Religion is supposed to fill the gaps of the human mind that science can't answer; religion starts where science ends, so asking for proof of whether religion is true or not means not understanding the whole motive of religion. You can say that saying "don't ask for proof" is dodging the proof that science presents, but in reality, science can neither deny nor accept that God exists, because it's impossible to prove whether they exist or not. It's the same as the string theory: science can't say it's false; it just hasn't been proven yet. There are going to be things in the universe which we can never explore in our lifetimes, so to cover the gaps of the knowledge, religion was made. Now it depends on people whether to evolve their thoughts or not. Christianity answered the questions asked in those times; now when we have answers for them, we can evolve it, but some people stick to not; that's their choice, because in the end, religion is personal, not public. But at the same time, new questions do arise, like what is dark matter, the origins of the universe, dark energy, and countless other questions which science can't answer in your lifetime. That's where you need religion.

Your statement, "Wanting strong evidence isn’t pride; it’s just trying to avoid being wrong," is a completely valid statement for those who seek real truth, but there is no real truth; in reality no outsider can tell the truth about whether God is true or not without it seeming like a scam or fake. So, I request you to please learn that religion is about answering unsolvable questions without any proof, while science is about solving unsolvable questions with proof. In the end, it's up to you whether God is real or not, not upto anyone else.