I commend your open mind and lack of arrogance. It takes a truly humble individual to conclude that absolute certainty is unattainable. But if you are so willing to listen, I will share my perspective with you.

There are, in my view, two major consderations in a discussion on God. (1) Purpose, and (2) Ethical relevance.

The concept of religion itself is an antiquated and obsolete form of existential observation. We all hold a perspective on existence, be we agnostic, atheist, or devout. Therefore, set aside the notion of "religion" for just a moment. I would argue that the atheist shares more in common with the Christian or the Jew than he would prefer to admit. The only difference is the absence of organization in the observance of the atheist's perspective. Despite this, atheists share with spiritualists the concept of purpose and ethical relevance. These are the two overriding concepts in any existential perspective, regardless of name or origin.

First consider purpose. To the atheist, Man is both the highest order of known intellect and the equal of animals. From this viewpoint, the Atheist finds that his only prupose is hat which he himself chooses. This purpose may be a selfish one or it may be selfless. The concepts of "Good" and "Evil" are merely crafted from human imagination and relevant only in the selfish ambition of a symbiotic mutually gratifying civilization. In other words, civilization itself and its series of behavioral tradeoffs only function so long as there is an individual benefit to those within the society. When society ceases to be mutually rewarding, the individual agent of society may select an anti-social self-gratifying behavior with no feelings of guilt. Again, the purpose of the individual is that which the individual selects. Thus, an individual may choose to allow himself the "losing end" of a social role in order to benefit others. This provides an intrinsic reward rather than an extrinsic material benefit.

However, I would argue that self-determined purpose is ultimately empty purpose. The breat that you take today will matter no more than the last breath of your life. Your actions, choices, and the consequences are thus rendered irrelevant in this environment. There can be no satisfaction because ultimately you will die and you may well have never lived- you are worthless in the scope of time eternal. Your thoughts, dreams, loves, ambitions, relationships are all without any true purpose other than a brief goal to entertain your shallow and callous mind.

Now consider ethical relevance. I already mention the futile irrelevance of morality since "Good" and "Evil" exist only so long as one is willing to play a symbitotic role in society. Proponents of atheistic ethical philosophy rely on the concepts of utilitarianism, ehtical relativism, and Kantian theory. Utilitarianism argues that decision should be made which affect the most good for the largest amount of people, ex: If murdering one human will save the lives of two people, then it is an ethically acceptable proposition. Under moral relativism, the only justification for behavioral modification is that which the culture deeems appropriate, ex: Mayan human sacrifice is perfectly acceptable because the Mayan culture deems it so. Finally, Kant proposed the humans should be treated as ends themselves rather than simply means to an end, ex: In other words, propositions to utilize a human being as a sacrifice are unacceptable because the human life cannot be treated as an object of barter. While each of these theories alone provides us with a guide for ethical decision making, they all ultimately fail because there exists no ultimate moral authority. It relates back to the lack of purpose in human life and the inherent fact that ethics is ultimately futile and irrelevent.

God fills these voids by providing both purpose to humanity and ethical guidance, linked in one relationship. The failing of "religion" is in the claimed monoploy over superiority of perspective. As an eclectic, I find that all religions have equal universal principles which are found in their doctrine and interpretation. The difficulty is in removing the myth and legend and rooting to the intent. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and even Hindusism all offer a single God be he Yaweh, Allah, or Brahman. Buddhism teaches us that suffering can be avoided by abandoning desire, as does the Torah in the book of Job, as does Jesus's teaching on the perils of materialistic desire, and as does the Qu'ran in the celebration of Ramadan and the importance of the fast. In each and every existential perspective embracing a higher power, purpose is found in our relationships; first with God and secondly with each other. Why is this?

This is the relationship between Purpose and ethical relevance. I have gone on at length on this topic in previous threads. If you wish, I'll dig them up for you.