I've noticed there are two different ways the word "faith" is used.

First, there's a religious sense, in which many people -- both religious and non-religious -- seem to be saying faith is when you believe in something for which there is no evidence at all, or even contrary to available evidence. In this sense, faith preceeds reason and evidence.

Then there's the more typical use of the word, which we use for every single other topic in life except religion. In this usage, faith is always based on solid evidence, but simply falls short of "proof". In this usage, faith simply follows reason and evidence, but is willing to grant it one step further.

Let's say someone told me my wife was having an affair. I respond by saying: "No, I have faith in her that she'd never do that." Do I mean I have no evidence about her? No: I probably have years of experience with her. To the contrary, I know, from my experiences and evidence, that's the kind of thing she'd be very, very unlikely to do.

Yet it's true I cannot absolutely prove she is faithful, unless I'm having a PI trail her (which would imply I didn't have much faith in her at all). This kind of "faith" refers to a reasonable extrapolation from available information -- when we can't yet know either answer for sure.

Here's another use: An investor says he has "faith" in the stock market. Does he mean that it is a blind belief it is good, even though there's no evidence? Does he mean, by sheer force of will, he overcomes a total lack of evidence, or even evidence to the contrary?

Or does he mean he has solid historical evidence that long-term investors have almost always made money in the stock market in the past, even in the Great Depression -- and thus he thinks this is a good bet, even though he can't absolutely prove what will happen next year?

So I have "faith" in God. But it's not a blind kind of will-to-believe thing. It's simply the only reasonable conclusion I feel I could come to, given the evidence that I've encountered -- the second kind.

I don't think there are any definitive proofs for the theistic God. So, of course, let's admit theists believe in something they can't prove. But are there any proofs that there is no God out there? No, not that way either. So any opinion on God must involve a bit of "faith", though the average atheist, in my experience, gets really annoyed when you point that out.

(Hence the word games they've stared playing in recent years.)

I was raised as a Christian, but at some point I wondered if it was really right. I mean -- with all the religions out in the world (not to mention ones people have never imagined) -- what were the odds the one I happened to be born into was true?

So I embarked on a long quest, and specifially considered changing my belief to atheism, which seemed the most reasonable alternative. And, after all, atheistic scientists like Carl Sagan seemed to come off as rather smug about it, so I reasoned they must have known something I didn't. And I loved science...

What I found astounded me: To make a long story short, I found that atheists, and atheistic arguments, were often deeply irrational. As I was taking classes in formal reasoning at the time, and as I knew genuine theistic beliefs, I found their straw men fallacies and circular arguments easy to spot. And often, as I note here, they often didn't even respond to obvious counter-answers, which earned them even more demerit points.

Then, in comparison, I read some C.S. Lewis, Josh McDowell, and others, which, although I sometimes disagreed with at points, I found to be much more lucid. And there was a marked difference in tone: Lewis would simply answer the critics' various points. But those critics often came across as deeply insulting and angry towards their opponents. Irrational + angry = not good stuff.

And most anti-theistic arguments were simply refutations of various Catholic beliefs and actions, which even I, as a theist, disbelieved or disapproved.

So I never did see an absolute "proof" of God's existence, nor a good reason to become an atheist. (In fact, I never figured out how atheists were quite so sure they'd proven a negative. Nor did they seem to have anything non-circular to say to justify that stance.) I just noticed that the Christian apologists appeared to be playing straighter than their atheistic critics. So I went back to the side which seemed far more intellectually honest, and seemed to have better evidence, even though the evidence for both sides fell short of "proof".

Besides all this, from what I knew about the universe (I'd been an avid fan of science, even reading about quantum physics and black holes in the seventh grade), it seemed grossly improbable that anything existed at all: the subjective impression the evidence gives me is that of a mind behind it all.

And I also had a few supernatural experiences around that time.

So from my point of view, I'm a theist because that actually seemed to be the position which required less faith, and seemed to explain far more things.

So, while I respect those who do so, I myself never answer critical arguments by referring to faith. My arguments are almost always based in things that I believe anyone, from any faith, should be able to see. Because of my own experiences, I expect that evidence should be able to persuade reasonable people.

I know that I might be unusual this way: I have brothers and sisters who have always believed and never went through my own questions, and perhaps that's even better. In a way, I'm the Thomas who needed to examine the evidence for Jesus's crucifixion. But Jesus didn't fail to answer Thomas either: he was willing to go there if Thomas needed that.

And that can be helpful too, because there are other sceptics out there who need to approach it that way too, and we can honestly testify as to the questions we've asked and the answers we've found. The parts of the body aren't "better" than one another: they each simply play a different role.

So God bless you all -- and if you have any questions, you're more than welcomed to ask. I can't claim to know all the answers, but I'll at least try to be honest with you. Take care, friends.