It is a pleasure, therefore, to answer in the words of Jesus, "G.o.d is a spirit."

This might very well be regarded as a final answer but for the fact that spirit means all sorts of things to different minds. When I once asked a company of intelligent people if I were a spirit, they promptly answered "no," but supposed I should be when I died. They seemed to think of spirit as a ghost, as something that might appear or disappear through locked doors. The same idea apparently obtained universally in times past, and that doubtless accounts for the fact that the Greek word, meaning spirit, was translated "Ghost" in the Scriptures and Apostles'

Creed. But the idea of a _visible_ spirit should perish. Spirits are neither evil ghosts nor Holy Ghosts. Even if there were a ghost, that which appeared could be no more than the instrument of the spirit, and not the spirit itself. However refined and ghostly the form, the spirit would remain as invisible as when it had a gross human body.

As further evidence of confusion on this subject, a young man from one of our good colleges seeking membership in my Church, informed me that he had peculiar views. Spirit, whether applied to G.o.d or man, had no meaning for him. He wanted to join the Church because in that way he believed he could render a better social service. In his thought, G.o.d was neither a person nor a spirit, but a force. Having no satisfactory idea of spirits he had banished the thought of them entirely from his mind.

All through my own period of doubt I conceived of G.o.d's spirit on earth as something emanating from a glorious spiritual _form_ in heaven.

Thinking that this form in heaven was a spirit made it only the easier to believe that G.o.d himself could appear to men if He cared to do so.

That He did not care to appear to His children and thereby settle the question of His existence beyond all doubt seemed preposterous. And it would still seem so to my moral sense, if I retained my former conception of spirit. Of course He should not come near enough to "consume us," but He might come near enough to convince us.

The "New Thought" people, struggling with the meaning of spirit, have arrived at the conclusion that there is just "_One universal substance called spirit_." So, G.o.d is not to them _a_ spirit, but simply spirit, "a universal substance."

Two or three other cults believe that man's spirit is simply his physical breath.

To say that G.o.d is a spirit, then, with any of these gross conceptions in mind, is sadly to misconceive Him.

_Whether we say G.o.d is a Spirit, a Soul, or a Person, our meaning is the same._ Of these three expressions, however, the word _Person_ is the best because, being the scholar's term, it is clearly defined. So when we have learned the signification of the word _Person_, we shall attribute the same meaning to all three words, using them interchangeably.

In speaking of G.o.d as a person the scholar never has in mind either form or substance, however rarefied. He does not know even that there is material substance, much less spiritual substance. He knows very well what personality is as experience, but beyond that he knows nothing about it. Personality, to him, means _a Will that knows itself_, and then knows _Other Wills_. When we say that G.o.d is a Spirit, or Person, we should mean that He is a _Loving Intelligent Will_. In speaking of G.o.d as the Soul of the universe we should have in mind the same idea.

There is no harm in thinking of G.o.d as a force if the force is intelligent, and knows itself; but a force that does not know that it is a force, is not G.o.d. A progressive Jewish rabbi expressed the wish that we could get rid of the word G.o.d altogether, and subst.i.tute some such word as "Cosmos." When asked if the "Cosmos" knew that it was a cosmos, or that we were talking about it, he replied that he did not think so.

"Then I would rather worship you," I said, "than your cosmos, for you would at least know that I reverenced you."

An intelligent lawyer friend of mine once said to me, "Of course I do not believe in a personal G.o.d." I asked him if he meant that he did not believe in a G.o.d who has a _form_ in heaven. But he answered:

"Oh, no, no, I have been beyond that for twenty-five years! G.o.d, if He means anything, means the infinite, while a person means the limited.

Now, who ever heard of such a childish thing as a limited infinite? No, pig-iron, as much as anything, is G.o.d."

I replied, "With all your intelligence, you haven't the remotest idea of what const.i.tutes personality. You are not aware that by personality we mean a certain type of experience, and not a substance. Personality is realized only as the experience of self-knowledge is achieved. You are not as yet much of a personality, you are hardly more than a candidate for the office, but by making a good campaign you may get elected. You are not very personal because you are not very self-knowing, and if you should drop the plummet into the depths of your experience to sound yourself, by that very act you would acquire new depth, and would need to try again to fathom yourself. So at best, you are only becoming personal. None but the Infinite Experience can know itself perfectly, and therefore, G.o.d alone is completely personal."

My friend had no idea either of G.o.d's personality or his own, and his philosophical conception of nature was only a little less crude.

It was a long step in the right direction when I came to realize that I had never seen my mother, with whom I lived for so many happy years. Yet there was one thing that I felt sure I knew--absolutely, as I knew nothing else--and that was my mother. Not her face, not her voice, not her att.i.tudes nor her actions, though all these I knew too and loved.

