Posted on 01 May 2025, 18:01

Let’s let William James, the great American philosopher who died in 1910, get us started.  James in this life wrote with a flare unique to him, and it shows up in the hand and thinking of Jane Roberts, his medium. (Roberts was also the medium who brought us all those Seth books.) I am fairly confident this is really James speaking, as Roberts claims in a fascinating postscript.

“Nowhere have I encountered the furnishings of a conventional heaven, or glimpsed the face of God. On the other hand, certainly I dwell in a psychological heaven by earth’s standards, for everywhere I sense a presence that is well-intentioned, gentle yet powerful, and all-knowing. This seems to be a psychological presence of such stunning parts, however, that I can point to no one place and identify it as being there in contrast to being somewhere else. At the risk of understating, this presence seems more like a loving condition that permeates existence, and from which all existence springs.”

He goes on to say, “I am convinced, then, that this atmospheric presence is the creative medium from which all consciousness springs. . . . More, this light is surely the same that in another fashion lit the skies of Boston, dawned over the ocean, and splashed upon my study floor. But the quality of this knowing light differs, for it is alive with a loving intent that is instantly felt and experienced in a direct manner. There is no mistaking its intent, and again I am struck by the ambiguity of its vastly personal and impersonal aspects.”

James then points a condemning finger at the materialist who denies the world of spirit and leaves us feeling “alienated from God and man, alone in a chaotic universe, a creature accidentally thrown into existence like a live coal from some gigantic furnace, sizzling for an instant with the cracklings and rustlings of desire, but soon reduced to ash.”

James shows himself elsewhere in the book to be well acquainted with the science of the day, but he doesn’t hesitate to denounce the conventional wisdom: “To imagine that such an entire environment [earth] is an accident is, I see now, intellectually outrageous as well as emotionally sterile.” His view of atheistic materialism is typical of all the channeled accounts I’ve read. Few of them fail to warn us of its dangers to the human spirit.

Spirits don’t speak of seeing God in some celestial humanoid form. Many of them explicitly rule it out for beings at their level. Another medium, Vale Owens, channeling his mother, writes that “God is no more visibly present here than He is in earth life.” Another spirit, Frances Banks,  tells a spirit child that God is “Much too far away for us even to see Him. We’re not ready for his glory yet.”

When Drayton Thomas asks his deceased father if we will ever be able to see God, John Thomas answers, “I do not think that, as you develop and progress, you will wish to see Him. You will not wish to limit Him in that way. . . you would have brought Him down, made Him into a Being only one millionth part of that which He is.”

Imperator, a highly advanced spirit speaking through the gifted Anglican minister and medium Stainton Moses around 1880, shamed us with some tough talk: “But though we have not yet seen Him, we know yet more and more of the fathomless perfections of His nature through a more intimate acquaintance with His works. We know, as you cannot, the power and wisdom, the tenderness and love of the Supreme. We trace it in a thousand ways which you cannot see. We feel it in a thousand forms which never reach your lower earth. And while you, poor mortals, dogmatise as to His essential attributes, and ignorantly frame for yourselves a being like unto yourselves, we are content to feel and to know His power as the operation of a Wise and Loving and All-pervading Intelligence.…His government of the universe reveals Him to us as potent, wise, and good. His dealings with ourselves we know to be tender and loving.”

In my next blog we will look at more descriptions of God from the minds of the deceased—and from my own mind.

Stafford Betty, Professor of Religious Studies, CSUB, (ret) is the author of When Did You Ever Become Less by Dying?  and Heaven and Hell Unveiled. His latest novel, Guardians of the Afterworld is published by White Crow Books.
Stafford can be found at http://www.staffordbetty.com.

NOTE: If your browser will not accept a comment at this blog, send it by email to Jon at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) and he will post it.

