The point now that I would like to make is this: there is no use of substituting words or interpretations of words from a human standpoint. In other words, if we say, “God is not power.” don’t make the mistake of in the next breath of saying, “Well, Joel said God is power. so we will accept his view,” because then you put yourself back in the position of accepting probably another concept of God and then find that may not be God. And so here is how we come to our study. We refrain from the use of labels, judgments, in this wise: Let me say to myself, and you say to yourself “God is.” Now, that is not a concept, is it? That is definite. There’s no one here that doubts that God is. You can’t doubt that God is if you are here, because you have to account for yourself in some way. And no matter how you account for it, something higher than human expression did it because even if we were to accept human conception, there always is the question, “Well how did the seed get there?” or “What turns the seed into a full grown child?” And so, no matter how materialistic the concept of our existence is, somewhere you must acknowledge that a power operated or something operated, first of all to produce a seed. Second of all, it had the intelligence enough to know how to bring the two seeds together; then, thirdly enough, to act upon the seed and take it from a seed stage to its full-grown infant stage. And of course, you have to further acknowledge that in some way some power raised that tiny infant up to adulthood.
No matter what materialism embraces one’s thoughts on the subject of creation, even human creation, there must at some time come the realization, “Ah, yes, but something invisible produced that which was visible. Something acted upon that which was visible to produce the effect.” And once we get to that we have acknowledged God by whatever name you wish to give it. You can call it nature if you like. Call it anything you like, but it is deific. It is that which is above the human.
Now, once you look upon yourself and say, “Ah, yes, I am,” or you look out upon this universe and see the stars, the sun, the moon, the oceans, this wonderful earth, the animals upon it, inwardly, regardless of reason, inwardly, intuitively there comes the realization, “Ah, yes, God is.” Now, if we have within our own being an acceptance of that truth that God is, we have gone as far as we can go without creating concepts. That is, without creating God in our own image and likeness, pursue our own idea of what God is. Let us be satisfied with the truth that God is. And then go to no man for any description or any definition or any defining of what God is. Let us now agree God is. Then as we turn in meditation we can say to God, “Alright God, Thou art. I know that because I am.” But now, what art Thou, who art Thou, where art Thou, why art Thou? What is the function of God?” Now you may address your question to God Itself. You know there’s a God now. Inwardly the feeling has come, the conviction has come, God is.
All right, now let us turn to God for our teaching and let us see how God defines or reveals Itself to us. Well, let us say that—I’m speaking now only for myself—let us say that in my inner meditation God has revealed Itself as power, and probably in my ignorance I set about trying to use that power and then found that it wasn’t that kind of power. I had to go back all over again and then have It define Itself to me as this power which is—not which is used, a power which is. Let us say creative power. That It made all that was made in the beginning and all that It made was good. Let us say then that to me has come this realization that God is and God’s creation is and God’s creation is good. It has nothing to do with you remember, this is an individual unfoldment within me.
But you come to me and recognize that, or have been told that I have something, and so you say, “Will you give me help?” And I say, “Yes,” and then as I turn within I know that I can’t use God in your behalf. I know that I can’t swing God around and have him do my will for you. As a matter of fact I don’t even know what’s good for you. I have to even leave that with God. And so, as I turn within, with the realization that God is; that God is the creative principle of all that is, that is the nature of God, the creative principle, I Am, so that I know that which is God must have created me. I know that you exist, and therefore I know that God created you.
Now, I sit there and I realize not only God is, but you are. I do not deny your illness, or your unemployment, or your unhappy relationship. I don’t deny that. Nor do I affirm that you are spiritual or perfect or good. Oh, no. I affirm nothing about you except one thing: You exist. That I know because God exists, and God exists infinitely and therefore you must be part of that infinity. God exists and you exist at the standpoint of God. That’s all I know. As I ponder that idea, as I stand within my own being, in this realization: God is; you are. I put no labels upon you: I do not call you spiritual; I do not call you mortal; I do not call you perfect; I do not deny that you are sick. I put no labels upon you. I affirm nothing about you. I deny nothing about you. I know only one thing: God is; I am. God is; you are.
Now into that vacuum which I have created by withdrawing judgment or labels, all of a sudden an inflow comes to me defining that which you are. It may then say to me, “This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased.” Oh, that’s good enough for me. I’m not judging by appearances anyhow. That’s good enough for me, if the father says to me, “This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased.” I’m satisfied with that treatment, or the Father may say, “Ah, I am with thee, I am present,” or “I will never leave thee or forsake thee.” That’s meant as much for you as for me because God has no favorites. Whatever’s true of me must be universally true, or it would not be true.
And so whatever comes to me in my unfoldment is the treatment. I haven’t given a treatment. But neither have I humanly denied the error and affirmed the truth. I have just refused to put any labels, any judgments upon this universe. I have been asked at times where there was a drought, “Can’t you pray for rain?” No, because I can’t know that there was a drought. I don’t know what there is. I only know God is. If God is, that’s enough to know, and in knowing that a flood of something came in, and in two cases at least, we had a very quick rain. Now that was not by acknowledging an absence of rain. To him that hath not shall be taken away even the little bit that he has. So you acknowledge a drought, and you’ll have two. Nor was it stupidly, metaphysically saying, “Oh there is an abundance of rain.” No, no. I can’t insult my intelligence that way. I just cannot look at a mortal and say, “Oh, there is pure spiritual being.” That’s not a treatment to me, that’s an insult to my God-given intelligence.
I would rather say, “I don’t know what’s there. Perhaps my vision is blurred.” I may be seeing God erroneously or Christ erroneously, but I am not going to judge. One thing I acknowledge, God is. That’s all. Now in the acknowledgment of that is, you are seeing this: that if you say God is power and you have some preconceived idea of what power is you may be wrongly meaning God. You may be expecting a God that which cannot come forth. If through your meditation, if through your pondering God reveals Itself to you as power, It will also define for you the nature of the power which God is.
It is in this same way that the Hindus have a three-faced God, and for a long, long time that was a mysterious idea to me. A God that creates, a God that maintains and a God that destroys: That’s the Hindu three-faced God. Well it’s a little bit easier to understand God, the creative principle, and also God, the maintaining principle, but this God, the destroying principle seems strange, and why does it seem strange? Because we have certain preconceived ideas of what destroying means, what destruction means. And we always think of destruction as the destruction of something good. And for that reason, when we hear of a destroying God, we become very uncomfortable.
Now, as we turn to God for a defining of God, the destroyer, what do we hear within ourselves? What do we learn? That God is destructive to all unlike Itself. That God is the destroyer of false concepts. God is the destroyer of false belief. Ah, in that sense our God the destroyer becomes a wonderful idea.