Problem: Let us suppose, for the sake of argument that "God Proofs" do not work to establish God's existence.
Does this matter? Logically it does not follow that God does not exist, but only that a specific line of reasoning is faulty or flawed in some way. Shouldn't "faith" or a non-rational element be just as important as a purely rational demonstration (which is like a math proof in a void)?
Many folks are religious and do not care about proofs. On the other hand, some nonreligious types, like Bertrand Russell, care a great deal about logic proofs.