate\nthe future to the divine framework of God's present Universe.\n\nThe common conception of heaven has been of something quite apart from\nthe existing world as we know it. Among all with whom I have conversed,\nI have not found one who expects to have a physical body in the future\nlife. They have erroneously interpreted a \"spiritual body\" to mean a\nspirit body. This crude idea of a spirit body is a fair sample of a\nhundred other fancies and misconceptions.\n\nWhen the commonly accepted idea of heaven became as distasteful to the\nminister as it was to many of his congregation, he stopped preaching\nabout it. The laity may no longer be seen enjoying a rapturous\ncontemplation of future bliss. Instead, they accuse persons so inclined\nof other-worldliness, and point out to them that they are not as good as\nthey might be here and now. So, for one reason or another we seldom give\nmore than a furtive glance at that which lies beyond the grave. In\nproportion as the vision has gone from the mind, the sense has faded\nfrom the soul. The old picture of heaven has become altogether\ninadequate, and no other has been put in its place. Considering the\nsudden transition through which the world has been passing, possibly\nthis stage of affairs was inevitable.\n\n\n4. The growing habit of classifying the future with things unknown and\nunknowable\n\nAt last there has arisen in the Church a considerable class that strives\nto discourage any effort to inquire into the future life. \"One world at\na time\" is their motto. The future is classed among things unknown and\nunknowable. This type of mind is trying to arouse interest in the\npresent by drawing attention from the future.\n\nSaid a woman professor to a student:\n\n\"If ministers would talk less of things about which they can know\nnothing and do more to help those about them, they would show more sense\nand accomplish a great deal more good.\"\n\nI think I know some ministers who might do more for their environments,\nbut I happen to know of none who talk much about the future. This\nteacher so enthusiastic over a fragment of the truth has never suspected\nhow meager and one-sided her education is. She has not grasped the\nthought of our age which recognizes, above everything else, the unity\nand solidarity of things. So she protests against any _rounded-out_\nconception of life. It is not strange, therefore, that immortality is to\nher a disagreeable theme that she would like to see tabooed.\n\nA professional man once said to me:\n\n\"When you came on the train the other day our mutual friend, Mr. A.\nsaid, 'There is the Parson,' and then nudging me remarked, 'Say, he\nknows no more about the other world than we do, does he?'\"\n\n\"So that is what you were talking about,\" I replied. \"Well, I am\nsurprised. I thought you were modern men, and knew that there is no\nother world. Science, philosophy, religion, and common sense, teach us\nthat there is but one world, a uni-verse. We now live in all the world\nthere is. But since we have not penetrated it very deeply, if your\nfriend had remarked that the minister was no more developed than you, or\nthat he had gone no deeper into the meaning of the universe than you, he\nwould at least have been on debatable ground. When, however, two men of\nyour opportunities could sit there and talk about another world, I am\nashamed of you. The universe is as much one as my watch is one. Every\nparticle of it enfolds us continually and never ceases to pour its\nenergies through us. Every part of the universe is beating upon us to\nwaken us, if possible, to its meaning. If I live for an eternity, I\nshall be in the same world as now, and what I truthfully know about it\nnow will still be true after my body has decayed. God's one-world is the\nonly world.\"\n\nNo wonder that people become confused and mixed up with their plural\nworlds, and broken fragments of worlds.\n\n\n5. An inadequate conception of the Kingdom of God\n\nMore than a generation ago it came to us like a new discovery that while\nJesus rarely spoke of heaven, the expression, \"Kingdom of Heaven,\" was\ncontinually on His lips. This discovery turned the whole tide. And since\nthen, \"The Kingdom of God on Earth\" has been the theme of the Church.\n\nWhile heartily agreeing with this discovery, and sympathizing with the\nnew aim, I still seriously doubt whether we have seen the kingdom of\nheaven in any such full-orbed sense as Jesus intended we should. Too\noften we unwittingly preach a kingdom of _earth_ on earth; we leave\nsomething out. That which Jesus preached was somehow more religious.\nSurely it is an inadequate kingdom of God when it, as so often happens,\ndegenerates into a _mere_ scientific cooking-school, or a _mere_\nscientific system of sanitation, or a _mere_ several other things\nlacking in God motive and God consciousness. The Kingdom of God is more\nthan a program of social service; it is a God-filled and God-ruled\nsociety. A genuine Kingdom of God on earth will be pervaded by a\nheavenly atmosphere. Even a social religion may become so unsocial as to\neliminate the Head of society; it may consign Him to the oblivion of\nforgetfulness.\n\nNo woman, whose duty it is to be a cook, can be a perfect Christian\nwhile she is careless about the preparation of food for her family. Yet\none may be a scientific cook without being a Christian. It requires more\nthan beautiful, material conditions to make the kingdom of God on earth.\n\nI know families with beautiful mahogany dining rooms and all that goes\nwith them, whose good food is so well cooked that it almost melts in\ntheir mouths, and yet they give God no thanks. Indeed, there are those\nthus situated who think nothing about God.\n\nThis is not meant to imply that the conditions of poverty and ignorance\nare any more favorable to a Christian life.\n\nComing one day from a poor family's home across the street, my little\nson said:\n\n\"Papa, does Mr. R. love the Lord?\" When I told him that I did not know,\n\"Well,\" he replied, \"I don't believe he does, because he sat down at the\ntable to-day with his coat off and never thanked the Lord for his food.\nHe just looked around and said, 'Pass the taters,' and that is all he\nsaid.\"\n\nFrom what I knew of this poor man, he was probably neither more nor less\na pagan than the man with a mahogany dining room. The doctrine of the\nkingdom of God on earth, with but little consciousness of God, is\nsurely increasing among rich and poor, both in the Church and out of the\nChurch. And as personal acquaintance with God goes, the assurance of\nimmortality invariably fades.\n\nMany women, of varying degrees of intelligence and social standing, are\ndoing commendable social work for the love of humanity with but dim\nconsciousness of God. It has come to pass that fine women may whisk\nabout in silks and limousines visiting day-nurseries and the like\nwithout bending the knee to the Father or remembering that the babies\nare God's little ones. Yet no right-minded person wishes to diminish the\nsocial service of this day by whomsoever rendered. On the contrary, he\nfeels that the Church which overlooks the poor babies should have a\nmillstone hanged about its neck and be cast into the sea. Nevertheless,\na kingdom without the consciousness of God in the hearts of its subjects\nwill never succeed in saving the assurance of immortality. The old\nreligion could not succeed without a bottom, and the new religion will\nnot succeed without a top. This topless kingdom, spreading far beyond\nthe Church, is making many feel that they are better off without the\nChurch. Some of these are sincere and substantial men and women, while\nothers of them are extremely superficial.\n\nMany of the latter class will tell you with real self-appreciation that\nthey look after poor stray kitties, and feed the birdies in cold\nweather, and in fact befriend all the animals. Really, they are too busy\nwith good works among animals and needy people to go to church and, as\none of them told me, they are not among the narrow-minded people anyway\n\"Who believe in hell.\"\n\nThis generation needs to learn the necessity, and the sane psychology,\nof Christian experience. To put it plainly, it should be converted to\nGod. With God in our thoughts and affections we can hardly be too\ncareful about the material side of His kingdom; for the religion of\nJesus means the spiritualizing of the material, all the way from our\nbodies to the end of the material forces that are at our command. Though\never so many cups of cold water be given, if they are not given in His\nname or with a consciousness of His share in the gift, the kindly deed\nwill not impart to us Christ's assurance of life eternal.\n\n\n6. We automatically lose the assurance of the future when we lose the\nreality of the present\n\nBecause he _has_ nothing in his ice-bound world, the Eskimo hopes for\nnothing. There is nothing within his present grasp that suggests great\nthings to come. Whereas, the civilized man hopes for a glorious future\nnot yet attained because he sees that the present warrants such a hope.\nNo one can reasonably hope for that which the present does not justify.\nOnly let him be sure that he knows the present. Men who miscalculate the\nfuture usually do so because they fail to apprehend the present facts.\nWe cannot judge what the fruit will be unless we know the particular\nvariety of tree. The future history of the universe depends upon whether\nthere is a God _now_. Either there is or there is not a God. If there\nis, the one not knowing Him has a very superficial knowledge of the\nworld that now is. A God-projected and a God-filled world will have a\nvery different future from a world of mindless ether and mindless\nelectrons. The discovery of electricity and some knowledge of its\nbehavior were necessary before men could dream of electric cars and\nelectric lights. When electricity and some of the laws were known,\nhowever, the dream was unavoidable, and like many another rational\nprediction it has come true. When the thought of God fades, Christian\nhope dies. If one is only _agnostic_ with reference to the existence of\nGod, he is simply agnostic on the subject of immortality. In exact\nproportion as we lose connection with the deeper realities of the\npresent, we forfeit insight into the future. As one who is entirely\nignorant of chemistry has no criteria by which to judge the future of\nchemistry, so the one having no personal consciousness of God, nor clear\nvision of the deeper meanings of life, has no data for a rational\nprediction of the future. Paul said that the rulers of his day did not\nknow spiritual things, or they \"Would not have crucified the Lord of\nglory.\" Not knowing God, naturally they did not recognize His purpose\nwhen they met it in the character and teachings of Jesus; so they\nignorantly put Jesus to death. Things which their eyes saw not and their\nears heard not, were recognized by those who knew God. \"For who among\nmen knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man, which is in\nhim? Even so the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God. But\nwe received the spirit which is from God; that we might know.\"\n\nOur expectations for the future always rise spontaneously out of our\nvision of the present. Whether it will rain within the next forty-eight\nhours I can but imperfectly predict because I recognize but a few vague\nweather conditions. The weather bureau, however, with many more present\nfacts at its command may predict with far greater certainty.\n\nThe man who knows nothing but a material universe cannot believe in\nimmortality. Any effort to convince him is but a waste of breath. If he\nis right in thinking that the universe has no soul, then he is right in\nbelieving that there is no future life.\n\nThe Soul--granting that it has a Soul--is the best part of the universe.\nTo have lost God, therefore, is to have lost the best part of reality.\nAnd the loss does not end here, for, in the best sense, we have lost the\nworld also. Though its chemistry and physics remain the same, its higher\nmeaning and finer uses no longer exist, for us, when God is eliminated.\nTo comprehend the universe we must know it philosophically, poetically,\nand religiously, as well as scientifically. Some unwisely think that to\nknow it scientifically and poetically is enough. If the forces of nature\nare energies proceeding from an Infinite Mind, and if we might so use\nthese forces as to express His wisdom and love in all human relations,\nthen the universe is fundamentally different from the atheist's world.\nThe one who does not recognize an infinite Mind of love and\nrighteousness, must prostitute the world to uses lower than the highest.\nAnd as soon as he does this he has not only lost the Soul of the\nuniverse, but in the very finest sense he has lost the body of the\nuniverse as well. On such a poor foundation, his common sense saves him\nfrom the folly of trying to build a temple that pierces the skies. He\nmay still remain a gentleman, and have a most kindly and unselfish\ndisposition within certain limits, but at a thousand points he will find\nhis will at right angles with the one who lives in a different\nworld,--in a world that warrants the long look. I have experienced the\nworld from both points of view. And though my common conduct did not\nvary greatly, yet when I was deeply conscious of God, and saw the\nuniverse all vibrant with His thought and love, my life in its inner\nmeaning and quality was different from center to circumference.\n\nHere, then, is the crux of the whole matter. In so far as we have lost\nthe assurance of a future life, it is because we have lost so much of\nthe present that what remains of it is not sufficient to arouse a lively\nanticipation of immortality. True, our sense of reality is oppressively\nintense in the physical realm; we clutch, with death-like grip, that\nfrom which the Soul has escaped. But the husk will not support spiritual\nlife nor give assurance of the life to come.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nFINDING THE SENSE OF IMMORTALITY\n\nHow shall we find the assurance of immortality?\n\n\n1. We automatically find the assurance of the future when we find the\nreality of the present.\n\nNaturally, assurance will be found, if at all, where it was lost. We\nshall automatically find the assurance of the future when we find the\nreality of the present.\n\nIt is not claimed that all professing Christians have a firm grasp on\nreality; for when religion is no more than a superficial formality, its\ncredulous devotees experience neither truth nor doubt; they are\nreligious automatons. But if we do not allow such Christians to attract\nus to heaven, neither should we permit them to drive us to perdition.\n\nIf one succeeds in finding God, if he learns to grasp the religious\nsignificance of the universe, and if he achieves a personal experience\nof the kingdom of God, assurance of the future will come unbidden and\nunsought. These great and present realities are the gateway to life and\nthe guarantee of good things to come. _Only let one find, assimilate,\nand build upon this three-fold present, and the soul will blossom into\nhope._\n\n\nSome reasons why the quest for reality is not more frequently and\nearnestly undertaken.\n\n\na. The moral failure of Christians\n\nSome refrain from any effort to make religious attainments because of\nthe moral failures among professing Christians. But there are many\nfailures in business, education, citizenship, and every other line of\nhuman endeavor that is worth while. On that basis a person would refuse\nto live at all. We all know there are some religious sceptics who are\nmuch more upright than some believers. From a Christian civilization\nthey have inherited strong wills, a deep moral sense, and physical\nbodies with no marked weakness. Many of them have kindly dispositions\nand charming graces. Among their most helpful friends and favorite\nauthors they count many of the best religious people. They themselves\nare one of the best by-products of Christianity. If they did not live in\na Christian civilization they would not be what they are. Many such are\ndoubters simply because they have not found their religious teachers.\nThey have probably encountered that which, for their type of mind, was a\nvery unfortunate religious environment. It would have been better for\nsome people if they had had different parents, or a different Church, or\nboth. However, it is a simple matter of observation that a large\npercentage of humanity is weak whether believing or sceptical, whether\nit goes to Church or does not go to Church. A man who has a real saint\nin him may at the same time have seven devils in himself to fight. With\nno patriotic ideals or emotions some men can keep morally straight,\nwhile some noble self-sacrificing patriot may, if he is not very\ncareful, fall into the ditch. It is fortunate that some doubters are so\ngood, and a pity that some Christians are so bad; but regardless of just\nhow good or bad any of us is, if this universe has a Soul it is of the\ngreatest importance that we make His personal acquaintance and learn His\nplans; and if in anything we have deviated from His plans we should\nhumbly repent and get in line with the Power that must ultimately break\nus if it cannot make us. If one is strong enough to perform ordinary\nduties without the conscious help of God, that is no reason why he\nshould run away from his Father and treat Him with silent contempt. The\nFather desires the company of His son, and in a thousand ways great and\nsmall needs His son's help.\n\n\nb. Because the average Christian cannot answer technical questions\n\nOthers regard the religious verities lightly because the average\nChristian cannot answer technical questions pertaining to his faith. Yet\nthere is not one cultivated person in a thousand that can answer\ntechnical questions concerning the material universe in which we all\nlive. The most highly civilized and prosperous community succeeds simply\nbecause it relies on the technical knowledge of the few. Most of us\nknow electricity neither practically nor theoretically. Even among\npractical electricians, how many could answer more than the simplest\nquestions? It requires no profound knowledge of the subject to wire a\nhouse and give its occupants light and comfort. Yet the practical\nelectrician knows as well as the expert that he is dealing with a real\nforce, and may be able to wire the house better than the theoretical\nelectrician himself could do. How many good cooks are there who could\nchemically analyze the food which they have prepared for their families?\nIt is absurd to expect the average Christian to go into all the\npsychology and philosophy of his religion; as it is absurd to deny the\nreality of his experience because a full analysis is not forthcoming.\nThe large majority of people have neither time nor qualifications to go\ninto an exhaustive and technical examination of the philosophy and\nscience of religion, any more than they have to go into the philosophy\nand science of the material world. Fortunately, a more practical way\nstands wide open to them. Because men are men, they may possess the\ngreat realities before they can adequately explain them. They know the\nstars before they are astronomers. They have an implicit knowledge of\nGod which under right conditions becomes explicit. They have intuitions\nand common sense, the foundation of all knowledge. It is their\nprivilege, likewise, to put things to the severe test of use. In the\nmaterial world men risk their lives and fortunes on the truth of\nsciences of which, at first hand, they are totally ignorant. But by so\ndoing they find themselves the richer and the wiser. Likewise, the\nChristian multitudes who take the spiritual world practically, find\nthemselves the recipients of untold blessings. Their knowledge, to be\nsure, is only practical, but it is their knowledge, and they would be\nwilling to die for it if necessary. One may have the reality without the\nanalysis, or he may have the analysis without the reality, or,\nunfortunately, he may have neither. The happiest possible situation is\nwhere he has both. A man may be justified in giving money and labor for\nthe support and extension of religion without himself being a\npsychologist or a theologian. Just as the men who have given the most\nmoney for the advancement of the sciences do not know enough about these\nsciences to teach them. Yet we do not call them fools; we highly esteem\nthem as philanthropists and benefactors. They are often as intellectual\nin the practical world as the scholars are in the scientific world. The\npractical and theoretical everywhere supplement each other.