Statesboro, GA, USA
I think our impasse Essorant, amounts to this: One may always (with some level of plausibility) propose that God is no more than an artistic sum of human characteristics ... and yet humanity itself implores an explanation. Remember that God, according to Monotheism, is the maker of the world and human beings. If you want to say that God is a montage of human attributes, fine. But you are landed right back in the problem of origin. Why the human attributes that you find so "worthy" to begin with? Where did they come from? Impersonal blind nature? Nature itself raises questions. Why is nature "rational" in the sense that it is strangely apprehended by the human cortex, as if distant edifices of mathematical grandeur (like a rainbow) were always meant to relate to the mind and retinas of a guy named Kevin. Do you find that this is a strange correspondence? How can our brains know something about something lightyears away and be fairly certain that they do? Why does your brain reason and perceive along the same pythagorean lines, as hydrogen gas in deep space? The Anthropic principle in nature suggests a reason larger than our own, which also corresponds to our own.
For these reasons, Traditional Theism makes more sense than the "man made God" theory, for it at least addresses the serendipities I've mentioned of a universe and a humanity which seem at least partly rational.
Ron is right to point out that even your own existence is only confirmed by a disjointed aggregate of mental impressions of a scant few people, relatively speaking, and thus is entirely an article of faith. A believable one, in my estimate, though I've never seen you.