But back of all these there was a real mother, of whom these were only manifestations. And this real mother, that I knew as I knew nothing else, was silent, and invisible. And then I found that I knew myself too--hardly as well as I knew my mother, but in the same way, and I knew myself also to be invisible and silent. My spirit, or personality, is as invisible and silent as G.o.d. I have no more seen myself than I have seen Him. Neither has my naked soul ever made a sound. All the words that my soul desires expressed are produced by a sort of animated phonograph which we call the mouth. At the wish of my invisible self the physical organs of speech set the air vibrating, but my self-conscious Will is eternally silent. There is much to be said about the relation of Personalities to their instruments, but this must be left until a little later. It will avoid confusion if we try to take but one step at a time.

Great scholars may think that such ideas as I have endeavored to ill.u.s.trate are too simple to require statement, nevertheless the recognition of these simple facts concerning my mother and myself unlocked my prison door. It revolutionized everything within me, and without me. During the thirty years of my active ministry, it has been the moulding thought of my life. Once realizing that G.o.d was a "Loving Intelligent Will," I no longer thought of Him as sitting on a throne, or showing His face through parted clouds. This conception of spirit gave to everything new shape and color. It was the idea around which a new heaven and a new earth took form. The rest of this book must further explain what it then meant, and still means, to me. As the result of a better conception of spirit, my world was relieved of intolerable intellectual burdens. Simply to get the idea, however, is not enough; one must follow it out logically to see where it will lead him.

To the question, "What is G.o.d?" I once more answer that He is a Loving Intelligent Will. And, apart from His instruments, He is silent and invisible, here and everywhere, now and always.

2. Who is G.o.d?

First, allow me to say that He is _not_ the Father of our bodies, though He is the Creator of them. G.o.d created trees, but He is not the Father of trees. Fatherhood, in addition to creation, implies likeness so close that father and child cla.s.sify as members of the same family. Our bodies were not made in the image of G.o.d.

While pa.s.sing through my Sunday school where a college woman was giving some supplementary work, I heard her teaching the young people that we were made in the image of G.o.d because we had two legs instead of four, and stood on end. "Why in the name of conscience," I thought, "do we permit anyone in our churches to retain such detrimental and absurd ideas?" This woman was what the young men and women called a "crackerjack" in her college line. So I was amazed at her crude conceptions, until I realized that she had never heard an exposition of the primitive story in Genesis. I also remembered that I had heard it preached from a pulpit, that man was in the image of G.o.d because he had a face, and walked upright instead of going on all fours. Those churches that believe man has no spirit except his breath are necessarily confined to this monstrous idea; while many in our regular churches are in a maze of tangled thoughts.

According to Scriptures, _G.o.d is the Father of spirits_. The "Loving Intelligent Will" is the Father of other loving intelligent wills. This makes every created spirit a G.o.d-child, or a child of G.o.d. These terms must be interchangeable, unless we are playing at "make-believe," when we say that a spirit is a child of G.o.d. Were not all spirits members of the G.o.d family, it would be useless to teach them about G.o.d; for, being of a different order, they would not understand. It is impossible to teach a horse the things of a man, because he has not the spirit of a man. I believe in an anthropomorphic G.o.d, simply because I believe in a Theomorphic man. G.o.d must be in man's image, because man is in G.o.d's image. But it is not the animal man in whose image G.o.d is.

I should never believe in a religion that I was incapable of experiencing. Neither could I experience a religion that was contrary to my reason. Nevertheless, mine is not a private religion, because I am an infinite debtor to the world's best thought, and to the world's best experience. Without the help of the ages I never could have thought or felt that which I cannot avoid thinking and feeling at the present time.

This is not an effort to prove anything, but simply an attempt to picture what I see and feel, with the hope that someone else may see and feel in the same way.

The great pity of it all is that so many people have never _known_ the world's best religious thought and experience. There are those, a thousand years behind their age, who are launching new religions or fostering old ones, who are utterly oblivious to the strata upon strata of human achievement above them.

Yes, G.o.d is the Father of _all spirits_, whether they reside on earth, or in heaven, or in h.e.l.l. When once the meaning of spirit, or personality, is realized there is no dodging the issue. If a horse goes down the street keeping company with himself after this manner, "Now I am an old horse, and I ought to be a good old horse, and I wonder what the end will be," then he too is a son of G.o.d and our brother, though he has four, instead of two legs. I do not think a horse so keeps company with himself, but if he does, then we must own him and hope for the time when our brother will have something better than a quadruped for an instrument.

I am often asked what angels are like. That is an easy question. An angel is very much like my wife. For they both are spirits, and children of G.o.d. My wife is a sister of all the angels, and if Milton's great, cla.s.sical devil exists, he also is our brother, and a child of G.o.d. All spirits are children of G.o.d, whether good or bad, just because they are spirits.

