Faith is often represented or defined as believing something without evidence. Some think it refers to belief in spite of evidence. In other words, faith is believing something just because, even when the evidence says otherwise. This kind of representation is typically found in writings that are opposed to "religion," specifically that which comes from the Bible. However, that is a misrepresentation.
"Faith" should be thought of as "trust." It is not merely belief. Belief might just be "mental assent." But Faith goes much deeper than this. It is trusting that something is true, and includes a willingness to live by that trust. That does not mean, however, that one has no good reasons to trust that something is true. To say that one has faith that God is, and that God rewards those who seek Him (Heb. 11:6), is not to say that one accepts these things as true without any solid reasons for doing so. I have faith in my wife. I trust her in every way. Does this mean that I have no good reasons for this? Does this mean that my faith in her is baseless, without evidence? Hardly. In fact, it would be foolish of me not to trust her, especially after she has demonstrated time and again that such a faith is warranted. Again, the point is that faith is not baseless. Rather, it is a proper response to reasonable evidence. Who could rationally argue that my faith in my wife does not coincide with reason? This kind of faith is reasonable; and I propose this is the same type of faith one can exercise when it comes to God and the Bible as God’s word. This is not to say that faith must be based upon scientific demonstration. I accept by faith that my mom really is "mom," though I've never asked for scientific proof. If there is a reasonable basis upon which I can say that I trust in someone or something as true, then that is enough. When it comes to the existence of God, for example, for many it is enough that they can look at the creation and know that there is a Creator. This is not belief without evidence, for the evidence is all around us. The heavens are telling the glory of God.
Some, however, need more convincing. Of course, if one decides that there is no God, or that the Bible cannot be true, then no amoun of evidence will convince this person otherwise until there is a change of attitude (from closed-mindedness to open-mindedness). This is one of the reasons that the question of, "What are you prepared to accept as evidence of the truth of God?" must be answered. The idea is to get one to look deep inside him/herself and see if the necessary sincerity and honesty is there.
The bible states that which hinders an individual from "seeing" truth. In 2 Thess. 2:10 we read of those who are deceived by Satan because they refused to have a love for truth.
Earlier in John 3:17-21 Jesus taught that His teachings could not be "seen" because men had a love for darkness. This prevented them from 'coming to the light'. The failure was not in Jesus' ability to explain, for if anyone could have caused the truth of God clear, would it not have been the Lord Himself? No, the fault was not in the seed, but in the ground. A closed mind simply cannot be given ample evidence.
Some who say, "prove it to me" may have already decided that it cannot be so proved, so arguments fall on deaf ears. If one needs more convincing, then he/she will at least have to be open to the question. I do not suppose that I can argue one into faith who is not open to the possibilities.
But when one is not open, we must ask, is that person showing a reasonable attitude? In other words, who is being reasonable? The one who is open to the possibilities, or the one who has decided before looking at the evidence that it cannot be true?
We all have faith in something. We think of faith as a religious word, but we all exercise faith every day in many matters. I have faith that my car will start. I have faith in the bank into which I put my money. I trust that this computer will allow me to finish this article. You see, faith is not inherently religious. It is just a trust that we have that things will be, or will continue to be, a certain way for us. This doesn’t mean that it always is, in terms of the practical world. It just means that we live our lives by trust. The question is, on the grander scale, what is the proper faith by which to live our lives?
Even scientists operate by faith. For example, a scientist has faith that his/her senses are giving proper information about the world, even though such a presupposition cannot be proved by the scientific method (without begging the question). The scientific method itself is based upon assumptions that cannot be proved by the scientific method. Yet, there is a reasonable basis upon which the method operates.
Likewise, a Christian’s faith in God is reasonable. It is not just a baseless assumption that there is a God, or that the Bible is true. Some accept these things without needing a lot of argument, but that does not make it unreasonable. If one thinks that more evidence is warranted, then fine. There is plenty of it out there. In this case, it will serve to solidify faith, and perhaps remove some of the stumbling blocks that stand in the way of biblical faith.
There is not a person in this world who does not live by some kind of faith. The question is, which faith is the best one by which to live?