Now, those who depend only upon an instinctive feeling may be placed in the very painful position of seeing no answer to the objections brought against them.  What is said may seem plausible; it may even seem true, and is it right for a man to oppose what appears to be the truth?  One may be shocked and pained, and may feel that he who makes the assault cannot be right, and yet may be forced to admit that a relentless logic, or what presents itself as such, has every appearance of establishing the repellent truth that robs one of one’s dearest possession.  The situation is an unendurable one; it is that of the man who guards a treasure and recognizes that there is no lock on the door.

Surely, if there is error mixed with truth in our religious beliefs, it is desirable that we should have some way of distinguishing between the truth and the error.  And if our beliefs really have a foundation, it is desirable that we should know what that foundation is, and should not be at the mercy of every passer-by who takes the notion to throw a stone at us.  But these desirable ends, it seems clear, cannot be attained without reflection.

77.  THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION.—­The reflection that busies itself with these things results in what is called the philosophy of religion.  To show that the name is an appropriate one and that we are concerned with a philosophical discipline, I shall take up for a moment the idea of God, which most men will admit has a very important place in our conception of religion.

Does God exist?  We may feel very sure that He does, and yet be forced to admit that the evidence of His existence is not so clear and undeniable as to compel the assent of every one.  We do not try to prove the existence of the men we meet and who talk to us.  No one thinks of denying their existence; it is taken for granted.  Even the metaphysician, when he takes up and discusses the question whether we can prove the existence of any mind beyond our own, does not seriously doubt whether there are other minds or not.  It is not so much what we know, as how we know it, that interests him.

But with the existence of God it is different.  That men do not think that an examination of the evidence can be dispensed with is evident from the books that are written and lectures that are delivered year after year.  There seem to be honest differences of opinion, and we feel compelled to offer men proofs—­to show that belief is reasonable.

How shall we determine whether this world in which we live is such a world that we may take it as a revelation of God?  And of what sort of a Being are we speaking when we use the word “God”?  The question is not an idle one, for men’s conceptions have differed widely.  There is the savage, with a conception that strikes the modern civilized man as altogether inadequate; there is the thoughtful man of our day, who has inherited the reflections of those who have lived in the ages gone by.