Dear Stafford,

Speaking of God in the afterlife, I was recently reading in a remarkable, too little known volume, “Personality Survives Death” (c.1937, reprinted by White Crow Books), communicated by the discarnate Sir William Barrett – a physicist knighted for his contributions to science as well as a leading psychical researcher and SPR founding member who authored the first volume on deathbed visions – communicated over many sessions though Gladys Osborne Leonard – a trance medium thoroughly studied and vetted by the SPR over many years – to his wife, Dr. Florence Barrett.  In the excerpted passage, William Barrett recounts visiting higher levels, planes or spheres and the increased sense of Divinity received in so doing:

  “Do you remember I wasn’t always able to be as receptive as I should wish on earth? I sometimes wished I could open psychically – that I could be receptive to the other world – the higher plane. Latterly I was not always able to be passive enough in a receptive sense to take or absorb inspiration of that kind, but now I find myself able to open myself with ease to inspiration from a higher sphere than my own. The message comes – we all respond to it – we are gathered together with one mind, one idea. The fact that we have met together for a certain definite object is proof in itself that we are of one mind with regard to the object or information we are seeking, and when the call comes it does not come in the form of a voice or bell ringing. It is a mental call. One, or two, or three, or four may hear it first, before the others, according to the degree of their receptivity. We rise collectively, and those of us who have visited the higher planes before reach out to any persons who have not done so, just as you might hold out your hand in order to aid strangers along a difficult path or staircase to which they were not accustomed.
There is no feeling of danger or strangeness in it at all-none whatever; but we find ourselves ascending, the feeling is ascending. We may go to the plane immediately above our own, or even two or three planes above our own. It is undoubtedly an ascension in every sense in which we understand the word.
[Frederic] Myers said to me it was a reaching out, a travelling out rather than up. But I’m inclined to think that means the same thing, as the earth is undoubtedly round, and the planes that surround it are round too ; they are around it-outer rims so to speak­ so I suppose if one goes out, one goes up and vice versa ; but it is undoubtedly a travelling away from one’s accustomed sphere or condition.
As one travels out, one becomes aware of the different atmosphere.  That I cannot quite explain to you. It is an atmosphere in which the details of one’s surroundings do not seem so important as oneself, one’s thoughts, and one is aware of the oneness of things – the infinite; as one travels away from the planes of finite life, finite ambitions, finite imagination, one becomes more conscious of the infinite love, infinite power and understanding, and above all, one becomes absolutely conscious that everything is working toward the ultimate good of everybody.
The further one goes out or up, the more conscious one is of this, because one draws near or nearer to the infinite source of all good.” (c.1937, pp.166-8)

Another remarkable feature of “Personality Survives Death” that is germane to the topic of the present post on God and the afterlife is that the book is one of the very few sources in the discarnate literature to have any significant discussion of prayer or of spiritual practice more generally.  The following should be taken as Barrett’s views and not necessarily as authoritative.  In particular, I find his critique of formal prayer – while taking his point – to be somewhat slanted.  That quibble aside, there is much good sense in what he conveys.  It is the sort of general commentary and advice that should be commonplace in the discarnate literature yet somehow is not.  From the discarnate William Barrett:

“Since I passed over I found out that so much prayer is almost useless because it is done in a too formal way. Prayer should be made as simple as possible. A natural thought sent out to God is much better – than a stereotyped and set prayer performed at a stated time and therefore often given mechanically. We often forget what prayer is. It is talking to our Father – that is what prayer should be – asking for our Father’s guidance and help.  Much of so-called prayer is a request for gifts, for material advantages. That is wrong. But we may ask for enlightenment to prepare ourselves for good in our physical lives. I feel we may ask for that; we have been told we may ask for our daily bread which embraces all possible need, but we are not told to ask for tomorrow’s daily bread.  I feel the words ‘Give us this day our daily bread’ mean that we have to be satisfied with each day’s supplies, and we shall be given them if we ask simply and directly for them.
  I think you sometimes find yourself in a little difficulty in regard to prayer. Do not feel apologetic towards God if at times you cannot feel the sense of God and spiritual communion as you would wish to.  You can talk to God at any time, in the car, in the street, in a restaurant and in the country.  God is everywhere. He does not wish you to make great effort in order to provide what you may think a fitting place in which to speak to Him.
  Prayer is most powerful; it is almost our only way of opening ourselves to strength and wisdom. I know of no better way, and I am sure it would not matter what the trouble was, there would be some alleviation of it if you would open yourself to the source of strength and to the help that is never denied.
  We pray over here, but we pray naturally.
  Q: Do you pray without vision ?
  Yes, and no. It depends on what I am doing. Sometimes I find myself doing something for which I want help. I simply speak and ask for that help. But at other times I find I attain a remarkable degree of clairvoyance. As I lift my soul up in prayer true vision comes to me. I feel God, I understand God. I see all kinds of wonderful visions which in themselves lift and stimulate me.
  But often on the earth you have to pray blindly and as you say without vision, but sometimes that blind stumbling on the threshold of the spiritual world opens the gate and the vision comes when we least expect it. We may think we are praying without vision, but the very act of prayer will or should bring vision with it. I have seen many men begin to pray hopelessly, but they have prayed feeling ‘Is this thing any use? I cannot see anything or feel anything’; and yet the words of prayer rise from their lips, and though while they are praying they may feel nothing, afterwards peace comes, and after peace strength and inspiration. I have seen that again and again.
  Do not be afraid of worrying God; talk to Him all day if you want to. What father would complain of his children wanting to speak to him? Go on talking and vision will come, more strength and more vision.” (c.1937, pp.101-3)

All the best,

Paul

Dear Stafford,

The quote from the discarnate William James regarding the ‘atmospheric presence’ of the Divine is one of my favorites as well.  I do wonder, however, regarding your comment about discarnate individuals not “seeing God in some celestial humanoid form”, for their never having ‘seen’ God is only to be expected.  The Reality we are gesturing toward here is not a ‘person’, is not ‘anthropomorphic’, does not have a ‘body’, is not a ‘thing’ or ‘being’ that could in any wise be ‘seen’.  About the closest one might come is when Frances Banks, in “Testimony of Light”, describes her experience of the Divine Presence as an encounter with ‘Light’, as when she states at the end of her communications, “If there is a message in these writings it is the simple statement that all is Unity and that Unity is Light.”  The encounter or experience of the Divine presence as light is one common in the discarnate literature as well as in ‘terrestrial’ religious and mystical experience.

I do not, in saying this, mean to suggest that the understanding of ‘God’ that one finds in the discarnate literature is fully supportive in detail of any terrestrial religion.  This appears not to be the case.  Nevertheless, the general discarnate understanding of ‘God’ is very close to that found in the ‘classical theology’ of the Greek and Abrahamic traditions, as presented, for instance, in David Conway’s remarkable book “The Rediscovery of Wisdom: From Here to Antiquity in Quest of Sophia”  Or, to cite another touchstone, it is very close to the cross-traditional understanding of God presented in David Bentley Hart’s brilliant book “The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss.”  Or to cite a third, it accords very closely to the cross-traditional understanding of the perennial philosophy as articulated in Aldous Huxley’s classic book of that title, “The Perennial Philosophy”.

Given the choice of deciding, in dispassionately objective terms, whether the understanding of God as found in the discarnate literature accords more closely with atheistic secularity – which William James lambasts in your quoted passage as leaving man “alienated from God and man, alone in a chaotic universe, a creature accidentally thrown into existence like a live coal from some gigantic furnace, sizzling for an instant with the cracklings and rustlings of desire, but soon reduced to ash” – or with the best that traditional religions and philosophies have thought – which I would associate with the perennial philosophy (philosophia perennis) that Conway, Hart and Huxley are able expositors of – I think that it is inescapable to conclude that this discarnate understanding is completely divergent from the former while closely hewing to the latter.