In speaking of sons, the Bible usually means the good children of G.o.d; yet it clearly teaches that prodigals are likewise sons. Earthly parents are our older brothers and sisters, honored and much beloved; but only G.o.d is the Father of our spirits. No one need fear that natural sonship to G.o.d makes it less imperative that we should become good sons. To be a bad son of G.o.d is a most wretched and deplorable thing in itself, and leads inevitably to all deserved punishment. A good Father will not be slack in discipline. And furthermore, the rebellious sons of G.o.d are not slow to make h.e.l.l in this life, and that they will make no more h.e.l.l after death we may not dare to believe.

If the truth about the Fatherhood of G.o.d and the brotherhood of all spirits could enter the minds of the people with all that it involves, it would break the heart of the Church, and, we may believe, the heart of the world as well. As yet, however, this truth is but dimly realized.

I once had a dear old friend, a saint, whom I greatly appreciated. With her white hair and charming accent she was beautiful. Her mind was richly stored with beautiful poetry, and her apt quotations often touched me deeply. Loving all the saints, she was equally loved by them.

But one day I learned that my dear old saint was a saint only in spots--yet she was a saint. The discovery came about in this way; I asked her if she knew of the family with four children across the way, who had lately come to her neighborhood, suggesting that she might be useful to them. Now, what do you think my dear old saint said? With a spasmodic jerk of the elbow, and a toss of the head, she replied, "No! I don't want to know such folks!" This was a case in which caution was unnecessary, and where real service might have been rendered. For the time being my friend had completely forgotten that her neighbors were G.o.d's little ones and her own brothers and sisters. She had forgotten that her Father was over there struggling and suffering to save His children from sin and harm, and that He sorely needed His older daughter over the way to help Him. My dear old saint would not go across the street to help her Father whom she thought she loved so dearly. She did not realize that G.o.d was the Father of all spirits, and that all they were members of one family. My dear old friend has long since gone to her home beyond, and has learned how sadly she failed to comprehend the Fatherhood of G.o.d and the brotherhood of man. This knowledge doubtless gives her many a heartache, and drives her forward with new zeal to learn the lesson that G.o.d is the Father of _all spirits_.

We may be proud of our family name and social standing; we may think that we are different and apart, but we should remember that no one ever had more disreputable children than G.o.d. All the bad people are His sons and daughters. True, they have dishonored His name, and grieved His heart, yet He does not disown them; rather He follows them into all the dens and haunts of vice asking them to return home. And as fast as we become good sons, we join the Father in His love quest for His prodigal sons, who are our brothers.

Possibly I am a direct descendant of King Swain of Denmark who conquered England in the tenth century. There is no evidence to that effect, but he is the first Swain of whom I know in history. However this may be, with every other self-conscious being I can lift my head and say with justifiable pride and gladness of heart, "G.o.d, who makes the world, is my Father." How wonderful you are, O G.o.d-child! and what a pity it would be if anything should drag you down from your divine possibilities!

3. Where is G.o.d?

When I once asked a company of young people where my spirit was they promptly answered,

"In your body." I inquired,

"In a part of my body, or in all of it? Am I to understand that my spirit is just the shape and size of my body, and that when I am thin of flesh my spirit is not as large as when I am fleshy?"

"No," said they, "we do not like that."

"Oh! your spirit is in your brain," remarked one young fellow.

"Now, then, I have it," said I, "my spirit is just the shape and size of the cavity in my skull."

"No," he replied, "we don't know how it is." And they did not know, because no one had explained it to them. This is what I told them:

"The spirit is not in the body as a hand is in a glove, for that is one _thing_ inside another _thing_. Spirit has no dimensions. If any boy has a rule in his pocket let him measure my 'conscious will,' and tell me how long it is." They promptly replied that it could not be done. So I continued:

"If my self-conscious will occupies no s.p.a.ce, then I, the spirit, am neither in my body nor out of my body. I am nowhere. 'Where' applies to things and not to spirit. The book is in the room because it occupies a definite s.p.a.ce. When we say that our spirits are in our bodies we simply mean that our wills are capable of commanding our bodies and making them act. _While our spirits are nowhere, yet they do get expressed somewhere._ For all practical purposes, spirits are where their instruments express them in time and s.p.a.ce."

At this point in my remarks, I turned aside, and poked sharply with my forefinger a friend who stood near. In reply to his inquiring look I said:

"I did not poke you. It was this finger." (Then to the boys) "Did I poke him? My finger touched him because I wished it. My will got expressed right at the end of the finger, and therefore that is where my spirit seemed to be."

Again I punched my friend, but this time with a long stick, and when he turned sharply about, I said:

"I did not jab you, it was the stick. But the stick," I explained, "had become the instrument of my will; therefore my will got expressed at a greater distance from my body. The stick was really the lengthening of my finger."

I then told them of the man in Virginia who was talking by wireless telephone. It is reported that when he spoke, one man in Paris, and another in Honolulu, replied at the same time, as if he were in both places: