ng it. Why is this? I think that the
principal reason is that they are constituting themselves the judges of
the truth; they first of all lay down certain rules which God must obey
if He wishes them to believe in Him! They insist on having, before they
will believe, a kind of evidence that is impossible of attainment. They
assert that this or that is impossible, and the other thing incredible.
They partially ascertain the laws that govern the material universe, and
they deny to the Maker of the universe the power to act otherwise than
in accord with so much of the order of nature as they have discovered!
They deny to God the sort of personal action in this world that they
themselves constantly exercise.

The method is not a method that can be hopeful of success. And it is
worth noting that it is not a method that these same men followed in
their investigations of the natural world. They have not accumulated
information about natural law by first laying down rules as to how
natural law must act, and refusing to listen to any evidence which does
not fall in with these rules: rather, they have set themselves to
observe how nature does act, and then deduced rules from their
observation. Why not pursue the same method in religion? Why not in an
humble spirit observe how God does act? Why start by saying, "Miracles
do not happen?" Why reject as incredible the Virgin Birth and the
Resurrection? Why not get a bigger notion of God than that of a
mechanician running a machine, and think of Him as a Person dealing with
persons? The relation of persons cannot be mechanical or predetermined;
they are and must be free and spontaneous: they have their origin, not
in the pressure of invariable law but in the impulse of love.

Nor is the search for Jesus that is inspired by mere curiosity likely
to be a success. There are many people who are curious about religion,
and they want to know why we believe thus and so; and particularly why
we act as we do. Why do you keep this day? What do you mean by this
ceremony? Do you think that it is wrong to do this or that? Such people
wander about observing; but their observation we understand is the
observation of an idler who does not expect to be influenced by what he
observes, but only to be amused. These are they who run after the latest
thing in heresy, the newest thing in thought. What is observable about
them is that they never seriously contemplate doing anything themselves.
They are like