Paul said faith is the belief in things unseen. Perhaps for our day of emphasis on feelings, we should say that faith is the belief in things unfelt.
I consider myself a Christian agnostic. I do not know. I faithe. This is more trust and perseverance and reliance while not knowing, than any sort of knowledge as that is nowadays "understanded of the people."
The only knowledge as such that can be derived from my faith is from raggedy-ass reflection on my "faithing." And the reflections aren't worth too much. They don't really support my faithing, and sometimes take me away from it, to stand outside it and reflect on it. I am coming to discern that it's a waste of time. I follow Aquinas's remark about straw.
On the other hand, if there is a knowing in faith, it resembles more the knowing in a sexual sense than in an intellectual one. And that kind of knowing is way obsolete from being understanded of the people. It is technical vocabulary of Christians, and not shared except as a snigger by our contemporaries, in great part.
It is this odd technical speech that isolates us from the cultured despisers, the educated, the academics, whom R M Benson called the "educated, or so-called educated classes." When we use it, we are preaching to the choir.
We really do need to learn to speak to our contemporaries in their own language. And we need to employ the strongest scepticism they have to offer us to look at our faith and practice before we can speak to them plainly of our faith.
I am a fan of the Jesus Seminar. They do precisely this to the Scriptures, and as many of them as I have known, are doing so out of their own faiths looked at as skeptically as possible. Frankly, I admire their courage in asking the question, what we can say with critical certainly about the Jesus of history and the Christian Scriptures. Their faiths may be stronger than mine.
Maybe once we get our heads around this a bit further, we can go and tell the good news to those who need it as much as we ourselves need it.