Most people in the West "know" that God does not exist; and they think they "know" this from the "lack of evidence".
They may ask some variant of - "If God is really-real; then why doesn't God communicate with us?"
But of course there are countless people (now and in the past) who state they know that God exists, have seen or heard or reasoned-out evidence of this.
What "most people" in the West actually mean is much more like "I, personally, don't believe those people who say that God exists, and I don't believe that the evidence the believers provide is real".
What is really meant is something more like "I choose to believe the people and institutions that state God does Not exist; and I choose to disbelieve anyone who claims God Does exist."... which is a very different thing from there being "no evidence".
That's a first line defense. People choose who to believe - what "authorities" to trust. But they then pretend that they have not made this choice! - they claim that their choice was not a choice, but was objective reality; to deny which is irrational self-deception...
To make a choice, then to deny this was a choice, is surely the very worst kind of self-deception - because impossible of correction?
It also goes deeper than that...
"I personally do not know of any evidence that convinces me that God exists" is the kind of phrase - and what this actually means is that no such evidence of God is possible, because "my" understanding of "reality" excludes the possibility of God - my understanding of The World has no space for God.
Someone who says they personally know of no "evidence" that God exists is therefore in truth saying something about himself - not about reality.
Because his grounds for claiming there is "no evidence" are rooted in many chosen-assumptions that might be otherwise; and these assumptions were themselves chosen.
(Or else the assumptions were passively-accepted at first, and then later defended as being necessarily true - defended by personal choice.)
"I know of no evidence that God exists" actually means something-like:
"I deny the possibility that there could be any evidence of God's existence - because I already have decided there is no God, and therefore any supposed-evidence cannot be true".
Yet such convictions, like all convictions, are ultimately chosen; and therefore we are personally, and ultimately, responsible for both our beliefs and for our disbeliefs, equally.
And "responsible" means that we personally will take the consequences for the life we choose to lead - which life is most deeply and essentially our thought-life: that of our lives over which we have the greatest choice, and in which our agency is manifested...
We have little or no direct control over the material context of our lives: we don't choose the physical world we inhabit.
Yet, our thinking is free - if we choose it to be free.
In particular; we can choose to affirm the ultimate truth, goodness and reality of whatever we want; and to deny the reality of whatever we want*.
By That we make our life, and judge our-selves.
*Note - Believing "whatever you want" does Not means that all alternatives are equally true; and choosing to want-to-believe that which you judge to be false or evil will have consequences.