Again, we can keep on creating GOD to fit our own perceptions or we can know and understand that GOD just is.
Just for a point of reference, there would be a lot of people who could say those same words, but would be totally convinced that you are the one creating God to fit your perception, while believing in a divine creator would be knowing and understanding that GOD just is.
I understand your objection to a person creating a "god" in their mind and then attempting to force that view on others (which I agree is something to be avoided and has very little value). But... there have been many people throuhout history who have felt that they have had personal interaction with an "other than natural" God (even when they would have denied him before), and this experience(s) is why they believe- not because of some philosophical or dogmatic mind-game.
I have no iron-clad philosophical proof of God's existance, so I am not attempting to give one here at all. But... from a skeptical (philosphical) point of view, I do feel obligated to point out that you seem to have ruled out the possibility that people have experienced a God outside themselves. Do you have any philosphical proof that denies their experiences as possible or valid? If not, then I think they are entitled to believe what those experiences led them to believe.
And to take it one step further, I also think that people should be given the dignity of being allowed to believe someone else's story of their experiences, and draw conclusions from those stories as well. Of course it then lies in the realm of the indivdual to choose carefully who and what they will believe, but still, I think people should have that right. (Of course, philosphy will/should call into question anything assumed or believed.)
Sorry, I don't want to sound too antagonistic! But I do think there's more than one side to this coin, and finding a healthy balance is our best option.