Question

Hello,
There is a basic assumption throughout the site, in every publication, that there is no such thing as certainty regarding God, and that everything is born out of probability. Simply put, I understand that this contains nothing that obligates me in and of itself; the absolute choice is in my hands. If it seems probable to me, I’ll believe, and if not, then not.
Why should one begin at all with philosophical thought regarding God? Why not develop the concept of trustworthiness/faithfulness that we encounter in everyday life, whose force goes far beyond probability, to the point of using it as truth?
Why, in essence, not take the issue of trustworthiness in the transmission of tradition, deepen the definition, and build a whole framework on that? To discuss the rules of credibility that the Sages taught, to rely on the laws of preservation of transmission as they existed throughout the generations, and stand on that basis? Why is probability that turns into certainty through sound trustworthiness any less good? Since that is the truth, then even a less intelligent person, who necessarily lives his life according to a concept of trustworthiness (in the laws of nature, in his parents, in his doctor, in the food company, in transportation, in his friend), could certainly arrive at it. The obligation here also becomes real.
I don’t think there is no place for philosophical thought in this matter, but it is hard for me that this is assumed to be the first floor rather than the second.
 
Thank you