Okay, I hate to crush the bible- thumpin' attitude here, but if you want to argue that because a book from thousands of years ago advocates ignorance, we must admit that knowledge can be misleading, we have a problem. I think that you should do more thinking about that point, so we can agree it is a red herring.

Also, does it matter, in the slightest, if the physical bodies of people are recognized as the people, if we never see them, interact with them, or anything? That sort of ignorance is minute; It is the physical equivalent of wording problem. It seems like your argument is that truth matters outside of what we sense, but the truth we observe does not. What we sense our surroundings are is all that matters. Should car manufacturers worry that the universe we 'really' live in cannot contain cars? No one thinks in such a way, because if there is a greater knowledge available, it will not have an affect on them. So why take that into account? If it is 'reality', why should anyone care? This is the part the argument called the statement of case. And you are missing it.