On this SPAG thing... I feel like this only has significance if it is an unconscious process.... I believe in god. I don't really think believing in a Bad god is of much use.
Unless, of course, God really is bad. In that case, believing in a bad god is just accepting the truth, and there are plenty of good reasons to accept the truth. Accepting that god doesn't exist is much the same.
If you accept that the books describing a single deity are infused with the thoughts and ideas of the cultures who wrote them, the only thing you can say is probably true is the base message.
Actually, that's not necessarily true. Another thing you could possibly say is that the base message is the one that appeals to the most people, and therefore has the best chance at survival over other messages. The base message doesn't have to be true at all... all it has to be is believed.
I found that to be that god loves us and wants us to treat each other lovingly and respectably... I found that to be a pretty reasonable aditude for god to have, and as I said if one cannot know the true nature of god no sense in not giving god the benefit of the doubt.
The message that god loves us and wants us to treat each other lovingly comes from the people who teach you that. It doesn't come from observation of reality. It can't. It only takes a few moments of observation to see that.
I disagree that god deserves the benefit of the doubt, however. Coming from your position, I can see why you think he does, but if you start with the belief that god is good and that he loves us, how can you ever allow new information to change your mind about whether or not he is worthy of worship or even worthy of defending? Can't you see how that would be a perfect barrier against any sort of realization that your starting premise - that god is good - is wrong?
What evidence do you have that god loves us? What would evidence against such a position even look like to you?