\n\nThere should be experts, by all means, who know religion technically as\nwell as practically. And to these many inquiring troubled minds should\ngo for help, just as the business man goes to the experts for knowledge\nthat lies beyond him. Some sceptics take special delight in perplexing\ncommon Christians with the deepest philosophical aspects of their faith.\nWhy do they not go to the experts? Many religious doubters never go to\nany one with their problems; while others of a more superficial\ncharacter go to the religious quacks, and thenceforward help to swell\nthe ranks of some ridiculous or fanatical religion.\n\nIt is doubtless true that almost every one could find his religious\nteacher if only he would look for him; one who could interpret religion\nin such a way as to satisfy his reason and meet his deepest need. If\nthere is any possible way of bringing honest doubters and religious\nexperts together it should be done for their mutual benefit. But here is\none of the gravest practical difficulties that we have to face.\n\n\nc. Antiquated forms irritating to sceptics\n\nCrude ideas still cling to the popular statements of religion as\nbarnacles cling to a ship. This unfortunate and unnecessary fact drives\naway from the Church many conscientious minds. Though not many of us are\nscientists, yet we all live in a fairly well reconstructed material\nuniverse. Without knowing any mathematical astronomy our general notion\nof the heavens is fairly correct. Ignorant as we are of physics and\nchemistry, yet we have in our minds a moderately fair picture of a world\nthat is compounded from the gases. The old picture of the material world\nhas given place to the new, even among the uneducated masses. But, sad\nto say, the simple, complete picture of the reconstructed religious\nworld has never been given to the masses. Sometimes we lug in a little\nof the dry and technical science that lies back of the new picture, but\nrarely do we give the picture concrete and whole, unburdened and\nuntrammeled by the technical substratum. As a result only a handful of\nChristians have the simple, modern conception of religion in anything\nlike complete form. Yet no task should be easier or more delightful than\njust this work of giving the people a complete picture of the religious\nworld in which we live. Recently I met a man who is a good worker in one\nof the most prominent churches in America, and I was surprised to find\nthat his ideas of religion compare with those of his renowned minister\nas the Ptolemaic astronomy compares with the Copernican,--and yet he has\nno realization of the discrepancy. His capable minister should draw the\npicture for him. A great many sincere and genuine churches greatly\nirritate the sceptical mind because of the forms in which their\nreligious ideas are clothed. Like a grapevine that is never trimmed,\ntheir faith is free and easy and of luxurious growth. To the critical\ndoubter the suffocating atmosphere of the Church seems unreasoning and\nunreasonable. It is not that he wants something learned, but something\nthat does not rough his mind into a state of irritation. The mischief\ndone is great.\n\nIt is the imperative duty of some people to go to another Church; and in\nsome cases to another denomination. Though the fault is on both sides,\nyet they will never be able to make a harmonious adjustment.\n\nInstead of finding a church, or some specialist, that could teach him,\nunfortunately and untruthfully the sceptic usually decides that it is\nimpossible for him to be a Christian. So he resolves to be what he\nregards as an upright man and lets it go at that. But he does not find\nthe great realities, except in a most vague and attenuated form.\n\n\nd. The provincialism of sceptics\n\nThe most hopeless situation of all is where sceptics consort almost\nwholly with sceptics. They can soon kill the last remnant of religion\nthat lingers in their hearts. The provincialism of doubt may be even\ngreater than the provincialism of a bigoted faith. In their hearts,\nsceptics often try and condemn intelligent Christians with but slight\nknowledge of what the Christians believe and with even less knowledge of\nwhy they believe it. Many doubting minds take it for granted that all\nChristians conceive of religion as they themselves did when they were\nchildren in Sunday school, or boys and girls in a Junior Endeavor\nsociety. They think that a little scientific knowledge of the material\nuniverse makes anything more than agnosticism impossible. If their\nknowledge of religion and their philosophical knowledge of the universe\nwere all that is known, they would be right. By learning a little more\nof religion, and by acquiring a better philosophical as well as\nscientific knowledge of the material universe many have regained their\ngrasp on God. For such as have come to see God as the center and Soul of\nall things, natural science, instead of being a hindrance to, has become\none illuminating phase of theology. As a Christian believer, I find\nmyself continually going to expert scientists to ascertain their latest\nfindings. And I can truthfully say that, from a religious point of view,\ntheir verifiable report is always interesting. It is good news. It lifts\nme to higher levels of thought, to nobler planes of social conduct, and\nto loftier heights of fellowship with God and men. God's blessings on\nany man that discovers anything new in God's world and reports it\ncorrectly!\n\nA friend once said to me:\n\n\"I do not know whether there is a God or not, and I am not going to\nbother my head about it; I am just going to wait and see.\"\n\nIf, however, he finds himself alive after the death of his body, I\nventure to assert that the old problem of finding God will still\nconfront him. We may rest assured that there is no ghost-God to be seen\nafter death. This man has utterly misconceived of God and of the method\nof finding Him. Death will not be a substitute for spiritual\ndevelopment. If ever he finds God it will be as a Loving Intelligent\nWill, and not as a glorious ghost on which his physical eyes may look.\n\"God is a spirit, and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit\nand in truth.\" If we would know God we must seek Him as He is, and not\nas something which He is not.\n\nLet the sceptic consider well this statement: So far as we can _see_,\neverything would necessarily appear just as it does if there were a God.\nI have never interrogated any one who could suggest anything to the\ncontrary. If God actually exists, we shall never know Him as we know\nman with local form and articulate speech, unless we come to recognize\nHim in man. I dare say we shall _never_ become acquainted with God save\nas we learn to know Him in our own souls, in other people, and in\nnature. So if we ever expect to know Him we would as well put forth the\neffort to know Him now. If it could be proved that there is a God we\nshould still need to find Him. But if we find him we have no need of\nfurther proof. Our problem then is not one of proving, but of finding.\n\n\n2. Equal striving for spiritual and material things is necessary\n\nAll normal people have senses which give them physical objects. Without\nthese, we could not commence to live a rational life. But we must\nacquire some sense to make our senses of value. Most of our seeing, in\nthe physical as well as in the spiritual, is with our sense and not\nalone with our senses. To achieve insight in any line requires effort.\nThe man who has senses only, lacks the insight of the man who has both\nsense and senses. Therefore we must earn not only our bread by the sweat\nof our brow, but everything else which has priceless worth.\n\nHow covetous we all are for the material side of things! That we may\ntruthfully know and really possess the material side of the universe, we\nput forth prolonged and painful effort. Our striving, however, to know\nand to possess the _Soul_ of the universe is pitifully meager. If we\nstrove no harder for the former than we do for the latter we should be\nignorant and poor beyond recognition. Having long neglected the Soul of\nthe universe we look up, occasionally, and demand proof that the world\nhas a Soul. However, it is not _proof_ that we need, but religious\ninsight. If I ask proof that classical music is beautiful, I must either\ntake other people's word for it or else acquire musical sense by living\nwith classical music and classical musicians. The senses of the average\nman pronounce classical music very ugly. Mathematical or business\nability will not suffice; it will more likely hinder, because as a rule\nit has been acquired at the expense of musical development. There are\nthose who actually make fun of classical music without any realization\nof their personal defect which they are advertising. Charles Darwin was\nprobably never surpassed in the amount of data gathered for scientific\nobservations. And yet, there are persons in every civilized village in\nthe world who are better judges of music; and Paul, to say nothing of\nJesus, was so far ahead of him in religious insight that the contrast is\npainful. In every realm of knowledge known to man, so-called proof is\nbut seeing and understanding and appreciating. Logic does not prove\nanything. If for our major premise we say all normal men are rational,\nwe rest our belief on observation. If for our minor premise we affirm\nthat here is a normal man, we do so on the ground of observation. If\nboth observations are correct, then we need no proof that the man of the\nminor premise is rational because it is self-evident. Logic is often a\nconvenient method of seeing, but it is never a proof. Even in\nmathematics we do not prove, we see. Not a single proposition in\nmathematics is proved; its truth is only perceived. The so-called proof\nis but a method of separating the elements of a condensed proposition so\nthat these elements, one by one, may be recognized. The certainty began\nwith one or more axioms, and proceeded with rules built upon\nobservation, and the certainty at every step to the finish rested on\nsomething self-evident. A prominent man assured me that he could prove\nthat two and two were four. However, the first thing I learned in\nGeometry was that an axiom was too self-evident to be capable of proof.\nThe highly complex methods which we have devised for reducing intricate\nmathematical statements of their axiomatic verities we call proof, but\nthe term proof can only be used in this accommodated sense, for\nfundamentally we have proved nothing; we have simply increased our\nintelligence by using a speedy and ingenious method of looking. When it\nis said that one does not know how to prove a proposition, it only means\nthat he does not know how to separate and arrange the elements in such a\nmanner that the mind can see them. Fundamentally, _nothing in the world\nis proved_. When we clearly see, doubt flees and certainty comes. If in\nanything a person insists that he can not see, all we can do is to ask\nhim to look again; or perhaps we may try holding the truth at different\nangles, or we may present its elements in some new order. If, however,\nnothing enables him to see, then in respect to that particular thing he\nis damned. I had a very intelligent friend who was dismissed from an\nimportant position because he was color-blind.\n\nWhile some have much stronger religious intuitions than others, yet I\nthink there is no normal person who may not, if he goes about it in the\nright way, achieve religious insight. It takes a great deal of\nmaneuvering to get some people to see mathematics. And the average\nsceptic has not put forth the effort to see religious truth that the\naverage pupil has to see mathematical truth. But I know sceptics who\n_have_ put forth such effort, and they have succeeded. When a sceptic\nwins a faith, in the nature of the case it is vital. Saving faith in\nreligion, as in everything else, is the feeling of certainty that\nfollows clear insight. And clear insight into any subject depends upon\nintelligent study and faithful practice. While there are many things\nthat we positively know, and many more that we may come to know, yet it\nis through rational experience, and not so-called proof, that we come to\nknow them.\n\nAs hungry cannibals feed upon the body of a civilized man with never a\nthought that his trained mind would be worth more to them than his body,\nso multitudes feed upon the body of the universe with no thought of what\nits animating Will might be to them. To all who sustain such an attitude\ntoward the universe, its body looms large while its Soul fades. As the\ncannibal missed the wealth and civilization which the larger mind of his\nvictim could have brought, so the mere world-consumers miss that which\nthe Soul of the universe could abundantly give. If it were divinely\nconceived of and divinely used, the physical universe and the social\nrelations therein would be infinitely enriched. But when the Soul of the\nuniverse is lost, and the body of the universe is narrowed down to the\ntemporal uses of the materialistic mind, we have lost the best part of\nreality.\n\nBut if we know what God and the world are to-day, we have a solid basis\nfor knowing what they will be to-morrow. The future is not a new life\nand a new universe and a new God, but the present life and the present\nuniverse and the present God to-morrow. The remedy for a hazy future is\na luminous present. Since God carries all men, good and bad, in His\nbosom, what a pity it is that we allow sloth and selfishness to deprive\nus of His acquaintance and fellowship. A little play-fellow once refused\nto speak to me in the presence of his newly arrived cousin. Finally he\nsaid to his cousin with a sneer, \"Dick spoke to me three times, and I\nnever let on that I heard him.\" This cut me deeply. But I now confess\nwith sorrow and shame that the God who carries me in His own life has\nspoken a thousand times to me when I never let on that I heard Him. I\nhave often tried to forget Him that I might enjoy pleasures of which He\ncould not approve. All souls are in touch with God, and in that sense\nknow Him, even when they do not recognize who or what it is that touches\nthem; they are like the fishes that know the water but can not find the\nsea.\n\nAt last it has come to this: I have simply learned to see the universe\nthat enfolds me, as the present energy of an intelligent Will. I see\nthat Will coming to human expression in me, in my Christian friends, and\nin a social kingdom of infinite possibilities. That which I see _works_,\nand _cooerdinates_ with all that I know, making me more glad and more\nstrong as the years go by. God seems to live in me and about me and\nthrough me. That in which I live and from which I cannot escape for a\nsingle moment of my existence, I do not try to prove. My task is to see\nit more intelligently and to adjust myself to it more perfectly. I can\ntestify that the more I learn and _the better I live_ the more clearly\ndo I see that that in which I live has sense as well as chemical\nenergies; and that its deeper meaning and purpose may get to the surface\nthrough my life. I no longer live in a dirt world, but in a mind world.\nI believe neither in a muck world, nor in a ghost-God who is somewhere\nin hiding. My universe has come to be a Will in action, a Will that\nenfolds me with its energies and does not let me go. When the universe\nis otherwise conceived I do not like it. My intellect and instincts\nrebel against a universe materially conceived and materially explained.\nIt is too twisted and dwarfed for all the facts. I am rationally\nconvinced that I see a larger and better world.\n\nTo me, worship is the deeper penetration into that Will in whose\nenfolding energies I live and move and have my being. My world has\nbecome an oratorio with both peaceful and dramatic passages. I get nerve\nthrills from its music; and more, since its text is written in plain\nEnglish, and not in an unknown tongue, I see the majestic pageant of a\nwell-ordered creation. I understand what the music is about, and\nexperience a joy infinitely beyond what I should if the music were\nwithout words. And though I meet some severe hardships, yet I am\nconvinced that this is the best conceivable world in which to _begin_ a\nlife that is to live forever. History helps me, science helps me; and I\nfeel myself borne along by a union of forces toward a glorious goal. God\nbecomes more and more articulate in me and in all men and in all nature\nas we learn to will His will and to use nature's forces as the\ninstruments of our enlightened and purified spirits. I also find that\nthis vision will not leave me unless I live beneath my best. If,\ntherefore, my best life and best vision go together, it would be folly\nto do anything that would break the harmony.\n\nSome may say, \"this is nothing but the way _you_ see things, why not\ngive us something more?\" No one has anything to give beyond what he\nsees, unless he gives what some one else has seen; and that is entirely\nuncalled for if he can not tell it better than the other man has done.\nThe only justification for the appearance of another book is that the\nauthor thinks his vision is sufficiently like what others see, and at\nthe same time enough different to make it useful. \"But I can't see it\nyour way,\" some reader may retort. Well, I am sorry. Obviously, if we\nare sincere, it is for us to go on living and preaching the gospel with\nthe hope that some day he may come to see. The Master Himself was shut\nup within the same circumscribed method. However, my contention is that\nif we have \"pure hearts,\" and are not unnecessarily confused in\nthought, or possessed of erroneous thoughts, we know God here and now.\nThis is the luminous present that clarifies the hazy future. Not all men\nknow God, but in my opinion all may know Him if they go about it in the\nright way. Every human being, consciously or unconsciously, must submit\nto having his life moulded by a world with a God or by a world without a\nGod, and the finished life will be as different as the two worlds.\n\n\n3. The final step in the effort to know God\n\nTo know God and to win the hope of immortality one must do more than\nformulate a set of correct ideas. Correct ideas will greatly aid, yet\nalone they are utterly inadequate. When the scientist gets his idea, he\nproceeds to experiment with it. If he does not at first get the\nhoped-for results, when the idea is clear and impelling, he performs his\nexperiments over and over again in the most painstaking manner. In\nreligion, however, many will never go beyond the idea. They wish to have\nthe idea fully established without experiment or application. The reason\nfor this difference is that, in religion, the experiment can not be made\non carbon and zinc, but it must be made on the man's own soul. The\nexperiment cuts right into his moral, emotional, and sentimental nature.\nHow often a man will admit, \"I can see no flaw in your idea, but I am\nnot convinced that you are right.