[Racehorse]

Mathematical proof of his existence (if I could have understood it, a highly doubtful proposition) would have done no good.

As mathematicians go, I've always been partial to Blaise Pascal.  He would agree with you, I think.

Let us then examine the point and say: "Either God exists, or he does not." But which of the alternatives shall we choose? Reason cannot decide anything. Infinite chaos separates us. At the far end of this infinite distance a coin is being spun which will come down heads or tails. How will you bet? Reason cannot determine how you will choose, nor can reason defend your position of choice.

This is the famous wager.  No god?  Nothing lost.  But, if God does exist, then having the faith to believe gets you an infinite reward.  Pascal chose to believe.

[King Prout]

Pascal starts with an artificially truncated base set of Given variables. His Outcome combinations are thus similarly artificially truncated. Ludicrously so.

I would be deeply pleased if Pascal's Wager were forever abandoned by those seeking to offer Grounds For Belief. It is silly.

[Dr.Deth]

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.