lets make an analogy to a court of law.
lets put a suspected murderer in this scenario. the case proving he killed a man is rock solid, or so it seems. although, ultimately, his incarceration, or lack there of is left to the jury. the jury is the general population, both in this scenario and in actuality. the jury makes there decision based on the evidence presented. a jury is more likely to declare the man guilty if enough evidence is presented to shoot down any appeal or rebuttal.
if the case is not so rock solid, how about shaky? well, in that case (no pun intended) you will see a larger degree of varying opinions amongst the jurors. some who believe the suspect (god) to be guilty (non-existent) and others who believe the suspect to be not guilty (exist)
either way, those jurors made a decision based on the amount of evidence at hand, and have faith that they made the right decision.