\" When the scientist gets his idea,\nwhether it is true or not, he acts as if it were true until he has\ntried his experiments, and does not always abandon the idea when his\ntests fail; he realizes that the fault may have been in the experiment.\nMany of the greatest facts in science have long been baffled by faulty\nexperiments. Like consequences occur in religion. If instead of going on\nto the experiment and application one keeps repeating forever the\nquestion, \"I wonder if the idea is true,\" he will never get anywhere\nexcept into a deeper state of doubt. A wise person while putting his\nbest idea to the test will say, \"I am hopeful that it will turn out\nfavorably because it is such an attractive, promising idea.\" Religious\nideas must be planted in the soul as seeds are put into the ground, and\nallowed to remain undisturbed long enough to germinate. It is most\nfortunate when children, through experimental knowledge, have been\ntaught to love good types of religion and music; and this while they are\nreceptive, and before they are ensnared by a thousand other influences.\nYet no one, at any age, dare neglect his religious duties and privileges\nif he wishes religion to be an impelling power in his soul. In my youth,\nmathematics was a great inspiration to me, but through neglect my\nmathematical lamp burns low. To keep mathematics interesting and alive\none must work problems applied to constructive business.\n\nFor an example of a man who attained unto great religious certainty,\ntake Paul. He experienced a radical revision of his religious ideas, but\nhis improved ideas were not enough. To test their validity he hurled\nhimself upon the Christian verities with all the force of his being;\nand in consequence, found a life of intimate friendship with God.\nThenceforward Paul had great things to tell and magnificent things to\nachieve. \"I can do all things in Him that strengthened me.\" He felt that\nnothing could break this new bond. \"For I am persuaded, that neither\ndeath, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor\nthings to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other\ncreature shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in\nChrist Jesus our Lord.\" His friendship with God gave him a new\nconception of, as well as a new interest in, society. \"So we, who are\nmany, are one body in Christ, and severally members one of another.\" God\nthe Father \"Is over all, and through all, and in all.\" Paul's insight\nbroke all former bounds; it elevated him to a boundless and timeless\nworld; his insight gave him a deep sense of God and became the evidence\nof many things not yet achieved. Here was personal assurance of God and\nimmortality deep, strong, and jubilant. Whence came it? Such assurance\nis inherent in a life spiritually nourished and divinely employed. Hope\nsimply comes to such a soul, like color to the ripening apple.\n\nThis generation, though engaged in many noble charities, shows marked\nsigns of under-nourishment; its mind is active in the acquisition of\nmaterial knowledge, and its body is overworked in the effort to\naccumulate wealth, yet its soul languishes. And there is a near likeness\nbetween a starved soul and a starved body.\n\nWithout hope or courage, a little girl sits staring out of great\ninnocent eyes because she is under-nourished. This poor fading flower is\nin striking contrast with the little apple-cheeked girl in bloomers who\nbelieveth all things and hopeth all things and (as her brother knows)\ncan do pretty much all things. This startling difference requires no\nlengthy explanation; nourishment and exercise tell the whole story.\n\nSo in our day many languid souls ask, \"Where is thy God, and who knows\nwhether there is a life beyond?\"\n\nFor an instructive contrast, place beside such a life the life of Jesus.\nLiving in the bosom of the Father, doing the Father's will day by day,\nseeing life in the light of divine love, and witnessing the effect upon\nthose whom he won to a life of love and service, made it impossible for\nJesus to lose faith in immortality. While enduring the pain of the cross\nHe could say to the malefactor, \"To-day shalt thou be with me in\nParadise.\"\n\nThe abundant, buoyant life nourished in the life of God and exercised in\nthe service of God and man, is the source of hope for the life that is\nyet to be.\n\n\n4. Conscious of the existence of God, we become certain of immortality\n\nIt is clear as daylight that God Himself will be defeated if He _loses\nHis family_. Attention has already been called to the fact that, with\nthe loss of His family, God would be reduced to a child-god playing with\na toy world; and that without the cooeperation of other wills He could\nnot finish His toy. He would be in the position of having a world full\nof raw material, material capable of infinite, spiritual and social\nuses, only He would be destitute of any such help as would enable Him to\nturn the universe to any account whatsoever. If He were left solitary in\nthe world, all God's labors in creation would lead directly to shameful\ndefeat. Without other inhabitants than Himself, the universe would\nbecome one colossal piece of junk. Yes, it would be worse than that;\neven junk has value where there are people. Without intelligent souls to\ninhabit the universe, an appalling night would settle over all creation.\nLove, truth, wisdom, righteousness, and the last semblance of a kingdom\nwould be gone; and God Himself would as well die with His children; He\nwould be destitute of character, and incapable of completing that which\nHe began on such a magnificent scale. Having a universe like the present\non His hands, with no one to use it, nor to inhabit it, God would be an\nobject worthy of ridicule. The idea that God could murder His children,\nor carelessly allow them to perish, and then spend an eternity in an\nunfinished and depopulated world shatters reason itself; such a thought\nis too appalling and abhorrent to be entertained for a moment. Just as\nsure as there is a God, we shall continue to live. Anyone who believes\nin God and does not believe in immortality surely never gave two\nconsecutive logical thoughts to the subject. (1) _Ultimately God will\nhave no children at all_, (2) _or He will have an endless succession of\nshort-lived children_, (3) _or He will have children that survive all\nchanges_.\n\nThe first obnoxious idea we regard as impossible and unthinkable. A\nbeing that could live in perpetual and absolute solitude, with no more\nreason and character than such a position would warrant, is not a person\nthat we should call God anyway.\n\nThe second thought of God having an endless succession of short-lived\nchildren is in some respects worse.\n\nIn the autumn of nineteen hundred and fourteen, a friend said to me:\n\n\"What _is_ there, I should like to know, in Christianity? Here we've had\nthe Christian religion for more than nineteen hundred years--and now\nthis war. Oh, there is nothing in it!\"\n\n\"No,\" I answered, \"we have had Christianity about thirty-three years;\nthat is, a few people have had it.\"\n\nWhen asked what I meant by such a statement, I told her that the earth\nwas inhabited only by children; that the average age of all living\npeople was only about thirty-three years; and that they would scarcely\nget beyond the spanking period until their places would be taken by\nanother set of babies; and that these new babies would scratch and bite,\nand be tempted to lie and steal just as all the babies before them had\ndone; and that these in turn would soon give way to another set of\nbabies. I told her that all the knowledge and character on earth would,\nin a few days, need to be transferred to the minds of babies not yet\nborn, or it would entirely disappear from the earth. \"Moreover,\" I\nsaid, \"how do you know what Christianity has accomplished? You have\nnever been where the Christians have gone? What do you suppose the\nApostles and all the Christians who are nineteen hundred years old have\nbeen doing; and the multitudes who are eighteen hundred years old, and\nso on down through all the centuries? You have seen only a succession of\nkindergarten classes.\"\n\nThough progress on earth rests exclusively upon successive groups of\nchildren, yet we gladly recognize the social achievements that have been\nmade during human history. We keenly realize also the sin we all share\nin not having produced better social conditions than now exist.\nNevertheless, I am absolutely certain that no succession of infants will\never be able to put this universe to its highest possible uses. God will\nnever get far with His great cosmic enterprise if He employs only\nignorant little children; and that is clearly what He is doing if death\nends all. What a pity and shame it would be to throw away such a\nuniverse; a universe of infinite intellectual, spiritual, and social\npossibilities. And what a crime it would be to destroy the intelligent\nbeings who could turn the universe to full account if only they were\nallowed ample time. That God will not do anything so foolish and wicked\nwe may safely rest assured.\n\nAt the close of one of my services a man came forward and spoke to me,\nsaying:\n\n\"If everybody were good, your job would be done.\"\n\n\"Now I must scrap with you,\" I said. \"If all were good, I should have a\nlarger and a better job. The good people, and not the bad people, have\nthe greatest desire for Church. Why is the engine put on the track at\nall unless it is to go somewhere? For what purpose does anyone become a\nChristian, except to learn more about God and His plans in order that he\nmay embody them in a kingdom of love and righteousness? I am too young\nand ignorant to preach you a very good sermon now, but if you will come\naround where I am a thousand years from now, I will preach you a sermon\nthat will make you sit up and take notice.\" Something must be left out\nof the mental structure of one who can make such a statement as this man\nmade to me. In the face of such conceptions of life one wonders that\nreligion commands the respect that it does.\n\nThere is no doubt concerning the unlimited possibilities of the\nuniverse, nor of the limitless possibilities of the human spirit if it\nis given a chance. Standing as many of us do on the threshold of these\ngreater possibilities, who but a devil could shut the door in our faces?\nIf God wanted us when we were ignorant and sinful, He wants us even more\nnow that we are a little wiser and a little better. If He intended to\ncrush us before we were fairly started why did He ever raise us to such\nhope by allowing us to see the infinite possibilities?\n\nAs to our ability to survive the shock of physical death, if God made\nus live in the first place, He can make us live on through all changes.\nIf, however, God alone survives He will be quite worse off than His\ndead children; they will simply be extinct, while He will go to\nthe gloomiest sort of hell. Who could wish to be a mad god living\nalone through eternity in a graveyard? With everybody dead, and\nall kingdoms gone, and all work at an end, the universe would be one\nvast--desolate--hell; such as a bad God would deserve. How _can_ any one\nbelieve in God and not believe in immortality?\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nWHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE WHETHER WE BELIEVE IN IMMORTALITY IF WE\nLIVE AS WE SHOULD IN THIS LIFE?\n\n\n1. How can one live as he should?\n\nSome say, \"What difference does it make whether we believe in\nimmortality, if we live as we should in this life?\"\n\nWe also would ask a question. How can one live as he should if he\neliminates God and His plans? God planned a \"whole\" or He planned\nnothing.\n\nWe willingly admit that some honest doubters have a larger share in\nGod's life than they realize. They have heard the message of truth and\nlove, and though confused as to its origin, they accept much of it as\nbinding upon their lives. In many things they conscientiously do God's\nwill without recognizing it as such. No one is so bad but that he\nsometimes obeys God. The meanest man thinks some of God's thoughts after\nHim, and makes some voluntary sacrifices. It may never occur to him,\nhowever, that God has any part in the matter. Yet no one lives as he\nshould until he lives the highest type of life of which he is capable.\nIt is easily possible to be doing good in one direction while exerting\na baneful influence in another direction; and easier still to be\noverlooking something of grave importance. Many well-meaning persons\npursue courses of action that work great harm to themselves and to\nothers in the long run. No one should flatter himself with the thought\nthat he has lived as well as he should, until he has lived as well as he\ncould. No man on the outside of a business can do what he would if he\nwere on the inside. A really good man must try to know God and the plans\nof His kingdom from within; he must take daily orders; he should be\nstrictly honest toward God; he should feel the joy and enthusiasm that\ncome from partnership with God in a great enterprise. But this type of\ngood man will most likely feel sure of immortality. A lack of assurance\nis a practical proof that something has gone wrong in the life; it may\nbe confusion or indifference, but more likely it is both.\n\n\n2. The difference in social service\n\nUnless we know what the superstructure is to be, it is impossible to lay\nthe right kind of a foundation. A good foundation for a bungalow would\nnot answer for a fifty-story skyscraper. And to put a skyscraper\nfoundation under a bungalow would be the most foolish waste of time and\nmoney. Paul gave up everything that the average good citizen holds dear,\nand spent his entire life in laying the nobler foundation. He believed\nthat the superstructure would be stupendous, and of eternal duration.\nNo sane person would live the life Paul lived unless he believed in\nimmortality. The same is true of Jesus. Here is a clear-cut and\nportentous cleavage between good people who are Christians and good\npeople who are not Christians. I do not mean to intimate that a\npatriotic agnostic would be any more reluctant than a believer to die\nfor his country. It is largely a question of what he considers is worth\nwhile. A good sceptic is willing to help educate and civilize in a\ngeneral way, but he will put forth no effort to evangelize. He does not\nrealize the impossibility of civilizing a non-religious world. He would\npermit the whole race to be non-religious like himself. He would send\nall the billions yet to be born into the future life without any\nknowledge of God or any spiritual achievement. His attitude would so\nover-populate the future country with dwarfed and degraded people that\nour missionary work in a future state, if we are permitted to undertake\nit, would stagger a St. Paul. When we see the number and quality of our\nneighbors over there we shall realize the enormity of our mistake. And\nstill they will come, the uncivilized and unchristianized descendants of\nancestors whom we neglected. Almost every civilized community in the\nChristian world had its foundations laid by missionary effort; and it\nhas been kept civilized by a work very similar to that of missions. The\nfirmest ground of hope for the civilization of the race is in the\ncombined educational and religious work of missions. Darkness cannot\ncome to the light, but light may go to the darkness. The longer\nmissionary work is neglected the more of it will there be to do; and\nthat which we leave undone here will be accumulating for us over there.\nWith what amazement non-missionary Christians will face their\naccumulated missionary tasks in the future life! It is my impression\nthat fifty per cent of the Church members do not believe in missions;\nthat is to say, they do not believe in extending the religion of Jesus\nif it involves any work or expense for them. They themselves will first\nneed to be saved, if they are to be like their Master and share any of\nHis vision and compassion. Then there is probably another twenty-five\nper cent of professing Christians who believe but little in the\nextension of the gospel. So between the agnostics and the\nhalf-Christians, we are not doing a very good piece of social work\nthroughout the world. And this is true whether we have in mind the\nfuture history of society on earth, or of society as it shall migrate to\nour future home. Whether or not we have Christian assurance of God and\nthe future life makes a tremendous social difference both for this life\nand for the life to come. Unless we are active and aggressive in the\nwork of extending the kingdom, every form of vice will thrive and\nmultiply in our most cultivated and civilized communities. What hope\nthen is there for benighted peoples where there is neither salt nor\nleaven? My experience of thirty years in the ministry convinces me that\nthose who have their eyes on the whole earth, do several times as much\nwork for their home communities as do those who believe exclusively in\nhome missions. It is astonishing what narrow service so-called\nbroad-minded people can render, and what wide achievements can be\naccomplished by so-called narrow-minded people. Observation will show\nthat it makes a vast difference in the kind and extent of social service\nrendered if one believes in God and immortality.\n\n\n3. The difference in personal preparation\n\nWe tell our young people entering high school that they should decide at\nthe outset whether they are going to college; and if possible which\ncollege, as the entrance requirements of colleges differ. What should we\nthink of one who would ask, \"Why need I bother my mind about a possible\ncollege course in the future if I keep busy and learn something well?\nWhat difference can it make?\" Yet we grow weary with hearing the\nquestion, \"What difference does it make whether there is a future\nexistence if we live as we should in this life?\" Do they suppose that it\nis easier to make the freshman class in heaven than it is to make the\nfreshman class in college? I dare say the requirements are different,\nbut if heaven is worth going to the requirements can hardly be less\nspecific or exacting. Many people who never went to college are far\nadvanced in things pertaining to God and His kingdom, while some college\npeople do not know the a, b, c of religion. Their standing in a future\nlife cannot possibly be the same.\n\nLike many others, I was brought up to be honest and hard-working from\nthe beginning. According to ordinary standards, I was living as I\nshould. Yet when I heard of college, and had hopes of going to one, a\nsubtle change came over my whole life. While the old duties were\nperformed in the old way, at the same time a complete revolution was\ntaking place within me. The imagination and will readjusted everything\nto the new and larger sphere for which I hoped. Since no one thus far\nhad gone to college from our frontier community, some of the neighbors\nthought me to be a foolish dreamer. What good would it do me anyway, was\nwhat they wanted to know, since I was already good in \"figgers\"? When I\nwas probably fourteen years old, a young man told me of some one in\nanother township who was going to study Algebra. \"What is that?\" I\nasked. \"Well,\" he said, \"it is something like Arithmetic, only they use\nletters instead of figures.\" \"Now that,\" I promptly told him, \"sounds\nfoolish. Why aren't figures good enough?\" \"Ah,\" said the young man's\nfather, \"Algebra is a mighty fine study! You have noticed that merchants\nmark the price of their goods with letters. Now if you know Algebra they\ncan't cheat you.\" So I made up my mind then and there that I would study\nAlgebra.\n\nMy first experience with college catalogues, which came a little later,\nwas both interesting and amusing. I had often wondered what there could\npossibly be to study beyond history, geography, and the three \"R's.