And what makes you an authority on what might and what might not constitute 'fooling ourselves'?

There are views of God which are logically inconsistent - They simply can't be true because they are self-contradictory.  One doesn't have to be an 'authority' to point this out - it is simply self-evident.

And what is this about being effectively ruled by 'feelings'?  When empirical evidence shows that our feelings can change direction about as quickly as a ride on a roller-coaster, surely allowing ourselves to "pursu(e) what we feel" can lead us all over the shop.

Being ruled by a book like the Bible is far less consistent than being ruled by what we feel in our hearts to be wholesome and true. Human morality generally has a common theme - a theme  that says that compassion, mercy, respect, peace, grace, kindness, generosity, empathy and restorative justice are good things, things to aspire to, things that are of worth.  It is actually that common theme, recognised by humans throughout generations, that has been the basis for most long lasting religions (not the other way around).  In Christianity, you can see it changing the rules of the Hebrews/Jews over the course of time.. the unfairnes of some of the old testament rules and ideas about God had, even before Jesus, begun to be sidelined, and, if you look at Judaism today, you don't see people in Israel being stoned to death if they pick up sticks on a Saturday.  So religions evolve away from the nasty rules.  What is the driving force for that?  Why it's as simple as a four lettered word - Love.  The work of Love in the world changes it despite religions and not because of them.