This is true, and yet as the Catholic philosopher Peter Kreeft has noted, classical philosophical theology – what David Conway terms “the classical conception of philosophy” – is a kind of ‘minimal statement’ regarding what might be said of God.  One central point that it tends to miss is the love or beneficence that characterizes this Reality.  In this regard, a useful corrective to such philosophic formulations may be found in the private remembrance of Blaise Pascal, discovered sewn into his coat following his death: “The year of grace 1654, Monday, 23 November, day of St. Clement, Pope and Martyr. From about half-past ten in the evening until about half-past twelve, FIRE. God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob, not of the philosophers nor of the Wise. Assurance, joy, assurance, feeling, joy, peace…Just Father, the world has not known thee but I have known thee. Joy, joy, joy, tears of joy.”

The picture of love as the central motive and drawing force encountered in the afterlife is one that is shot through that literature, encountered at nearly every turn.  Dante, in his central concern for the nature and consequences of love, both human and Divine, seems to have, in the final line of his Commedia, penetrated to the heart of things when he writes of “the love that moves the sun and the other stars.”  One of the interesting things about juxtaposing your quoted passages from the discarnate William James and Imperator, to which could be added similar passages from the discarnate Frances Banks whom I quote from, is that they are very different figures and yet all speak, in their own particular ways, of the love and beneficence, there ‘at the heart of things’, they have discarnately encountered.

A final point: The inescapable and necessary conclusion regarding the above reflections is that the discarnate vision of the larger Reality, as taken in the main, is not something that stands alone, but rather is integrated with the broader cross-correlative ‘terrestrial’ vision of this same larger Reality that one finds across traditions in both their ‘mystical philosophy’ and mystical experience.

All the best,

Paul

I have a special feeling for William James as he had a beautiful summer residence in the small NH town where I reside. A few years ago , a local pastor arranged for scholars and students of James to come together in a weekend to celebrate his life.

Ann

Thanks for this Stafford.  And I look forward to part two.
Of course the Jane Roberts channeling is as profound as we’ve heard,
and I’m not about to challenge it.
How souls perceive the deity, both here and there, is a fascinating study.
It raises all kind of questions, the supreme deity, the secondary supportive deities,
the various prophets pointing their fingers in the direction of devotion, the philosophers
who reckon on the zen-like approach, - “the One and the ten thousand things”.
The reguar folks who are just relieved and happy to finally be in the paradise they’d heard
about but kinda doubted.  The narow minded judgemental righteous who are shocked to
see others not of their community enjoying the pleasures of heaven and not particularly
interested in all “this god stuff”.
It’s an endless discussion and one I am sure we here will be indulging in when we ‘pass over’.

gordon phinn
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

I have a special feeling for William James as he had a beautiful summer residence in the small NH town where I reside. A few years ago , a local pastor arranged for scholars and students of James to come together in a weekend to celebrate his life.

Ann

Stafford,
Well stated. I just finished reading Ross Douthat’s best-seller “Believe,” and in the review I left at Amazon I mentioned that once I have transitioned to whatever realm I have earned from my activities in this life and awakened there, I doubt that I will have a better understanding of God than I have now.  On second thought, I’m hoping it will be a little better, but I’m fairly certain that it will be well short of anything close to a full comprehension. 
Mike

Stafford,
Excellent article. I see your book Heaven and hell unveiled : updates from the world of spirit is on Internet Archive. Great background reading. The question of God is often asked of spirits with various responses. Different mediums connect to different spirits who are at various levels of knowledge. The bottom line is love. Most mediums connect with a love connection with only a few connecting to higher spirits. The trouble is that a solid platform of thinking has not emerged.  Books are often contradictory. As most people come to the world of afterlife communication from another religion, it is difficult to build a brand which is in agreement.

I recently acquired The Search for God by James F. Malcolm 1959. It is written for the Spiritualists with the seven principles at the rear of the book. The first principle is The Fatherhood of God. The book explains where our ideas of God come from, mainly the beliefs of different religions.

The spirits who contact are often eloquent in their descriptions of God. I think that Imperator had the best description but others are just as worthy.
I am looking forward to future articles and discussions,
Thanks
Bruce