\" But\nat last with a college catalogue in my hands here it was: De Amicitia,\nDe Corona, Trigonometry, etc. After reading pages of unheard-of and\nunpronounceable words, I scarcely knew whether it was about something to\neat or something to wear. Theological terms seemed plain English by\ncomparison. In those primitive days it took one more year of preparation\nto enter the classical course than it did the scientific. For that\nreason alone I promptly decided to take the classical. Although I knew\nnothing of what either course was really about or what it was good for,\nyet I did not want to bear the stigma of any short cut. I wanted to\nlearn it \"all.\"\n\nThough it did not take long to learn what the college course was about,\nyet it did take some good faithful application to prepare for entrance\nexaminations.\n\nMany people take their religion as some lazy boys--found in every high\nschool--take their education. These boys have a very light regard for\ncollege requirements. John is certain that he is as good a student as\nCharles or a half dozen other fellows. He emphasizes the fact that a\n\"grind\" like James is the most unpopular fellow in school. All\nsuggestions of future trouble fall on deaf ears. Every year train loads\nof these fellows go to take their entrance \"exams.\" Yes, they arrive at\nheaven, or college, and may chance to see the lord of the institution.\nBut some one calls them in to test their Latin eyesight, and another to\ndetermine their mathematical vision, and if their power of penetration\nis not sufficient for college subjects, back they go. This is a tragic\nexperience for the lads, to be sure, yet they must learn that promotion\nmeans fitness. I have known of young men entering the academy of the\ncollege town because they were ashamed to go back home. They were good\nfellows, but they lacked college fitness. Think of a good sensible\nfellow who has never studied arithmetic going to college! And then think\nof a good sort of person going to heaven who has never acquired the\nspiritual insight to know God! A man in college who is mathematically\nblind, and a man in heaven who is God blind! If one thinks of God as a\nvisible Ghost in heaven, he will overlook many of the essentials until\nthe pitiful disillusionment comes. And if he thinks of the future home\nas a doll's heaven, he will make no thorough preparation for entrance.\nWhen a young girl was once lured to a very superstitious church, a\nfriend said to me:\n\n\"Well, what difference does it make--we are all going to the same\nplace.\" But when I asked her if she would be willing to send her\ndaughter to a poor day school or to some wretched music teacher, she had\nnever thought but what that was different. Everything but religion must\nbe properly taught; how that is taught does not matter, \"because we all\nare going to the same place.\" On that basis, if all were going to live\nin New York City, I suppose it would make no difference what kind of\nsuperstition they were taught. The expectation of joining a higher and\nholier society after this life cuts as deeply into my present life plans\nand purposes as did the expectation of going to college when I was a\nfrontier lad. No matter how upright and industrious one is in the\nordinary affairs of life, take away the hope of college or the hope of\na future life, and it makes a difference at a thousand vital points.\n\nI once intercepted a stone mason who was building a wall where the\nspecifications called for a window. He was not at all inclined to be\nconvinced of his error. After reading the specifications again he said,\n\"I am right.\" \"But,\" I replied, \"you are confused as to directions.\"\nThen he appealed to a weather vane on a near-by steeple. When I informed\nhim that the church had been moved and that the points of the compass\nwere entirely wrong, he pulled down the wall that he had so perfectly\nbuilt. He did not ask what difference it made so long as he was doing a\ngood piece of masonry. He was glad to get the wall down before the\nsuperintendent saw it.\n\nIf, now, we go on the assumption that God has no plans in what He is\nbuilding, then we must conclude that He is the most ridiculous person\nthat ever went into the construction business. The shock of\ndisillusionment when it comes, as it is bound to do, will be tremendous.\n\nIt is one of my greatest sorrows that so many of my friends are building\nsolid masonry in their lives where God's specifications call for\nwindows; and windows where there should be solid masonry. The windows in\nthe life of Jesus all looked out on the side of love and eternity. The\nlight of a heavenly kingdom was always streaming into His soul.\n\nWe make the same mistake in building our cities and social institutions.\nThey but vaguely represent the human temple called for in God's\nspecifications. And the farther we depart from the plan the more\ndifficult it will be to return to it. Paul told some of the people of\nhis day that they might escape with their lives as from a burning\nbuilding, but that what they had built contrary to the divine pattern\nwould be reduced to ashes.\n\nI once knew a merchant who had twenty acres of new land broken and\nplanted with onion sets. A temporary house was built to care for a dozen\nor more workmen. The ground was pulverized to ashes, the onions were\nplanted, and the weeds were kept down so that none ever appeared from\nthe road. It was a fine piece of work. The men toiled, the onions grew\nand finally blossomed, and the field presented an attractive sight. But\nalas! the merchant had purchased winter-onion sets, and in all that\nfield there was not one bulb to reward him for his pains. What\ndifference did it make--he and his men surely did some good work?\n\nMany there are who flourish like that field during the days of their\nstrength; but when they ripen there is no bulb, nothing to garner. One\nof these men with the meaning of life exhausted at sixty remarked to me\nthat one was too old when he had passed forty.\n\nA short time before his death Washington Gladden was a guest in my home.\nAs he sat in an easy chair after dinner speaking of other days, and\nespecially as he spoke of his sainted wife, I noticed how old he had\ngrown. Though his body had about run its course, yet the light of his\nsoul had not been dimmed. In my heart I said, \"What a dear old man you\nare, Dr. Gladden. You are nearly all soul!\" He had kept the faith. And\nit had made a difference; for him, for me, and for all the world. While\nthe old man sat there and conversed with the family, the light of his\nsoul sent a shining ray\n\n\"Far down the future's broadening way.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII\n\nHOW SHALL WE CONCEIVE OF THE FUTURE LIFE?\n\n\n1. Its relation to the present constitution of things\n\nGranting that there is a future existence, are we not wholly in the dark\nas to what it is like? Is it possible to form any conception of heaven\nthat is not offensive to the intelligent mind? Professor Leuba says:\n\n\"As soon as, no longer satisfied with a general assurance of unruffled\npeace and unalloyed enjoyment, we demand specifications, we find\nourselves in the presence of ideas and pictures, either absurd or\nrepulsive, or void of real attractiveness. The best gifted religious\nseers succeed in this descriptive task no better than the cleverest\nmediums.\"\n\nHave we, then, no facts on which to build a rational conception of the\nfuture state?\n\nI believe that a satisfying view is a possible achievement, because we\nhave some very important and fundamental facts from which to construct a\npicture. The minor details, of course, are unknown to us, but the main\noutline, which principally matters, may be very clearly conceived. As we\nhave previously shown, the future does not have to do with a new God and\na new universe and a new soul; but with the present God, the present\nuniverse, and the present soul to-morrow. The future is not some new\nthing; it is the old realities a little later, and a little more fully\ndeveloped. That God will remain a stable factor in the equation, we may\nrest assured. And we can read nature well enough in this scientific age\nto understand that it is no sudden and fickle movement void of law and\norder. Neither are we entirely ignorant of our own rational souls that\norganize themselves into civilized communities by combining and giving\nshape to the forces of nature in which we live. We have plainly seen\nthat neither God, nature, nor man has any worth or significance when\nseparated from each other. In the future life, therefore, there is but\none factor that is different from those found in the present\nconstitution of things, and that is the loss of the present human body.\nAnd even this difference between the present and the future will be\nlargely rectified, according to the Scriptures, by our receiving new\nbodies. For too long we have foolishly tried to show that the soul could\nlive without a body; and this in the face of the Scriptural teaching,\nthat God will give us new bodies. In our effort to show that the soul is\nable to live independent of a body, we have likewise run counter to\nexperimental psychology and philosophy. Scriptures say we shall have new\nbodies. Psychology shows that the souls with which we are acquainted are\ndependent upon the body for consciousness and every intellectual\nachievement. Philosophy likewise teaches that man can not exist outside\nof God. Therefore when these bodies with which God now enfolds us die,\nHe must again enfold us or we shall perish. There is no reason for\nthinking that a soul can live if disconnected from God, and the universe\nof God, in which it lives. If God again enfolds a soul, that new\nenfoldment will be its new body. And it will not be a spirit body\nbecause that is a contradiction of terms. As the Scriptures teach, it\nwill be a _spiritual_ body; that is, it will be a highly refined and\ndelicate instrument of the spirit--yet a real body. This new body, as\nwas the case with the old, must be our first point of contact with the\nuniverse of God. And in the future life, as here, the whole universe\nwill be our augmented body as we progressively become articulated with\nit.\n\nSo all the old conditions of the present life will be restored on a\nhigher plane. Whether the new and refined body will closely resemble the\nold, is a matter of speculation. However, it must be the instrument of\nthe spirit; and therefore it will have functions similar to the higher\nintellectual and spiritual uses of our present body. We shall be\nconscious in it and think with it, and through it we shall manipulate\nthe forces of the universe. If we can keep well, and work without\nfriction, and all pull together I see no reason why we should not\naccomplish marvelous things in this universe, and at the same time\nderive a very dignified satisfaction from it all.\n\nHowever much advanced the new life may be, we shall still be the same\npersons living in the same God and in the same universe as now. We shall\nstill be living for the same social and righteous ideals as now, and\nour motive will be the same old motive of love and good will. God is not\na naked spirit hiding behind nature. He is a Loving Intelligent Will\nrevealing Himself by His outgoing energies which we call nature. In the\nfuture life, the same as here, God will be trying to come to the surface\nthrough the bodies which he provides for Himself and His children. And\nHe will be striving, likewise, for a full expression of Himself through\nall the institutions that His children will be organizing out of His\nbeautiful and boundless energies.\n\nNature is not the gross, crude thing that ignorant people take it to be.\nNeither is it something apart from God. With the little intelligence\nthat a few have acquired on this kindergarten earth, we begin to see\nwhat a divine thing nature is. When it is better known and more wisely\nand lovingly used by God's children, all nature will be vocal with God's\nwisdom and love.\n\n\n2. Where is heaven?\n\nHeaven is some place, or many places, in our present universe. God will\nnever leave His beautiful universe that is so infinite in its\ncomplexness, so vast in its dimensions, and so rich in its millenniums\nof development, and go off into nothingness to build some sort of\nmystical and ethereal heaven. Heaven will be as much a part of the\nuniverse as is this earth. And this earth is infinitely closer in its\nrelation to the whole than we are now able to comprehend. Almost daily,\nscientists are discovering new bonds between the earth and the rest of\nthe universe. The inhabitants of heaven will not be less closely\nconnected, but much more vitally and intelligently related to nature\nthan are we.\n\nThere are doubtless many spheres in this universe that would make good\nsites for a heaven. And it would be interesting to know how many of them\nare already so utilized. \"In my Father's house are many mansions.\" When\nwe speak of mansions in the skies it would be well to remember that the\nearth is a pretty good mansion in the skies. The trouble is, being such\npoor Christians, we have not built upon it a very good heaven. While we\nhave not been wholly recreant in building a heaven on earth, yet we have\noften cursed this mansion by constructing many hells of smaller or\nlarger proportions.\n\nAnother reason for believing that God does not plan for a heaven outside\nthe objective universe, is the deep desire of man to make his richest\nideals tangible and objective in a book, a piece of art, a musical\ncomposition, a noble building, or some splendid institution. Life\nwithout expression and achievement, as we know it, is both\nunsatisfactory and dangerous. The same must be true in relation to God,\nas evidenced by His vast and beautiful works that have come forth\nunfolding out of the infinite past and now promise to expand and\ndifferentiate into the infinite future. Even in the sphere of human\nlives He has impelled men to express His wisdom, beauty, and purpose\naccording to human modes of expression.\n\nIt evidently is not God's design to abandon His works of nature and draw\nback into His own thoughts and spend eternity in self-contemplation. He\nrather intends to utilize the unlimited capacity of nature, and the\nunbounded ability of His children, to give the fullest possible\nexpression both of His children and of Himself in a kingdom which has\nform as well as soul.\n\nIn Chapter III I gave a description of the kingdom of God on earth. I\nshall now repeat that statement as an equally good description of the\nkingdom of God in heaven:\n\n\"The kingdom of God is a loving intelligent family, organized around the\nFather's good will, living in the universe as His home, using the forces\nof nature as the instruments of His will, and making all things vocal\nwith His wisdom, love, and power.\"\n\nSo little has the kingdom of God been realized on earth that it is like\na kingdom on paper in comparison with what has doubtless been realized\nelsewhere in the universe.\n\n\n3. Will there be a Holy City?\n\nThere will doubtless be many holy cities and plenty of country too. The\nHoly City described in the book of Revelation was, in the thought of the\nwriter, to be located on earth. While it should be our aim to build an\nideal city on earth, yet like most of our aims it will probably fall\nshort. If in some respects the City of Revelation does not appear to be\nthe most desirable kind of place in which to live, nevertheless, as a\nthing of symmetry and beauty it is a marvelous picture. A perfect city\nis a wonderfully attractive thought; and none the less so because one\nenjoys a vacation in the country. If there is no ideal city in this\nuniverse, there should be. New York, London, and Paris, in spite of the\nugliness, squalor, crime, and disease which they contain, are very\nfascinating. They bring together so much knowledge, wealth, and power\nthat one feels the mighty impact of it all upon his soul. If one lives\nunder the most favorable conditions in a great city, his consciousness\nso blends with the whole that the city seems to be but his larger self.\nThis is simply the fuller experience of that law of consciousness which\nmakes a man feel larger when he puts on a fur coat, or taller when he\nwears a silk hat, and causes a woman to feel like her silks and plumes\nand fluffy garments. A city without crime, disease, poverty, or\nugliness; a Holy City filled with art, music, knowledge, love, and every\nkind of fascinating employment; such a city would lift one into a sense\nof joy and greatness beyond words to express.\n\nFrom our present meager knowledge of the universe, what kind of a city\nwould be possible if all the laws and resources of nature were fully\nutilized? Considering, then, the millions of people who have grown rich\nin wisdom and character through millenniums of experience in the\ncongenial company of their fellow citizens of a heavenly kingdom, what\nis it reasonable to suppose they have done in the way of realizing these\npossibilities? Even with our limited knowledge of nature's resources,\nwe know they could have built a city that would make the one pictured in\nRevelation look like a beautiful Christmas toy. And if the departed are\nliving in our universe and not in a vacuum, what could have prevented\nthem from achieving such a glorious result?\n\n \"For thee, O dear, dear country,\n Mine eyes their vigil keep.\"\n\nEvery one is justified in viewing his life in the light of this larger\nperspective. For by so doing he not only prepares himself for better\ncitizenship in the life beyond, but at the same time accomplishes a\nlarger and better piece of work on earth. When we break our lives and\nthe universe up into fragments, as so many do, we are like children\nplaying with broken pieces of china. For each of us there is one life,\nin one universe, under one leader. Beginning in weakness, life grows\ninto strength; beginning in ignorance, it develops into wisdom;\nbeginning in selfishness, life expands into a kingdom of love and\nrighteousness. At first we are submerged in the material; but finally we\ndiscover that the material is of spiritual origin, and that it can be\nturned to spiritual ends. Like true artists, we no longer scorn the\nmaterial forces, but see in them all the latent image of the divine.\nWhether the image that finally appears shall be a devil or a God will\ndepend upon the hands that shape the material.\n\n\n4. Will there be music?\n\nThough we may laugh at Mark Twain's caricature of the saint with his\ngolden harp, yet music is not to be laughed out of this universe. There\nwill be music, of course; though heaven will not run all to music, yet\nthere will be plenty of it and it will be of the right quality.\n\nWe know perfectly well that this vibrant universe has unlimited musical\npossibilities, and that we have scarcely begun to utilize these\npossibilities either in the way of music or instruments. With the\ninstruments improved a thousand fold and multiplied a million fold, they\nwould call for such noble music as has never yet been written. With the\ntechnique possible to more highly refined bodies, with time to outgrow\nall amateur execution, with the leadership of all the musical geniuses\nof the ages, and with an unlimited number of voices and performers to\nselect from, the music of a heavenly city should surpass our wildest\ndreams. And there is no sensible reason for thinking that there would be\nmusic without sound or that there would be musicians without\ninstruments. We have no right to think well of God, and at the same time\nthink ill of His forces with which He enfolds us.\n\n\n5. Shall we meet our loved ones?