I have not read any of your books about God but I have seen you on a television debate and I have read your memoirs. It seems confusing to me that someone who does not believe in God has pretty much dedicated his life to going around the world and talking about God!
I must confess also that I was confused in your debate by what your main contentions are. I think you were a little jet-lagged and the format of the debate was deliberately provocative (as our national broadcaster can be at times) but it seemed that your arguments covered three quite distinct subjects, and only one of them would I consider to be a significant discussion on the presence or absence of a Deity.
Firstly you comment that the main Christian body in your country is afforded special privileges and authorities. These are granted without merit and only to one body when other religions could lay equal claim to them. That does not happen in our country so I don’t have much understanding of the matter to comment. You are probably right so I hope you can make progress on that front.
Secondly you discuss what the church has done to people, either by their actions or in damaging words. The example you gave was teaching about the punishment of hell to a young girl. I fully agree with you on this one. And I have no tolerance for lazy and convenient preaching from people who are motivated by less than love in what they say.
But most importantly you talk about the arguments for and against the existence of a God. But the problem is that by now you are talking about a God (one represented by the above religious institutions) that I am hoping does not exist as well!
I wish you well in your continued search for truth.