Much of religion is a blind guess, yes.
What part of religion is not a blind guess?
The spelling of the word?
But there are certain laws of logic that have to be observed, or we cannot take you seriously. Suppose again we are talking about a bakery. All of a sudden, the ummmm baker's union is on strike. The manager and a few scabs try to bake the bread, but they all get killed in the fight (and this is why you should hate unions, all that delicious bread is not being made). We know that bread doesn't bake itself. Likewise, you can have a bakery in addition to tables and chairs (a place where the universe is ). You can dry ingredients, wet ingredients, starters, and preservatives (physical matter and subatomic stuff). You can have rolling pins, measuring cups, mixing bowls, even electric whisks (the laws of the universe such as gravity, magnetism, etc).
But none of that does any good if there aren't any bakers!!! But, you say, surely bread can arise spontaneously from the flour being left on the counter. If flour was able to stay in a jar with not reaction, more likely weevils (entropy) will do away with the flour long before it gets the chance to spontaneously turn into bread.
It may not have to be a conventional notion of God here. For the record, I am also willing to accept:
1. An unknown Will of Magic, or Force.
2. Human beings created themselves. Then everything else.
3. UFOs from another universe created our universe, and other UFOs created their universe, and other other UFOs created their universe...
4. Universe was eternal, it had not creator, but there was some sort of driving force.
5. Reapers or fairies run all mechanistic forces of the universe.
6. Not one God but many gods.
7. The Earth was constructed as a model. Also the meaning of life is 42.
Thank you for sharing what YOU are willing to accept.
If you are going to argue that the only stuff that can be true are the things YOU are willing to accept, please do so.
I will consider it without laughing, if I am able.
I am not willing to accept a creator-free creation.
Then stop arbitrarily calling it a "creation."
The only reason you are looking for the "creator" of this "creation" is because you are arbitrarily defining it as a creation.
I agree...so stop doing it.
And anyone trying to sell me on that is either also stupid, or a willfully ignorant con-artist trying to deconvert people because they hated Catholic school. So which are you?
I do not do a lot of hating; I am not stupid; I am not a con-artist trying to "deconvert" people (whatever that means).
Although I was raised Catholic, I did not go to Catholic school. I did eventually learn to serve Mass, though, and, as an adult, I once served Mass in St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican.
I have nothing against people who insist there is at least one god...nor against people who insist there are no gods. I have nothing against people who insist it is more likely that there are no gods...or against people who insist it is more likely that there is at least one.
BUT...the only thing all of those people are doing is sharing blind guesses, because there is no way one can come to any of those conclusions by logic, or reason, or science, or math.
You are doing what hard atheists are doing...trying to sell your guesses as some sort of reasonable logic.
They are all fails.