\n\nI see no difficulty in the way of meeting our loved ones in a future\nstate. Of course, I could not abide permanently with my parents, and\nthey with theirs, and so on clear back to Adam. The great population\nwould, of necessity, be scattered over a wide area. After reaching\nmaturity we do not, as a rule, live with our parents here on earth. The\nconnection is kept up by the different modes of communication and by an\noccasional visit. And though the distances there would, doubtless, be\nmuch greater than here, yet the means of communication and of travel\nwould much more than rectify the difference in distance. In heaven, as\nhere, we should probably have some friends near by and others remote\nfrom us. However, we have already overcome space to a marvelous degree\non earth; and have scarcely commenced to use the resources of which we\nare aware. We not only have the omnipresent mail system, the telegraph,\nand the telephone, but we have made some use of the electrical pen, and\nare rapidly developing the wireless telephone. Scientifically it would\nbe possible, even now, so to develop the wireless telephone that a\nspeaker could be heard by every one in the United States at the same\ntime. If we could project the images of those speaking, as we are hoping\nto do, we should have a very good hint of the possibilities of\ncommunication in a future state. With finer bodies, and finer\ninstruments, and a better knowledge of nature's forces, it seems\ncredible that we could see and hear our friends with but little regard\nto distance. There is no reason for putting limitations on the\npossibilities of nature, even here on earth; and much less reason for\ndoing so in connection with the future state of existence. All the\nsuggestions are in the opposite direction. The X-Ray enables us to see\nthrough solid bodies. Radium, which has no appearance of light, will\naffect a photographic plate through a foot of iron. Actinium, one of the\nradioactive substances, is said to have a chemical activity which is\nabout a thousand million times swifter than that of radium. And the\ndiscovery of new rays is getting to be a common occurrence. Everywhere,\nnature is suggesting heretofore unheard of possibilities; it is\napparently vindicating what we have been saying, that nature is of God,\nand that we are enfolded in His energies for the purpose of using them.\nNature, that proceeds from God, is doubtless as exhaustless as God\nHimself. There are no indications that it will ever fail His children as\nthey move on and out into largeness of life and richness of experience.\n\nWe little children on earth, as previously illustrated, are in quest of\nomnipresence; and we are slowly achieving it by progressively taking on\nthe universe as our augmented bodies. Then how much more rapidly may we\nrealize this process of enlargement under the new conditions to which we\nare going? Not only shall we have finer bodies, but we shall be in\ncompany with those who for thousands of years have been learning the\nsecrets of God and His universe. Our increased knowledge of the world in\nwhich we live does not raise new barriers between citizens of heaven,\nbut suggests a thousand rational modes of contact inconceivable a\nhundred years ago. Every day I am more amazed at the way the natural\nsciences assist Christian faith. Yet this is as it should be if all\nthings come from God.\n\n\n6. Shall we see God?\n\nCertainly not as a ghost; but we shall see Him in the face of Jesus. We\nshall likewise see Him in our loved ones. Since all bodies are primarily\nGod's, we shall see Him in every face, when the purified souls of His\nchildren permit Him to come into possession of His own.\n\nOne glorious evening in the springtime, I sat in the gloaming with my\nfather by the roadside. From an exceedingly hard day's work we were\n\"dead tired.\" Yet for our healing, the air was filled with the scent of\nnewly turned turf and the fragrance of blossoms. A large drove of swine\nwas crunching the corn which we had just provided them. The woods,\nbeginning at the other side of the road from which we sat, extended into\nthe deep valley. From the dark shadow of the woods rose the incessant\ndin of the whippoorwills. As we sat there, feeling a thousand influences\nfrom the sweet mystery of it all, my father turned to me and said:\n\n\"I know you are very tired; we have really worked too hard, but the\ndebts must be paid. I want you to know that I appreciate what you are\ndoing. You have been a good boy, and I have confidence in you. It will\nnot be long until I am gone. But what a satisfaction it is to feel that\nyou will be a good Christian man accomplishing in the world, when I am\ngone, things which I have not been able to do.\" As the golden glow of a\nlate evening sky fell across his face, it mingled with the light from\nhis soul and clearly revealed the Eternal. God had looked into my soul\nthrough that face, and I had looked into the heart of God no less than\ninto the heart of my father. Yes, he has been gone many years, and I am\nhere fighting the good fight, but oh my heart, what shall I see when\nnext I look upon his face!\n\nWe may depend upon it, the invisible soul of God and the invisible souls\nof His children shall become visible through their bodies, through their\nactivities, and through their institutions which are in common. Their\nspirits shall likewise become audible through music and speech. Our\nFather in heaven differs from our God on earth only in this: On earth\nthere is so little to express Him, while in heaven there is so much. God\ntruly has a throne in heaven, but the great white throne is the pure and\nloyal hearts of His children.\n\n\n7. Will there be burdens to bear in heaven?\n\nHeaven will not be too \"soft\" for our good. There is much bad work to be\nrighted, and unfinished work to be completed. We shall have glorious\ntasks to perform, and splendid problems with which to grapple. Sharing\nGod's purposes as well as His joys, we shall still be discovering the\nmind of God, and getting a firmer grasp upon His laws and forces; we\nshall still be organizing nature and society into a more glorious\nkingdom of love, beauty and power. We shall be making the ideal real,\nand the unseen visible. We shall accept God's will in our souls. We\nshall accept His will in the forces of nature, and make His instruments\nmore vocal and more radiant as time rolls on in eternity.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX\n\nLOSING THE BIBLE TO FIND IT\n\nIf the Bible contains errors, how do we know that any of it is true?\n\n\nA GENERAL STATEMENT\n\nAs this volume is designed to be a simple guide in the deeper and more\nperplexing problems of religion, it would be incomplete without a brief\nconsideration of how God has revealed Himself through the Scriptures. In\nthe selection of material and in the method pursued, the author has been\nguided solely by what he considers the safest approach to the Scriptures\nand the best \"first aid\" for wounded Christians.\n\n\"In my opinion, the Bible is just about one-half true.\"\n\nThis was the quiet and serious remark of a young woman who had recently\ntaken a Bible course in college. Like many others, she was judging the\nBible simply as a work of history, literature, and science. Its\nprogressive revelation of religion she had largely overlooked. The Bible\nis not properly appreciated, even as literature, without taking into\naccount its main purpose; namely, to teach religion, and not to write\ninfallible history nor infallible science. The biblical writers\nundertook to set forth, in a perfectly human way, the religious ideas\nand sentiments that God awakened in their souls. Through succeeding\ncenturies these truths grew clearer and more comprehensive until they\nculminated in the life and teachings of Jesus. The most elevated\nreligious ideas and ideals found in the Scriptures constitute, in my\nopinion, the absolute and universal religion. Ideas and ideals superior\nto these are not known to man. That anything _could_ surpass them, I\ncannot conceive. To convey these inspired truths to the world, the\nwriters wisely made use of poetry, fiction, tradition, history, and\nphysical phenomena; they conveyed the divine treasure to us in earthen\nvessels; and though the vessels are beautiful, yet they bear the marks\nof human imperfection. We all know that an illustration may clearly\nillustrate without its own truth being verified.\n\nOur young college friend had lost the Bible of her childhood but,\nunfortunately, had not found the larger and better Bible easily within\nher reach if only she had known.\n\nAs already intimated, even the religion of the Bible was not fully\nrevealed at once. Certain crude ideas lingered until they were pushed\naside by a fuller revelation.\n\nTo be able to follow the inspired truths from their beginnings in the\nScriptures until they appear full-orbed in Jesus is of very great value.\nTheir full worth first appears when we know all the vicissitudes through\nwhich they passed while struggling for a place in the sinful, stupid\nlives of men. The history of a truth is just as important as the history\nof a man; and fortunately the Bible furnishes a fair human history of\nevery great religious truth. As the streaks of morning light grow\nbrighter and brighter unto the rising of the sun, so the rays of God's\nlight shine through the Scriptures more and more until the Christ\nappears.\n\nAs a progressive, trustworthy, and indispensable revelation of religion,\nthe Old and New Testaments cannot be too highly appraised; but as books\nof science and history, they are sometimes overestimated. To believe\nthat its religious value is destroyed if the Bible contains errors in\nhistory and science, is a position as dangerous as it is false. We\ntheorize about the Scriptures more than we study them. Even in\nministers' meetings, I have listened without profit to many heated\ndiscussions on the subject of inspiration. The discussions were\nworthless because they had nothing to do with the facts of the Bible. We\nmight as well claim that the casket is a jewel because it contains a\njewel, as to claim that the literary forms of the Bible are a revelation\nbecause they contain a revelation. It would be as sensible to affirm\nthat the whole mountain is gold, as to declare that the human element of\nthe Bible is infallible. Yet no one turns away from a rich goldmine\nbecause the whole mountain is not gold; neither does he fear that the\nprecious metal may not be distinguishable from the rocks,--else it would\nbe of no more value than the rocks. If God had made one mountain of pure\ngold, it would have saved much trouble in mining; but He did not give\nus gold in that way. He mixed the precious metal with common elements,\nand He mingled His truth with human thoughts and human institutions. All\nthings considered, both religious truth and gold are more valuable for\nhaving been given in the manner they were. To deny the facts, or to\nquarrel with them, does no good. The sensible thing for us to do is to\nseek the gold and the truth with all our might; for if we seek we shall\nfind. If one is careless, he may mistake \"fools' gold\" for the real.\nBut, fortunately, there are ample means for testing both gold and\nreligion.\n\nHow shall we find the treasure that is in the Bible? In the same way\nthat we find the treasure in the mountain; by using our intelligence and\nstrength in company with those who know most about it. Our prospects for\nfinding God's word are good; because His word will find us if we are\nentirely sincere. If a person studies his Bible with the help of\ncompetent teachers, and at the same time keeps his heart wide open\ntoward God, the great verities of the Scriptures will surely find him;\nand they will find him deeply; they will find him so deeply that he will\nbe thrown into the dust of humility and, at the same time, lifted to the\nsky of hope. Yet who pretends to have found all the truth there is in\nthe Bible? We can only find that which finds us. If we wish the Word of\nGod to find us more deeply we must give it a better chance.\n\n\"Then the Bible is only for the learned,\" someone will say. No, the\nleast educated mind can readily grasp the most essential facts of\nreligion as set forth in the Scriptures, and as expounded by a\nconsecrated ministry. He can likewise hold to these facts with deep\nfeeling and true devotion. If one is ignorant of science he is not\ntroubled by unscientific statements. Whereas, the educated man is\ngreatly distressed if told that he must either believe statements which\nhe knows are not true, or else throw all religion overboard. If the\nChurch tries to carry all the ignorance and all the trumpery of the ages\nas a part of her precious message she will break down under the load.\nMultitudes will turn from her with scorn. It is a sin against God and\nthe human soul to make claims for the Bible that are manifestly not\ntrue. The Bible is so good that we do not need to lie for it; the light\nthat shines through the Scriptures is able to make \"wise unto\nsalvation.\" Having found the great pearl that is in the Scriptures, one\nwill experience the joy of being rich; and when he is once rich, he will\nnot readily part with his wealth. Besides, other rich souls will bear\ntestimony to the intrinsic value of his treasure; and best of all, God\nwill bear witness with his spirit that he is not deceived.\n\nThe reader may ask, \"Is it possible to find in the Bible that which\nnothing could induce us to relinquish,--something more precious than\nlife itself?\"\n\nIt is my testimony that we can. The religious truth of the Bible, having\ncompletely conquered my reason, commands my conscience. Its supreme\nmessage fits my soul as a glove fits a hand. The best that the\nScriptures teach, I find myself thinking. And I cannot avoid thinking\nthe same without being a traitor to my own soul. Though I cannot believe\nevery statement in the Bible, yet I think I should be committing mental\nand moral suicide if I did not believe and practice the essential\nteachings of the Scriptures; especially the matchless teachings of\nJesus. Moreover, if one believes and practices the best there is in the\nBible he will be a Christian whom the Master delights to own.\n\nImportant as our discussion thus far may be, it is not the main thing;\nit is simply our attitude toward the Scriptures, and not the truth which\nthey proclaim. It is one more appeal for a rational religion without\nstating what the rational religion is. This generation has had\naltogether too much of that kind of exhortation. If we would but tell\nthe good Christian people what the rational religion is, possibly we\nshould not need to exhort them to accept it.\n\nHow may one find the Word of God, contained in the Scriptures? The\nmethod illustrated\n\n\n1. The story of Creation\n\nWhat message of permanent religious value is there in the story of\ncreation?\n\nIn the story of creation, one thing stands out clear and distinct. _The\nuniverse is God's loving wish. Creation is God's will going forth._ God\nsimply said, Let it be, and it was. So far as Christian scholarship has\nyet advanced, it does not realize how a thought more fundamental,\nspiritual, and moulding could enter the mind of man. That a loving God\nwills the universe, is the great diapason note in the hymn of creation.\nAnd the next great note is that of Divine appreciation,--\"God saw that\nit was good.\" Then follows the note of blessing. And, finally, the child\nbearing God's image is made lord over all. These four epoch-making\ntruths constitute the imperishable word of God.\n\nThese four truths represent the sum and substance of all I have been\ntrying to elucidate throughout this book. Slowly, but surely, modern\nphilosophy and science are helping us to understand this superb\naffirmation of Genesis, uttered thousands of years ago. Not that\nphysical science knows anything about God, but that the discoveries of\nscience make it easier for the intelligent Christian to believe that God\nwilled, and continues to will, the universe. This idea of one good God\ncausing and sustaining the universe by the mere fiat of His will, did\nfor religion what the Copernican theory did for astronomy. As the\nCopernican theory made modern astronomy inevitable, so this view of God\nand His universe led unerringly to the Christian religion. And the\nKingdom of God, in its vast sweep through eternity, will rest upon these\nfundamental facts so beautifully expressed in the first chapter of\nGenesis. That they were uttered so long ago, in a world of polytheism\nand low morals, fills the mind with wonder and praise.\n\nThe writer of this story, however, did not have a scientific knowledge\nof the universe which, religiously and philosophically, he so perfectly\nrelated to God. But the religious value of the story is not injured in\nthe least by the author's manifestly crude knowledge of astronomy and\ngeology. In spite of all our advancement in science, since Bible times,\nour knowledge of the universe is still very crude. To learn _all_ about\nnature scientifically will require eternity. It was the poetical,\nphilosophical, and religious significance of the universe that the\ninspired writer discovered; science could abide its time. The writer of\nGenesis, like his contemporaries, regarded the earth as the center and\nmain bulk of the universe. His universe was the child's universe, the\nuniverse of the unaided senses. On a very large scale the world, in his\nthought, was something like the old-fashioned cheese dish with a glass\nhemisphere over it. This huge covered dish floated in a universal sea.\nThe glass cover, or firmament, kept the upper sea out except when its\nwindows were opened to let the sea through in the form of rain. The\ndish, or earth, kept the lower sea out except in time of great floods\nwhen, as they supposed, the sea worked its way up through crevices in\nthe earth. The sun, moon, and stars were supposed to be inside the\nvault.\n\nThis ancient conception of the universe pervades the Scriptures. In the\ntwenty-fourth Psalm we read, \"The earth is the Lord's and the fulness\nthereof: for Thou hast founded it upon the seas and established it upon\nthe floods.\" Religiously this is superb, but scientifically it is\nincorrect; the earth does not rest on a sea. \"The earth is the Lord's\nand the fulness thereof:\" for Thou hast hurled it into space and\nlovingly marked out the way that it should go.\n\nThe Babylonian bible, which is many centuries older than the Old\nTestament, says that Apsu and Tiamit first created the gods of order, or\nlight. This corresponds to the first day in Genesis. But our author\ndiscards all these gods and goddesses when he tells us that \"God said,\nLet there be light, and there was light.\" Whether light was the first\nact of creation or not, the best modern philosophy would confirm the\nstatement that light was the result of God's wish. Light energy is a\nmode of the divine Will.\n\nThe Babylonian bible tells us that after Marduk had slain Tiamit in a\ngreat battle, he took his sword and cleaved her in two as you would a\nfish. With one half of her he made the firmament and fastened it to keep\nout the upper sea. This corresponds to the second day in Genesis. While\nthe biblical writer does not change the Babylonian day, yet he has no\nuse for the monstrous idea that the firmament was made out of one half\nof a goddess. According to our Bible, \"God said, Let there be a\nfirmament, and it was so.\" Our author, as the narrative shows, in\nkeeping with the crude science of his times, thought that the firmament\nseparated the sea that was above the firmament from the sea that was\nbelow the firmament; and that the sea under the firmament covered all\nthe earth until God gathered the waters under the firmament unto one\nplace and caused the dry land to appear. But if we know anything at all,\nwe know that there is no firmament. God could not have made a firmament,\nfor there is none. He could not have made space on the second day\nbecause space is nothing. And according to the story itself, He made the\nsun, moon, and stars on the fourth day,--the day after He had made grass\nand fruit trees. When, as a child, I thought that the apparent ceiling\nof the earth was the floor of heaven, my scientific ideas were no more\ncrude than those of the writer who thought God made a firmament. But if\nthere had been a firmament, as it appeared to the untrained senses, then\nit would have been made exactly as our inspired writer affirmed; and not\nafter the ridiculous manner of the Babylonian bible. Our author's\nphilosophy and religion in this case were perfect, but his science was\nwrong. So what is the use of trying to make out that the Bible always\nharmonizes with science, when it is absolutely certain that it does not?