It teaches people to believe things based on no evidence.

Literally no major religion does that. They in fact have literal mountains of material dedicated to explaining based on what one should believe their religion.

Be it historical evidence that the Buddha or Jesus or Muhammad existed, or the continued survival of the Jewish people, or the uninterrupted line of Japanese emperors or reincarnation cycle of Lamas, or the literary evidence in the form of the Veda, Bible or the Confucian Analects, most religions rely on historical people or records as being direct witnesses or evidence of the existence of their respective god.

On top of this, all major religions have extremely complex theological arguments that have been developed through centuries of refinement, which would all be entirely unnecessary if they were based on "teaching people to believe things based on no evidence".

There's a big difference between you agreeing with the veracity of their evidence or the conclusions they drew from it, and them not using any evidence at all.