Very few people out the seven billion on this planet came up with the God notion by themselves. The vast majority are believers because they were told about it by someone else, or read about it, but mostly told it. A very large number of those, including me, were told that they'd better believe it under pain of sanctions. Hundreds of millions are told that public demurral could lead to death. In my case, it was hell fire even if I neglected to take part in regular worship, let alone failed to believe. I understand that slightly more enlightened attitudes are afoot these days (though for every newly-enlightened one I can show you half a dozen unenlightened ones that haven't budged). The evidence for God, or that religion is right, is not evidence at all. St Bernadette is not evidence. It could not be corroborated. When someone says something outrageous to you, you don't take them at their word, even if they're innocent little shepherdesses. The sky shimmering at Knock or moving statues are not evidence. The Bible is not evidence because, even if you you accept the authorship of the writings, what the authors wrote cannot, in most cases, be corroborated. In fact, the four Gospels, the "best" selection of a large bunch of gospels most of which are suppressed, are replete with inconsistencies. The Immaculate Conception is, in effect, an edict from the Vatican, one of the infamous ex cathedra pronouncements. It is actually a perfectly ludicrous proposition that casts the Church into disrepute. It certainly isn't evidence just because a pope said so. Great cathedrals (which I love), high masses with grand vestments, chanting and incense, are not evidence, imposing though they are. That would be like saying that the Mayday parades of impressive weaponry in Moscow were evidence that the USSR was the greatest nation. Prayers and hymns, whatever their aesthetic value, are not evidence. Papal speeches on Easter Sunday calling for world peace are very fine, but they don't amount to a hill of beans in the evidence stakes.   Looking all around you at the marvels of nature (always the opening gambit of my good friend, the local Jehovah's Witness), and claiming that there can be only one conclusion, a creator, is not only seeing evidence for God where there isn't any, but is also a complete dereliction of the human intellect.

I really try, honest. I don't accept anything without evidence, not even from Hitchens and Dawkins (they are usually careful to support any claims, mind you). I always read Watchtower and Awake! cover to cover and am currently perusing the Jehovah's Witnesses' book on what the Bible really teaches. The last time he came round we walked round my garden chatting about stuff and I gave him two big bags of apples. I don't care what people believe and I know that what diminishes people is the stupid things that they say or do, not what exists in the privacy of their minds. All I say is be careful who you pass it on to. You have no monopoly on the truth, in spite of your prayers and hymns riddled with certainties, and neither do I. You may not have noticed it, but I don't start threads on religion or atheism. I just react.