\n\nWhen in college I asked my professor in geology how the earth could\nexist and grow grass and fruit trees bearing fruit before the sun was\nmade. He replied that the sun, of course, was made previously, but that\nit did not appear until the fourth day when the vapor had settled by\nvirtue of the earth's cooling. However, that would leave no creation for\nthe fourth day; and besides, the second chapter of Genesis tells us that\nthere was no vegetation yet because the Lord God had not caused it to\nrain. According to my professor's explanation it was too wet to see the\nsun, and according to the second chapter of Genesis it was too dry to\ngrow grass. The biblical writers were not inspired to write science, but\nreligion. And it is just as certain that they did not know much science\nas it is certain that they did know much religion. In this story of\ncreation the writer took his crude, yet beautiful, little world and\nlifted it up into such perfect relation to the Infinite Creative Will\nthat no one has ever been able to improve upon it; and the more we\nlearn, the more certain it appears that we never shall be able to revise\nhis statement of how the world is related to the Divine Will. Besides,\nthe thought is so precious and so fruitful that we have no desire to\nchange it.\n\nA message may be perfectly true while the material used to convey the\nmessage may be mixed with error. For instance, I once used an\nillustration in electricity to make plain a deep spiritual truth, and\nthe evidences were unmistakable that my purpose was realized. However,\non the way home my little son said, \"Oh, papa, I was awfully ashamed of\nyou to-day, you made a mistake in your electricity.\" Convinced that I\nwas wrong I said, \"It is too bad.\" Then he tried to comfort me by\nsaying, \"Oh, well, I don't suppose that more than two-thirds of the\npeople knew the difference.\" Nothing could have been more true than the\nreligious idea I was trying to elucidate. Those who did not notice my\nerror in my electricity, in addition to getting the idea, thought the\nillustration a good one. And while those who did recognize the mistake\nmay have inwardly smiled, yet they too grasped my meaning equally well.\nEvery one present knew that I was not trying to teach electricity, but\nreligion. In like manner, while recognizing the crude science in the\nstory of creation, we may adore the matchless revelation of God in His\nrelation to the universe.\n\nIt is as if I had made something beautiful and ingenious for the people\nof darkest Africa. At first, they would be afraid of it. Not until they\nwere persuaded that it was made in love would they come forward and\ncautiously lay their hands upon it. Then as their fear subsided and\ntheir appreciation increased they would exclaim, \"And devils didn't make\nit, and it won't hurt us, and you made it for our good!\" But after their\nfirst curiosity had been sufficiently satisfied, I would touch a spring\nand awaken new wonder by showing the invention to be different from what\nthey had thought, and ten times more wonderful. And thus, at every new\nrevelation of the gift, their mistaken views would be corrected, and\ntheir admiration and love for me would be increased. So, in the story of\ncreation, God presented the world to His children by first telling them\nthat devils did not make it, and that vicious gods do not infest it; but\nthat it all proceeded from His will as a loving gift to them. Though\nthey still thought the universe like that which their unaided senses\nreported to them, yet the thing of supreme importance was that the\nloving gift came from a good God who rules over all. Than this\nrevelation, nothing could be truer, nor more calculated to put their\nhearts at rest from fear. It marked a complete transition from a\npolytheistic and immoral conception of the universe to a theistic and\nethical conception. Through all the centuries that have followed, this\nnew revelation of God in His relation to the universe has been arousing\nthe noble ambition and commanding the loving obedience of men. As men\nhave studied their good gift from God, a growing scientific knowledge\nhas enabled them from time to time to unlock the mysteries of nature;\nand behold, their good gift was not a snug little world floating in a\nsea, as they had thought, but a magnificent solar system flying through\nspace, and pulsating in an infinite sea of ether; and the supposed\nfirmament was but a light effect on particles of dust in the atmosphere,\ncaused by the light as it makes its journey of ninety-three million\nmiles from the sun. And once more devout men exclaimed with awe, \"Is\nthis what the good God made for us by the mere fiat of His will?\" That\nGod said, \"Let there be light: and there was light,\" was the affirmation\nof an inspired man who little realized that light travels the distance\nof eight times around the earth in one second, and yet requires more\nthan four years at that speed to come from the nearest star. Thus\nscience may forever change our conception of the world, and our sense of\nthe Creator's majesty.\n\nSomeone may say, \"Is not this upsetting our old Bible?\" I think it is.\nBut when a friend expostulated, \"Pat, don't you know that your stone\nwall will upset if you build it on that swampy ground?\" Pat's reply was,\n\"Faith, it is two feet high and three feet wide, and if it upsets it\nwill be a foot higher than it was before.\" It is but truth to say that\nour old Bible is two or three times higher than it was before modern\nlearning upset it; and may scholars keep on upsetting it as long as they\ncan make God's word stand out clear and strong above all human learning\nand bigotry and superstition.\n\n\n2. The story of the garden\n\nWhen I was a boy, nearly every one grew gourds on his picket fence. And\nat almost every well there hung a gourd dipper. How many cool and\nrefreshing draughts of water I have taken from gourd dippers I dare not\nsay; but the memory is precious, and I should be delighted to repeat the\nexperience now. No one, however, was ever foolish enough to tell us that\nafter drinking the water we must eat the gourd. Now, the Bible is just\nfull of gourd dippers from one end to the other,--and for this I am\npleased.\n\nLet me present one of these gourd dippers. It is the story of the\nGarden. Here is refreshing and life-sustaining water. It is not in a\nwell, but in a spring that bubbles clear up to the surface. You need\nneither rope nor bucket,--nothing but the gourd; and a child may help\nhimself. This story is a bit of inspired genius, if ever there was any.\nMy library contains great fat books on ethics, yet I never knew half a\ndozen men or women in my parishes who had the grit or grace to read one\nof them through. The mental discipline in reading them is good for\nministers, though the conclusions arrived at in these books are\nidentical with the teachings in this simple story. If the methods of\nthese writers on ethics had been adopted by the biblical writers, very\nfew people would be any the wiser for the Bible. But, from the dear old\ngourd a child may drink with ease and satisfaction.\n\nThis beautiful allegory was true to fact when it put Adam and Eve in a\ngarden. Human beings can live only in a garden; they must have a base of\nsupply in the products of the soil. But what about the forbidden fruit?\nAs a child, I did think it too bad that the Lord put the forbidden fruit\nin the garden when He must have known that it would cause no end of\ntrouble. However, when I became a man I realized that even God could not\nmake a garden that was fit to live in, without its having forbidden\nfruit in it. The grave is the only place where there is no forbidden\nfruit. Recently I spent ten days in our Capital City. And it _is_ a\nbeautiful garden, with many things \"good for food\" and \"pleasant to the\neyes.\" During the ten days, Washington was my garden; and the other\noccupants there made me feel that I was very welcome. But did not they\nand I know that there were at least a dozen kinds of forbidden fruit\nthat I might not partake of without running the risk of being tarred and\nfeathered? Forbidden fruit is not bad fruit, it is fruit that belongs to\nsome one else, or to us at some future time. It is all ours now, in a\nway; the wealth, the beauty, and the people are ours within certain\nlimits; and it is this that makes our lives worth living. When,\nhowever, we begin to break up families, or to take anything that belongs\nexclusively to others, we have eaten the forbidden fruit,--and the curse\nis upon us. \"In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.\" This\nis the infallible word of God, spoken to our first parents, to us, and\nto all mankind. Instead of haggling over the question of swallowing the\ngourd, we should preach this truth about forbidden fruit until offenders\nfeel their hearts filled with holy fear and wholesome disgust.\n\nThough the story of the forbidden fruit is truly wonderful, yet it is no\nmore wonderful than that which makes the serpent the symbol of\ntemptation. The serpent does not chase its prey like some bellowing\nhound, but silently awaits the victim's coming. As the serpent lies\ncoiled in the midst of your flowers, so temptation lurks in the heart of\nsome pleasant situation. You may be looking with legitimate pleasure\nupon some beautiful thing that belongs to your neighbor, and, before you\nare aware of it, the serpent of covetousness has struck its fangs into\nyou. If, however, the temptation is seen before you are bitten by it,\nlike a serpent, it makes strange circuitous routes as if it were coming\nand going from every side. It stops to parley. And if it succeeds in\nentwining itself about you, it crushes you with every part of its\nsinuous length. In countries that are infested with serpents, the\nreptiles go everywhere; they even hang from the rafters of dwellings.\nJust so, temptation may appear anywhere to surprise or to charm you. If\nyou are as good as the Master, temptations will assail you. If like\nLincoln you should climb from a hut to the White House, even there you\nwill be confronted by serpents of monstrous size striving in every\npossible way to beguile you. He who advocates a walking and a talking\nsnake, does so to the great detriment of God's word. We are in no danger\nfrom talking serpents; but we all are in great danger from serpent-like\ntemptations.\n\nThis parable and fable of the garden is meant for our edification and\nsafety. As an analysis of temptation, sin, and punishment, for all\npeople and for all times, nothing can surpass this story of the garden.\nSeeing that it contains such vital thrilling truth, it is a great pity\nthat it has fallen into almost universal neglect. The story has been\nkilled by the credulity of its friends.\n\n\n3. The Bible stories in general\n\nI now call your attention to the interesting _stories_ scattered all\nthrough the Bible. The story of the Flood is an example. In a very\nsimple form these stories were told long before they appeared in the\nScriptures. And, doubtless, there was a nucleus of truth in them or they\nnever would have been started on their rounds. As they were repeated\nabout the campfires to children and illiterate slaves for generation\nafter generation, everything that failed to interest, naturally, was\nforgotten. This made them the most tried and interesting of stories. In\nnothing did the inspired writers show greater wisdom than in making\nwings of these interesting tales to bear their spiritual messages afar.\nIf the modern Church could learn the spiritual utility of a folk-story,\nthe Bible would start on a new mission of service; and much of the Bible\nnow neglected could be used with new power. The _value_ of the lessons\nthus heralded in no wise rests upon the historic accuracy of the\nstories. It is perfectly evident that the story of the Flood involves\nthe same crude conception of the earth as that which we have already\ndescribed as the ancient and unscientific conception. If we contend for\nthe literalness of this story we shall make its invaluable lessons of no\neffect for many people. The Tower of Babel is a like case. As a parable,\nit is a most accurate description of the folly this generation is in\ngreat danger of committing. Germany really built her Tower of Babel, and\nis to-day suffering from a confusion of tongues.\n\n\n4. The laws of Israel--moral and ceremonial\n\nIf we now turn to the laws of Israel, we shall find the same blending of\nthe crude with the sublime. The ten commandments are the noblest\npossible prohibitions; and they are still needed for many people in the\nold prohibitive form. Yet Jesus takes even these and transforms them\ninto spiritual affirmations. He shows righteousness to be an inner\nprinciple,--a state of heart. \"On love hangs all the law and the\nprophets;\" motive is the soul of conduct.\n\nBy carefully comparing the Old with the New Testament we see that the\nlaw, moral and ceremonial, was a strong movement in the direction of\nChrist; but that, from the morals of Abraham and Moses to the morals of\nJesus, the way was long and steep. We also see that the journey often\ndeviates from a straight line, and that the road at times is almost\nobliterated by the drifting sands. It is, therefore, evident that one\ncannot select just any verse of the Bible and say behold! the perfect\nword of God. When Jacob reports to his wives that he has been able to\ncheat the father out of his flocks because the God of his father has\nbeen with him, neither Jesus nor the Christian conscience of to-day\nbelieves it. In the Old Testament times God was giving His chosen people\nas much of His law as they could understand. Sometimes the divine truth\nflashed out with great brightness; at other times, it was much beclouded\nby ignorance and passion. However, all the light that shines so brightly\nin the life of Jesus, began shining, with varying degrees of luster,\nthrough the prophets and teachers of Israel. It is just because the\nScriptures enable us to see the _growth_ and the _vicissitudes_ of God's\nadvancing light in the souls of men that they are so valuable to us. For\nthis reason we should study all the Scriptures more faithfully, and more\nintelligently.\n\nThe ceremonial law of Israel was their method of teaching reverence and\npurity. Though it strongly resembled the ceremonial law of their Semitic\nneighbors, yet it was a more useful method of worship for Israel, at\nthat time, than if it had been farther removed from the customary\nworship of the day. When the Israelites fell into idolatry, they\nworshiped the other gods in much the same way that they worshiped\nJehovah; and not essentially different from the manner in which the\nCanaanites worshiped their gods. But for enlightened peoples, this has\nlong since ceased to be a useful method of worship. Slowly we are\nlearning better methods; but we still have much to learn in the divine\nart of lifting men's souls to God.\n\n\n5. The book of Job\n\nPassing by a number of historical books we shall next make a brief study\nof Job.\n\nI once had an interesting conversation with a middle-aged minister who,\nthough uneducated, was a perfect gentleman. His mind was filled with an\nelaborate and ingenious scheme of religion falsely drawn from Job,\nDaniel, Ezekiel, and Revelation. Tons of brain power had been consumed\nby those who developed the system. Yet a moderate amount of general\ninformation would have caused the entire system to fall in ashes.\nMinisters and Bible workers of this type still abound in astonishing\nnumbers.\n\nIn the conversation just referred to, the minister was wildly quoting\nfrom Job. At one point I remarked, \"But what you are now quoting is not\ntrue.\" \"What,\" said he, \"don't you believe the Bible?\" \"Yes,\" I replied,\n\"but I do not believe that because, at the end of the book, God Himself\nsays it is not true. Your motive is good, but it is a mistake to think\nthat you can dive into the Scriptures at random like that, and find\nGod's word.\"\n\nWe must remember that the book of Job is a dramatic poem, cast in the\nform of a dialogue. Whether or no suffering is a proof of guilt is the\nbone of contention between Job and his friends; and both positions\ncannot be true.\n\nThe author staged this dialogue on the Ash-Mound, outside the village.\nAfter the loss of property and children, Job, all covered with boils,\ntakes a potsherd with which to scrape himself and sits down upon the\nAsh-Mound. When the news of his misfortune reaches his three friends,\nthey proceed forthwith to visit him. As these old sheiks approach Job,\nand find him changed beyond recognition, they lift up their voices and\nweep. They also tear off their mantles and sprinkle dust upon their\nheads. Seeing that Job is in deep distress, they seat themselves near\nhim and remain there seven solid days and nights without ever speaking a\nword. Finally, Job opens his mouth and curses the day of his birth, in\none of the most pessimistic poems ever recited. Even the comforters can\nscarcely believe their ears, so shocked are they at Job's blasphemy.\nStill, they retain a measure of sympathy, for Eliphaz asks with great\ndelicacy:\n\n \"If one assays to commune with thee, wilt thou be grieved?\n But who can withhold himself from speaking?\"\n\nYou remember, Job, how you instructed others when they were weak and\nafflicted. \"Recall, I pray thee, who ever perished, being innocent?\" Now\nbe a man, take your own medicine, repent of your sins, and God will\nreturn your prosperity. But Job only pours out his grief in fresh\ntorrents. This causes Bildad to respond with alacrity:\n\n \"How long wilt thou speak these things?\n And how long shall the words of thy mouth be like a mighty wind?\"\n\nNevertheless, in spite of Bildad's lengthy rebuke, Job continues to pour\nout his complaint until Zophar can stand it no longer.\n\n\"Should not the multitude of words be answered? You are too full of talk\nfor a righteous man. Your boasting will not silence us. For your mockery\nwe shall make you ashamed.\" And when Zophar had finished his vehement\nreproach, Job _was_ mad.\n\n \"No doubt but ye are the people,\n And wisdom shall die with you.\"\n\nThus the argument went back and forth with criminations and\nrecriminations, until Job and his friends were exhausted.\n\nWhile the discussion was raging, there came along a young theologian\nwho, being attracted by the discussion, remained to hear it through. It\nturned out that the speeches of both Job and his friends were to him\nequally disgusting. So he decided to wait and set them all right by his\nsuperior wisdom. Though this young man was filled with wrath at what he\nheard, yet he respectfully waited until the old men had finished. Then\nhe reminded them that it was his respect for age that had kept him still\nuntil now. Having expressed his surprise at not finding wisdom\nassociated with years, he takes thirty-three lines to tell them how\nsmart he is; and assures them that they shall hear something worth while\nwhen he gets to speaking. Some years ago while reading this with my\nwife, I could scarcely wait until young Elihu got through boasting; I\nwas thrilled with a desire to hear his new position. At last he began\nhis argument. But, to my great surprise, I could see no difference\nbetween his position and that of Job's opponents; and as my wife could\nsee no difference, I was convinced that there was none. Like Job's\nantagonists, he argued at great length and with much beauty that\nmisfortune is a proof of guilt. Finally, however, he did add a\nsuggestion. Misfortune is a warning not to sin more, lest you suffer\nmore. Of course none of the older men deigned to answer this young\nupstart by so much as a word.