Our theists of all labels please answer....

[Jackie]

Except, of course, that the birthday person is known to exist, we can find out with certainty what flavor of cake it was, and there are first hand eye witnesses to the party.

Well, let's strain the analogy a little, in an obviously leading way...

Suppose the birthday party was supposedly held in the early 1820's in Sri Lanka. Now let's say that the only reason people know about it is because:

a) 3 or 4 people wrote about it in unsigned diaries passed down by some descendants of the participants.
b) The details of the diaries vary but they all mention that it happened on a boat.
c) Several old birthday cards to the celebrant have been found.
d) A well-know explorer made fleeting reference to the party..
e) The diaries all tell the story of a rich guest lost a priceless diamond necklace into the water.
f) It is well known that treasure hunters have been trying to find the necklace since the supposed party happened.

So did that party actually happen and is it reasonable to believe there is lost a priceless necklace?

1. A history of making claims does not make the claim true. Other religions have their own histories of making claims.
2. Real people and real places do not make magic claims true. Other religions also can quote their real people and real places.

You are not making anything but an apology, and is hardly neutral nor nothing we don't see from people with other religions.

---

And not since the beginning of this thread has anyone who has tried to point to a club/writing has been able to answer "Why do you feel the need to believe" without pointing to the direction they want to point.

Neutrality is when you don't try to insert your own personal bias into a neutral method.