|
That seems like a long winded way to say you have no empirical evidence to back up the idea of a supreme creator... You compared God to the wind but where we can quantify and measure the effects of the wind we have to deal in perception and feelings when trying to measure the effects of god. I'd say that comparing god to the wind simply because we can see neither feels like a weak argument considering we have so much evidence to demonstrate the existance of wind.
In terms of the whole leap of faith, I think I used a poor term there since by your logic everything we do is a leap of faith unless it can be proven to the nth degree. I would simply rather work on weight of evidence. An atheist believes there is/are no god/s. There is no tangible evidence to support the idea of a creator and there is no more reason to believe in a god than there is to believe we are all figments of our own imagination. Could atheists be wrong? Of course, but the acceptance of that doesn't make one an agnostic.
There is as much eidence to suggest we are all living in the Matrix as there is to believe in a supreme creator, but if I were to postulate that as a legitimate theory people would rightly call me a muppet...
|