\n\nThe argument from all sources now being in, it was time for the artist\nto prepare a fitting scene for the approach of the Almighty.\nConsequently, the storm clouds gather and begin to drop rain. The\nlightning suddenly flashes to the ends of the earth. The quick crash of\nthunder makes the heart quake. It is such a time as when old leviathan\nchurns the deep into white foam. And at last out of the awful whirlwind\nGod speaks: \"Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without\nknowledge?\"\n\nStand up, Job, and I will speak with you. Where were you when I laid the\nfoundations of the earth? Have you walked in the recesses of the deep,\nhave you seen the gates of death, does the morning come at your bidding,\ndo you know the way of the lightning, do you cause the east wind to\nscatter over the earth? With all your wisdom, surely, you can answer.\nJob, \"Canst thou bind the cluster of Pleiades, or loose the bands of\nOrion?\" Can you thunder, Job? Can you send forth the lightning, can you\ndraw out old leviathan with a fish hook? Gird up your loins like a man\nand answer me.\n\nVery meekly Job replies, \"Lord, I have heard of you before with the\nhearing of the ears, but now that I see you with my eyes, I abhor myself\nin dust and ashes.\" He frankly admits that he has spoken concerning\nthings too wonderful for him. That Job has talked like a fool, God\nconcedes. Yet He assures Job that in his main contention, he is right.\nSuffering is not a proof of guilt. Then turning to Job's miserable\ncomforters, God informs them that He is angry because of all the\nfalsehoods they have spoken. Go, therefore, and take seven bullocks and\nseven rams and offer a sacrifice, and my servant Job shall pray for you.\nAnd look sharp, \"that I deal not with you after your folly; for ye have\nnot spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.\"\n\nAfter all this, how pitiful it was to see my old friend, the minister,\nbuilding up a weird religion on hit-or-miss passages from Job.\n\nWe all know that the wicked must suffer sooner or later, but the lesson\nof Job is that the innocent may suffer also. From this beautiful\ndramatic poem we learn that when the cause of suffering lies too deep\nfor our knowledge, we should trust the goodness of Him who is All-wise.\nThe false belief, argued so vehemently by Job's comforters, still\npersisted in the days of Jesus; because they asked Him, \"Who did sin,\nthis man or his parents, that he was born blind?\" And Jesus vindicated\nthe position of Job by saying, \"Neither did this man nor his parents\nsin.\" The greater pity is, that this false belief still persists to\ncrush the hearts of many innocent sufferers. A saintly parishioner of\nmine once said to me while wringing her hands:\n\n\"Oh, what awful thing can I have done, that God has brought this\naffliction upon me?\" I told her that she had done nothing, that she was\na Dorcas among us, and that God loved her as we all did. And thus I\ncomforted her from the teachings of Job, and from the words of Jesus.\nFor three months, until she went home, she lay on a bed of pain in peace\nand trust.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X\n\nLOSING THE BIBLE TO FIND IT (_continued_)\n\nThe method of finding God's Word in the Scriptures illustrated.\n\n\n1. The Psalms\n\nFor richness of spiritual content, for loftiness of expression, and for\nintimacy of communion with God, no other book in the world equals the\nPsalms. All devout souls have found the fullest expression of their\ninmost being in these inspired hymns. Like all true poetry the Psalms\ndeal with the timeless. Eternal truths and deathless passions flow\nthrough these beautiful, rhythmic lines like a majestic river. The world\nis infinitely richer for the Psalms. And though they often reveal\nmistaken ideas in astronomy, yet religiously and poetically the Psalms\ncontain the finest possible conceptions of the material universe. Even\nthe imprecatory utterances are not wholly immoral, nor altogether\ncontrary to the teachings of Jesus; for when they were deserved, He said\nthings dreadfully severe. But when a Psalmist goes so far as to say of\nhis enemy, \"Neither let there be any to have pity on his fatherless\nchildren,\" or \"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little\nones against the rock,\" he clearly manifests an evil spirit; a spirit\nthat is at once contrary to his own religion, and utterly condemned by\nJesus. However, when we consider the ruthless exploitation to which\nIsrael was so long exposed, it is most remarkable that the Psalms\ncontain so little of this evil note. Whoever approaches the Psalms in\nthe spirit of the Master will find them fat with spiritual meat.\n\nNotwithstanding all, it is an indisputable fact that the best Christian\nhymns are superior to the poorest Hebrew Psalms. Take for example Dr.\nGladden's hymn:\n\n \"O Master, let me walk with Thee\n In lowly paths of service free;\n Tell me Thy secret, help me bear\n The strain of toil, the fret of care.\n\n \"Help me the slow of heart to move\n By some clear, winning word of love;\n Teach me the wayward feet to stay,\n And guide them in the homeward way.\n\n \"Teach me Thy patience; still with Thee\n In closer, dearer company,\n In work that keeps faith sweet and strong,\n In trust that triumphs over wrong,\n\n \"In hope that sends a shining ray\n Far down the future's broadening way,\n In peace that only Thou canst give,\n With Thee, O Master, let me live.\"\n\nNow, if any one should say that this hymn is inferior to the poorest\nPsalm, he would simply reveal a biased mind. And yet, a hundred Dr.\nGladdens could not have produced the book of Psalms. The Psalms were not\nmade to order but, like his hymn, grew out of peculiar experiences. The\nHebrew Psalms were lived out, and suffered out, through the life of a\npeople that had looked with straining eyes from many a Mount Pisgah, and\nhad lifted a pitiful cry from many a valley of Hinnom. Such experiences\nget to the heart of things; they offer the great prophetic opportunity\nfor the noble souls through whom God determines the destiny of a people.\n\nWhat oratorical genius could _invent_ a Gettysburg speech? The necessary\nconditions for such a pronouncement were four years of national anguish,\na soil watered by the blood of her noblest sons, and a president bowed\ndown with grief. Then, and only then, could a Mr. Lincoln rise in the\nmidst of our hallowed dead and, all unconsciously, speak words immortal.\n\nIn the long ago, our western prairies lifted by mighty volcanic forces\nwere shattered, and twisted, and left with great frowning peaks and deep\nyawning chasms. As a result, great pockets of gold were deposited in\ntheir bosom for the enrichment of the world. In like manner, Israel\npassed through great national upheavals that resulted in many a precious\ndeposit. And among these deposits were the Psalms that have never ceased\nto enrich human experience.\n\nWhat the earth's crust is to the student of nature's forces, that the\nScriptures are to the student of spiritual forces.\n\n\n2. The Prophets in general\n\nIf we now turn to the books of the prophets, we shall find a new type of\nScripture. These spiritual giants were preeminently men of their own\ntimes, with a message for all times.\n\nBefore the first of the prophets now under consideration appeared,\nIsrael had already passed through many centuries of deep and varied\nexperience. First the Northern and then the Southern Kingdom became\ngrossly idolatrous and wretchedly corrupt. Their ideals had degenerated\ninto a mere cult, and their social institutions into a rigid system of\noppression. Through dishonesty, oppression, and irreligion, the national\nlife had so weakened that its destruction was imminent from inward decay\nand outward attack. Israel was clearly missing her destiny by forsaking\nGod, oppressing the poor, and by trampling underfoot her most sacred\nideals. She was inviting the judgments of God by truly meriting them.\n\nOut of this deepening gloom, the lightning of God's wrath and the\nthunder of His purpose awakened certain sensitive souls to be prophets\nand seers in Israel. The realization of the nation's crime and danger\ntransformed these prophets into the most fearless reformers the world\nhad ever seen. As couriers with an important message from God, they went\nin hot haste to a rebellious and foolish people. Because of the real and\nimmediate danger these preachers were exceedingly intense. To save the\nday, they strove valiantly. If they were to be successful in their\nmission, both vision and oratorical gift were necessary qualifications.\nTheir keen knowledge of Israel's _present_ made her future inevitable\nunless she repented of her sins. The prophets were not sent to proclaim\nany new religious truths in particular, but to be preachers and\nreformers of the highest order.\n\nNow, how different all this is from what I used to think.\n\nI once supposed that a prophecy was a pure miracle, a case in which God\ntold the prophet, without any insight on the prophet's part, just what\nthe future would be. It did not occur to me that the prophet had the\nslightest means of knowing the future which he predicted, except as God\nmiraculously informed him. I also thought that God told the prophets\nwhat should be, so that, when it came to pass, it would prove the\nexistence of God and the truth of revealed religion. To my\nunderstanding, prophecy was divine fortune-telling, designed to convince\nreligious sceptics of a later day, rather than preaching, designed to\nsave the sinners of that day. I did not realize that the predictions\nwere concerning events inevitable, for the most part, to any one not\nblinded by sin or ignorance. Nor did I realize that most of their\nthrilling prophecies were made with the hope of bringing the people to\nrepentance,--in which happy event the predictions would not come true.\n\nA Hebrew prophet rarely used an if. That was understood. He always hoped\nthat his predictions of evil would not come true, because of the\n_emphatic_ manner in which he declared they would. All orientals\nunderstood this, and it would greatly enhance the worth of Scriptures\nif we understood it equally well.\n\nToo often, however, the evil prophecies did come to pass, because sinful\nIsrael refused to hear. And for the same reason predictions of good\noften failed. Like true preachers and reformers, the prophets dealt\nlargely in warnings and encouragements; hoping, thereby, to lead the\npeople back to Him who loved them with an ever-lasting love.\n\n\"Do you think this war is a fulfillment of Bible prophecy?\" Yes, this\nwar and every other war is a fulfillment of Bible prophecies. Any\nprophecy that is true to fundamental principles, and true to human\nnature, goes right on being fulfilled over and over again. The dark\nprophecies recorded in the Scriptures will never cease being fulfilled\nuntil men no longer sin against God and one another. And when men cease\nsinning against God and their neighbors, the Bible prophecies of _good_\nwill be repeatedly fulfilled throughout all the expanding growth of\nsociety. But the fanatical uses made of Bible prophecy in our day, by\nsome well-meaning people, are enough to make angels weep.\n\nThe great prophets had their hearts wide open toward the God they\nadored, toward the nation they loved, and toward the times they feared.\nThey were tremendously inspired of God, and regarded their lives of no\naccount if only they could bring Israel back to God and save her from\nher enemies without, and her foes within. They were statesmen, seers,\nand lovers of God and men. Their souls burned with an unquenchable\nfire. They were the greatest preachers that the world has ever seen. To\nlearn the historical setting is to enhance the value of their sermons\nmany fold. And to study the prophet's method of impressing truth upon\nthe oriental mind is a marvelous lesson in the art of persuasion. In\ntheir effort to save Israel, the prophets partly succeeded and partly\nfailed. But their messages will live forever, and in this they succeeded\nbeyond all precedent. They were firebrands to punish sin, and torches to\nenlighten the world.\n\nTheir messages were simple:\n\nGod is infinitely great and good. He loves you with a boundless passion,\nand pities you with an infinite compassion. But you have trampled on His\nmercies, you have spurned His approaches, you have jilted Him as a\nlover, and you show only contempt for His word. You tread down His poor,\nyou rob widows and orphans, you take bribes, you pervert justice, you\nwallow in vice, you pamper yourselves with stolen delicacies, you mingle\nfreely with the heathen, you copy their vices, you worship their vile\ngods, and make the land a stench. As a result, Israel languisheth: her\npoor cry for bread, her young men fall into the vices of their fathers,\nlaw and order are forgotten, and a loathsome decay is eating the very\nheart out of the nation.\n\nYour enemies are quick to see your nakedness and your weakness. Already,\nthey are planning to move against you. And Jehovah is so weary and\ndiscouraged with you that He has about decided to use your mighty\nenemies as a scourge. He loves you so much that He must save you, at\nleast a remnant of you, even if He has to use your cruel enemies to\nbring you back to your senses. Anyone who looks can see what is about to\nhappen. If he listens he can hear the tramping of horses' feet and the\nrumbling of chariot wheels.\n\nIn true oriental imagery, these majestic prophets appealed to Israel's\nfear and pride and honor. There was no human passion overlooked, and no\nfundamental fact forgotten. They scolded, and wooed. They promised\nabundant good, or abundant evil. Their fund of _illustrations_ was\ninexhaustible and, for the most part, exceedingly effective with the\npeople of their day; and many of their illustrations are still\nunsurpassed for beauty and power. Nevertheless, they sometimes allowed\ntheir imagination to run riot while devising, or adapting imagery that\nwould attract the attention, and arouse the hopes and the fears of their\nhearers. A notable instance is that of the captive Ezekiel, when he\ntries to portray the glory and majesty of Jehovah by means of a\nmonstrous flying machine.\n\nWhile Ezekiel's motive was good, his method was crude. He pictured a\ngreat cloud flashing fire as it rolled out of the north with a stormy\nwind. In the fiery cloud were living creatures, and each one had four\nfaces and four wings. They also had calves' feet that sparkled like\nbrass. Besides having human hands under their wings these strange\nobjects had a man's face, a lion's face, an eagle's face, and the face\nof an ox. Their general appearance was that of burning coals and flaming\ntorches. Connected, somehow, with the cloud and these monstrous\ncreatures were wheels resembling precious stones, and wheels within\nwheels. And the rims of the wheels were covered with eyes. The movement\nof this startling apparition was direct, and very terrible; the noise of\nits wings was like great waters and the voice of the Almighty. Above\nthis flying wonder was a canopy, and above the canopy a throne, from\nwhence there proceeded a voice. Then he saw, as it were, glowing metal\nand the appearance of a rainbow. This appalling chariot of Jehovah, and\nthe awful majesty of God, threw Ezekiel upon his face. Then Jehovah said\nunto Ezekiel, \"Son of man, stand upon thy feet and I will speak with\nthee.\"\n\nNow, we may be sure that the majesty of Jehovah is not less, but\ninfinitely greater than this flying wonder. His glory, however, is\ndecidedly different from this vision. Reverence and awe for the Almighty\nare sorely needed in every generation, and the effort to inspire them is\na most worthy aim. There is no denying but this illustration is an awful\npicture; one that would thoroughly stupefy a child. But what should we\nthink of a minister to-day who began his sermon with a similar\ndescription of the majesty and glory of God? However useful such imagery\nmay have been to exiles in Babylonia more than two thousand years ago,\nit would be positively harmful to a modern congregation.\n\nThough this vision of Ezekiel is crude and very extreme, even for an\nancient prophet of Israel, yet we have people to-day who invest these\nwheels, and eyes, and heads with symbolic meanings to bolster up a\nmonstrous religion that is contrary to pretty much everything that Jesus\ntaught. Out of the books of Ezekiel, Daniel, and Revelation, some well\nmeaning but untaught souls can invent fifty-seven varieties of religion.\nBut they can learn neither the lesson nor the danger of an undisciplined\nimagination.\n\n\n3. Jonah\n\nAs I am simply giving a bird's-eye view of the Scriptures, and the\nmethod of approaching them, possibly a few words should be said\nconcerning Jonah.\n\nAs a great missionary book for a people who were very unmissionary in\nspirit, Jonah is unique. It breathes the spirit of Christian missions in\nthis twentieth century.\n\nThe friends of the Bible have unwittingly made this great book a jest\nand a byword by their wretched interpretation of it. Even as a little\nboy, I used to feel ashamed of certain portions of Jonah when read at\nfamily prayers. For, as I understood it, there was something about the\nstory uncanny and unreal. I knew that some people scoffed at the fish\nstory. But that did not trouble me because I believed in miracles, and\nwas much pleased that God did not let poor Jonah drown. It was the\nunnaturalness of Jonah himself that troubled me. And when it came to his\nexperience with the gourd, I almost lost faith. When Jonah felt so angry\nand sorry that he wanted to die because a worm bit the gourd, my common\nsense revolted completely. I meditated over this incident a long time,\nand finally concluded that no little boy was ever such a fool as that. I\nhad felt faint in the hot sun many times myself and had seen chinch bugs\neat up whole fields of wheat, and yet I did not want to die. That a big\nman, and prophet of God, could give way to such hysterical feelings over\na withering gourd was more than I could believe. This incident was a\nmuch greater shock to my faith than the fish story. Though I felt very\nwicked for doubting the Bible, yet I was heartily glad that a certain\nsceptical neighbor was not present to hear it, for I knew he would make\nfun of such a story. What a pity it is that a little boy should be\ncompelled to experience such feelings about the Bible at family prayers,\nwhen a little rational explanation would make this book charming to him\nbeyond expression.\n\nThough the book of Jonah is written in a curious oriental style that no\nman of to-day would wish to imitate, yet its spirit, purpose, and\nsubject matter would be very difficult to surpass. As a parable, it is\ntrue to the general history of Israel and to the spirit of Christian\nmissions. It contains the vision of a missionary statesman, and was\nmeant to sting Israel to the quick for her bigotry and hardness of\nheart.\n\nVery briefly stated, it is something like this:\n\nThe whining and almost contemptible prophet Jonah is Israel itself.