Suppose then that not only Socrates and all great religious reformers and founders of religious systems both before and after him were similarly stricken with mental disease, but that similar phenomena had occurred in the case of all scientific discoverers such as Galileo, Newton, Darwin, &c.—­supposing all these men to have declared that their main ideas had been communicated by subjective sensations as of spoken language, so that all the progress of the world’s scientific thought had resembled that of the world’s religious thought, and had been attributed by the promoters thereof to direct inspirations of this kind—­would it be possible to deny that the testimony thus afforded to the fact of subjective revelation would have been overwhelming?  Or could it any longer have been maintained that supposing a revelation to be communicated subjectively the fact thereof could only be of any evidential value to the recipient himself?  To this it will no doubt be answered, ’No, but in the case supposed the evidence arises not from the fact of their subjective intuition but from that of its objective verification in the results of science.’  Quite so; but this is exactly the test appealed to by the Hebrew prophets—­the test of true and lying prophets being in the fulfilment or non-fulfilment of their prophecies and ‘By their fruits ye shall know them.’

Therefore it is as absurd to say that the religious consciousness of minds other than our own can be barred antecedently as evidence, as it is to say that testimony to the miraculous is similarly barred.  The pure agnostic must always carefully avoid the ‘high priori road.’  But, on the other hand, he must be all the more assiduous in estimating fairly the character, both as to quantity and quality, of evidence a posteriori.  Now this evidence in the present case is twofold, positive and negative.  It will be convenient to consider the negative first.

The negative evidence is furnished by the nature of man without God.  It is thoroughly miserable, as is well shown by Pascal, who has devoted the whole of the first part of his treatise to this subject.  I need not go over the ground which he has already so well traversed.

Some men are not conscious of the cause of this misery:  this, however, does not prevent the fact of their being miserable.  For the most part they conceal the fact as well as possible from themselves, by occupying their minds with society, sport, frivolity of all kinds, or, if intellectually disposed, with science, art, literature, business, &c.  This however is but to fill the starving belly with husks.  I know from experience the intellectual distractions of scientific research, philosophical speculation, and artistic pleasures; but am also well aware that even when all are taken together and well sweetened to taste, in respect of consequent reputation, means, social position, &c., the whole concoction is but as high confectionery to a starving man.  He may cheat himself for a time—­especially if he be a strong man—­into the belief that he is nourishing himself by denying his natural appetite; but soon finds he was made for some altogether different kind of food, even though of much less tastefulness as far as the palate is concerned.