what is faith? faith, said paul, "is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." this is a faith that sensible men avoid. the man of reason may have faith, but it will be a faith according to knowledge, and not a faith that dispenses with knowledge. he believes that the sun will rise to-morrow, that the ground will remain firm under his feet, that the seasons will succeed each other in due course, and that if he tills the ground he will reap the harvest. but his belief in these things is based upon experience; his imagination extends the past into the future, and his expectations are determined by his knowledge. the future cannot indeed be demonstrated; it can only be predicted, and prediction can never amount to an absolute certitude; yet it may amount to a height of probability which is practically the same thing. religious faith, however, is something very different. it is not belief based on evidence, but the evidence and the belief in one. the result is that persons who are full of faith always regard a demand for evidence as at once a heresy and an insult. their faith seems to them, in the language of paul, the very substance of their hopes; and they often talk of the existence of god and the divinity of christ as being no less certain than their own existence.
properly speaking, faith is trust. this involves a wide latitude beyond our knowledge. if we trust a friend, we have faith in him, and we act upon that sentiment. but we are sometimes deceived, and this shows that our faith was in excess of our knowledge. sometimes, indeed, it is quite independent of knowledge. we trust people because we like them, or because they like us. this infirmity is well known to sharpers and adventurers, who invariably cultivate a pleasing manner, and generally practise the arts of flattery. the same principle holds good in religion. it was sagaciously remarked by hume that we ought to suspect every agreeable belief. the mass of mankind, however, are not so fastidious or discriminating. on the contrary, they frequently believe a thing because it is pleasant, and for no other reason. how often have we heard christian advocates prove the immortality of the soul to the complete satisfaction of their auditors by simply harping on man's desire to live for ever! nay, there have been many great "philosophers" who have demonstrated the same doctrine by exactly the same means.
religious faith, to borrow a definition from chambers's dictionary, is usually "belief in the statement of another." there are a few mystics who profess to hold personal intercourse with god, but the majority, of mankind take their religion on trust. they believe it because they were taught it, and those who taught them believed it for the very same reason. when you trace back the revelation to its beginning, you always find that it is derived from men who lived a long time ago, or who perhaps never lived at all. mohammed vouches for the koran. yes, but who will vouch for mohammed?
thomas paine well said that what is revelation to the man who receives it, is only hearsay to the man who gets it at secondhand. if anyone comes to you with a message from god, first button your pockets, and then ask him for his credentials. you will find that he has none. he can only tell you what someone else told him. if you meet the original messenger, he can only cry "thus saith the lord," and bid you believe or be damned. to such a haughty prophet one might well reply, "my dear sir, what you say may be true, but it is very strange. return to the being who sent you and ask him to give you better credentials. his word may be proof to you, but yours is no proof to me; and it seems reasonable to suppose that, if god had anything to tell to me, he could communicate personally to me as well as to you."
in ancient times the prophets who were thus accosted worked miracles in attestation of their mission; but our modern prophets have no such power, and therefore they can scarcely claim our belief. if they ask us why we reject what they tell us on the authority of the ancient prophets who possessed greater powers, we reply that what is a miracle to those who see it is only a story to those who hear it, and that we prefer to see the miracle ourselves. telling us that a man rose from the dead is no reason why we should believe that three times one are one; it is only proving one wonder by another, and making a fresh draft on our credulity at every step in the demonstration.
there are men who tell us that we should live by faith. but that is impossible for all of us. the clergy live by faith, yet how could they do so if there were not others to support them? knaves cannot exist without dupes, nor the church without subscribers.
living by faith is an easy profession. living on faith, however, is more arduous and precarious. elijah is said to have subsisted on food which was brought him by inspired ravens, but there are few of god's ministers willing to follow his example. they ask god to give them their daily bread, yet they would all shrink with horror from depending on what he sends them.