\nJonah is a caricature of Israel, and that is what made him seem unreal\nto me. Israel wanted the heathen killed, and not converted. And though\nshe did not dare to disobey God outright, yet she gave God the slip at\nthe first corner and embarked on the sea of politics. For a long time\nIsrael had been as anxious to get into politics and form international\nrelations as she had been determined not to be a missionary nation to\nher despised neighbors. So in this parable, Israel had not been long on\nthe sea of politics when a great storm arose,--it is ever so. And, as\nusual in politics, someone is thrown overboard. The great fish that\nswallowed Jonah was Assyria. Therefore it is not strange that Israel\noffered a long and beautiful prayer in that kind of a fish's belly.\nProud Israel, God's darling, in exile for her rebellion against Jehovah,\ncould do no otherwise than offer up a prayer.\n\n \"Out of the belly of Sheol cried I,\n And thou heardest my voice.\n For thou didst cast me into the depth, in the heart of the seas,\n And the flood was round about me;\n All thy waves and thy billows passed over me.\n And I said I am cast out before thine eyes;\n Yet I will look again toward thy holy temple.\n The waters compassed me about, even to the soul;\n The weeds were wrapped about my head.\n\n\"And Jehovah spake unto the fish, (Assyria) and it vomited out Jonah\nupon the dry land.\" And Israel returned from captivity. Israel still\nshowed an aversion for missionary work after her exile, but when God\nsaid \"Go\" a second time, Israel went. That is, she went in the parable.\nIt is clear, from the sarcasm of the story, that Jonah enjoyed his\nmessage when he began crying, \"Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be\noverthrown.\" The parable reveals the faith of the author. He wished to\nconvey the idea that the wicked heathen would repent more quickly than\nIsrael if they had a herald to proclaim God's truth. Of course, a\nprophecy of destruction would not come true if the heathen repented. So\nGod decided not to do what He said He would.\n\n\"But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was angry.\" When Jonah, the\ntypical Israelite, saw that his preaching had converted the heathen he\nwas so mad that he wanted to die. I knew how kind-hearted you were\ntoward repentant sinners, and that is the reason I tried to run off the\nfirst time. Now, God, just kill me; \"for it is better for me to die than\nto live.\" Is this history? Yes, it is history in stinging sarcasm. How\nthe Israelites must have writhed under such a portrayal of their\nfaithless and godless hearts. But the author knew that it would take\nmore than this to break their stubborn wills. So he proceeds with a few\nmore sledge-hammer blows.\n\n\"And Jehovah said, Doest thou well to be angry?\" Now this gave Jonah a\nlittle hope that God might kill his despised neighbors even if they had\nbitterly repented and turned to the Lord for forgiveness. Accordingly,\nJonah went out of the city and sat on the east side where he could see\nand gloat over the destruction of his converts, in case the Lord did\nintend to destroy them after all. In the meantime, Jonah made himself\njust as comfortable as possible by constructing a booth where he could\nsit in the shade. And our satirist causes God to add a little touch of\ncomfort by causing a gourd \"to come up over\" His darling, \"Jonah, that\nit might be a shade over his head, to deliver him from his evil case.\"\n\nNow, the contemptible Jonah had no business being there in the sun; he\nshould have been at home helping his wife, if he had nothing else to do.\nBut better still, he should have been in Nineveh rejoicing with the\nconverts who had been redeemed from destruction by his preaching.\n\nNote the fine sarcasm of our author, \"So Jonah was exceedingly glad of\nthe gourd.\"\n\nHowever, when the gourd was smitten by a worm, and the sultry wind blew,\nand the sun shone hot upon his head, our mean little Jonah again asked\nGod to kill him. Now Jonah, \"Doest thou well to be angry for the gourd?\"\n\"Yes, I do well to be angry even unto death.\" Were ever such words of\nirony spoken! O Israel, you are smitten with grief because of your poor\nlittle gourds, but don't you think you might have a little pity for all\nthose innocent people who were so untaught morally that they did not\nknow their right hand from their left?\n\nIt would be well for us to remember that we, as well as ancient Israel,\nfret and fume over a lot of little nothings. Little griefs and little\ndeprivations vex us sorely. But while our brothers and sisters over much\nof the earth go naked and starved and diseased, we feel no pity. We are\nvery tender-hearted over little things, we are deeply moved over some\nfictitious story; but for the appalling tragedies of dark continents and\nexploited peoples, our hearts are flint.\n\nObviously, Israel understood only too well the biting sarcasm and bitter\nirony of Jonah's ringing satire. If the author of this parable could\nknow that a generation has since risen, with so little historical and\nliterary acumen as to believe that Jonah is literal history, I think his\nbody would turn over in its grave. If he knew that he had set people to\nwrangling over the question of whether a fish could swallow a man,\ninstead of sending them out as missionaries to all the Ninevehs of the\nearth, he would feel sorry that he ever wrote the book.\n\nWhen intelligently understood, there is no other literature extant that\nmakes such a strong moral and religious appeal for social justice and\npolitical righteousness as the prophets. The writings of the great\nprophets of Israel constitute a practical _sociology_, founded on the\nFatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man; a sociology so enriched by\na wealth of historical materials as to make it a treasure-house for all\nworkers in social betterment.\n\nTo save the ordinary Bible reader from confusion, I have purposely\navoided all questions of origin and composite character, along with many\nother interesting and useful facts concerning the Scriptures. This\nsimple approach to the Scriptures is for the purpose of helping the\naverage person to find the soul of the Bible. For it is the soul of the\nBible, and not its incidental features, that enriches the soul of the\nreader.\n\n\n4. The New Testament in general\n\nIn the New, as well as in the Old Testament, the letter kills while the\nspirit makes alive.\n\nAs the historical and literary methods of study have imparted a new\nbeauty and a new significance to the messages of the Old Testament, the\nsame methods will, in like manner, affect the messages of the New\nTestament.\n\nThe personal Christ is the _soul_ of the New Testament. In Jesus,\nrighteousness is more than a decalogue or a catalogue to be followed; it\nis a character to be possessed. In Jesus, God is more than a Divinity to\nbe obeyed; the Infinite Will is an indwelling Spirit,--the soul of man's\nsoul. While the Old Testament never recognizes God as dwelling in man,\nthe New Testament takes the God of Israel and the righteousness of\nIsrael and places them in human life; not as a theory, but as personal\nexperience. This is the old righteousness and the old religion made new.\n\nWhen we say that Jesus is the soul of the New Testament, we have no\nreference to perplexing questions about how He came or how He went. We\nmean that the God-filled Jesus is the soul of all the New Testament\nteachings. The pure, strong Son of God is the lodestone of the Gospels\nand the Epistles. It is He that draws honest souls into divine\nfellowship with the Father and His family. To see the character of Jesus\nin its most lovely aspects, and to feel His love that heals and\ntransforms, is to receive the very best that the New Testament has to\ngive.\n\nThe perplexing questions of psychology, of tradition, of manuscripts,\nand of miracles are interesting enough for those who are equipped to\nstudy them; but all these are much less than the one essential thing. To\nknow Him, and to feel the power that He can exercise over all that are\nattached to Him in love and service, is life eternal. Granting that the\nmiracles are true, yet it is infinitely more difficult to be certain of\nthe truth of a miracle than it is to be certain of the truth of the\nChristian religion. The Christian religion may be tested at first hand.\nWe can taste and see that the Lord is good. By keeping company with\nJesus, and walking in His foot-steps, we are able to decide for\nourselves whether we care for Him and His way of living. Though one were\nin utter doubt concerning everything else, if he saw in Jesus something\nso much to be desired that he was willing to forsake all and follow Him,\nhe would find himself in loving fellowship with the Father. \"Whosoever\nwill, let him come.\" And, \"Whosoever cometh unto me, I will in no wise\ncast out.\" Though in doubt about every question of scholarship, the one\nwho personally tests the life and teachings of Jesus from day to day is\nable to answer, \"One thing I know, whereas I was blind, now I see.\" To\nfind one's self sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right\nmind, after living among the tombs as one mad for wealth or pleasure or\npopularity, is the last word in religion.\n\nHaving thus blazed the straight path to God, let me urge it upon my\nreaders that they take up the broader and deeper study of the New\nTestament literature as they have opportunity. For, in so doing they\nwill broaden and deepen their lives, and better fit themselves to live\nin society as those who helpfully and intelligently serve.\n\nBut some may say, \"How are we to know that our religion is true unless\nwe have some ancient, miraculous proof!\"\n\nMy answer is that in nothing does God so much delight, as in making\nHimself known to those who intelligently receive Him in pure hearts.\nWhen God is _here_, even if it were possible, we do not need to prove\nHis existence; we simply need to get acquainted with Him. Miracles may\nhave been necessary in times past; if so, they served their purpose when\nthey were needed. Since it is harder to verify an ancient miracle than\nit is to verify the presence of God in our own hearts, we cling to the\ngreater certainty without being too dogmatic concerning the wonders\nreported in a primitive age. If one believes in miracles, no one can\nprove that he is wrong. If he is so constituted that he cannot believe\nin them, God will not turn him away if he follows the Master with his\nwhole heart. If any one desires a richer assurance of God and His\nforgiveness, let him be a more intelligent and a better Christian; let\nhim make a larger investment of himself in the service of God. I have\nnothing to say against miracles; but I should like to testify that it\nhas been possible to lead many to Christ by getting them to become His\ndisciples first, and then letting them have plenty of time to settle the\nquestion of miracles as best they were able.\n\nThough I bring an indictment against myself, I must say, what we most\nneed is a ministry with Apostolic faith and fervor. We need St. Pauls\nand St. Johns. We need leaders who can make God real and sin hateful.\n\n\n5. The book of Revelation\n\nSeeing that so many good Christians are perplexed by the apocalypses, we\nshall close this chapter with a brief study of the book of Revelation.\n\nThe mystery that once shrouded the book of Revelation is gone. As\nProfessor Porter says, \"The historical method has, it is not too much to\nsay, broken the seals. To the historical student these apocalypses have\nbecome, in their general character and chief messages, among the best\ninstead of quite the least understood books of the canon. And their\nimportance has grown with their understanding.\"\n\nThe book of Revelation throws more light on the past than on the future.\nIt has to do largely with a crisis in the early Christian Church, and\nnot with the end of the world and the \"constitution of the unseen\nuniverse.\"\n\nThe probable date of the book is about ninety-three A. D. The great\nChristian leaders were gone, the heathen elements were entering the\nChurch with their traditions and rites, and the Roman government was\nsetting up emperor worship to strengthen the loyalty of diverse\npopulations. The mandate that all should enter the temples of the\nemperor and worship him as divine was particularly hard on Jews and\nChristians who refused to worship any but the one true God. The\npersecutions that followed a refusal to worship the emperor, with all\nthe other devitalizing influences mentioned, threatened the very\nexistence of the Christian Church.\n\nIt was to meet this crisis that the book of Revelation was written. And\nthis accounts for the poetical and visionary style adopted by the\nauthor. Strong language was needed; something that would quicken the\nimagination and revive the fainting hearts of those who were growing\ncold and indifferent. Dynamite was needed. No gentle utterance would\nsuffice. The writer realizes the awful conflict that is about to ensue\nbetween the gentle Lamb and His humble followers on the one side, and\nthe great dragon, Rome, and his vile cohorts on the other. Somehow, the\nChristians must be convinced that the Lamb will finally triumph over the\nbeast, or all is lost. After the sweet, simple letters of admonition and\npraise to the Churches, in which he pictures Christ among the\ncandlesticks, the task of reassuring the persecuted followers of Jesus\nmust somehow be achieved. So he goes to his task as a fireman goes to\nthe work of saving a building that is on fire. Ordinary means will\nutterly fail. He first looks to the heavens, and then to the most\nstriking imagery of the Old Testament, and never refuses a striking\nfigure from any source that promises to serve his purpose. He gathers\nfrom far and near anything that will startle and encourage. As the winds\ndrive the clouds until their blackness terrifies, so he gives free rein\nto his own imagination while marshaling his material. He commands the\nheavenly trumpeters, and brings forth appalling horsemen riding in the\nheavens. He sees one-third of the sun, moon, and stars, smitten after\nthe blast of a heavenly trumpet. He sees an angel open a pit from which\nbelches forth smoke that darkens the whole heavens. Out of the smoke\ncome forth locusts that look like horses prepared for war. They have\ngolden crowns on their heads, and men's faces, and women's hair, and\nlion's teeth, and breastplates of iron. Their wings sound like chariots\nand many horses rushing to war. And they have scorpions' tails with\nstings, to sting the men that have not the seal of God on their\nforeheads. He assures the poor sufferers that sealed mysteries, and\ndistresses, and woes await them; but that Christ shall be able to solve\nall mysteries, and that he will command all powers in heaven and earth\nto fight on their side until the old dragon, whose earthly embodiment is\nRome, shall be cast into the sulphurous pit and sealed. Finally, in the\nmost beautiful and poetical fashion he declares that the battle shall be\nwon, the clash of arms and the blare of trumpets shall cease, heaven and\nearth shall be cleared of their fierce combatants, and in that happy and\npeaceful hour the reward of the faithful shall appear. Heaven shall\ndescend on a new earth that is redeemed. The Lamb and His bride, the\nfaithful Church, shall again be united. And this new heaven on earth\nshall be inexpressibly beautiful; the architecture shall be symmetrical,\nand richly adorned. The gates of the city shall be pearls, and the\nstreets gold. The city shall not, as the old Jerusalem, be built of\ncommon stone; even the foundations shall be adorned with jasper, and\nsapphire, and chalcedony, and emerald, and sardonyx, and sardius, and\nchrysolite, and beryl, and topaz, and chrysoprase, the jacinth, and\namethyst. There shall be a river, and trees bearing fruit for food and\nleaves for healing. All these things the writer assures them shall soon\ncome to pass. In the great day of victory throngs of people shall be\nthere, arrayed in white; all, both the living and the dead, who have\nwashed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb, shall\nbe present. They shall be invited to the marriage of the Lamb, and to\nthe wonderful feast that will follow.\n\nWe are justified in believing that this poetical and highly imaginative\nportrayal of the conflict was very effective with the humble,\nilliterate, and sorely persecuted people who constituted the Christian\nChurch at that time. They revived from their coldness, they turned their\nbacks upon the insidious temptations and allurements of the heathen\nworld, and went in armies to the martyr's death. Rome was conquered, but\nnot in the way the author expected. Rome was conquered by being made\nChristian, at least nominally and politically. The histories that\nrecord the conflict between the Christians and Rome are not less\nblood-curdling than the book of Revelation. The conflict was frightful,\nonly it was in terms of blood, and fire, and dungeon. If the ingenious\nand infernal methods of torture, invented by Rome, present a picture\ndifficult to read, what must the reality have been to bear? We should\nnever cease to thank God that these humble Christians were nerved for\nthe conflict. The modern world owes these martyrs a debt of gratitude as\nhigh as the heavens and as deep as the seas. When we consider the\npeople, the times, and the crisis, the book of Revelation was a means\nwell suited to a noble end. Who can look upon such a scene, and witness\nsuch heroism, and read such desperate utterances rising out of the\nconflict as are recorded by the author of Revelation without wishing to\nbe a better man, and a more loyal follower of the one who still stands\namong the candlesticks,--His Churches. Sabatier has wisely said,\n\"Apocalypses do not reveal to us the secrets of the divine providence,\nbut do reveal the optimistic believing nature of the soul.\"\n\nDuring the recent war, many portions of our country were burnt over with\nthe fanaticism that has sprung from a false and unhistorical\ninterpretation of Revelation and other apocalyptic writings.\n\nThe following extract from Professor Porter's book, \"Daniel and\nRevelation,\" is of special interest:\n\n\"The more theoretical or theological messages of the apocalypses it is\nevidently impossible for us to accept in any literal way as a message\nfor our day. That which they claimed to do, namely, to unveil the\nheavenly world and the future age, they really did not do. We cannot\naccept their descriptions of heaven, of God's throne, or of the angels,\ntheir names and functions, as a revelation of hidden realities. They are\nat most figurative and imaginative representations or symbols of faith\nin God and a spiritual realm. We are interested in these things only, on\nthe one side, for the imperishable faith and hope behind them, and on\nthe other for their place in the history of human speculation and\nfancy.... Although we cannot receive their theoretical message, yet\ntheir practical message for their own time is a true message for all\nlike times, and in a measure for all times alike. Religious faith in\ntimes of a dominating, aggressive, or insinuating worldliness needs to\nmaintain itself by the assurance of the real dominion of the unseen\nworld over the world of sense, and by the hope of some approaching\nmanifestation of God, some open demonstration of the rule of justice and\ngoodness. The apocalyptical temper is needed when religion is assailed\nand in danger; and in all times the religious life needs to maintain its\npurity and strength by some sort of protest against the world, some\ndefiance of ruling ideals and customs, some faith in realities above\nthose of sense, and in truths contrary to appearances. The greater\napocalypses were inspired by a living faith in the ideal and an eager\nexpectation of its coming into reality; and faith in ideals which the\nworld contradicts is too rare and precious a thing to be despised\nbecause its form is strange.\"\n\n\n\n
","title":"What and Where is God? A Human Answer to the Deep Religious Cry of the Modern Soul","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":68449}