Christianity could be a higher order way of organizing lives

[Poopadoop]

PShh. I wish.
I had to learn about the Dirac sea of electrons, and the Bohr atomic model as well as plenty of physics history.
You still have to learn about Freud's nonsense?

At the same time they teach Freud they also teach that it's nonsense. The teaching of his theories is not provided because they want you to accept those theories; it's done because they want you to understand how the field originated and developed. Big difference.

I have yet to see a Bible where it says 'and Noah put two of each animal on his ark (But not really, it's just a story). The Earth is the centre of the universe (except now we know it isn't)', and so on.

Sounds like you're trying to make religion and science somehow be similar or do the same thing, and they just don't.

No, I'm trying to hold them to the same standard of evidence for their claims about things that can be studied.

There's no reason religion should be updating their stories. Those stories are parables of human nature. The only reason to change them is if human nature changes. I'm not saying it never will, but everything I've learned about anthropology sounds pretty relate-able. The stories in the Bible are often outlandish, but still totally relatable.

Aesop's fables are also relatable. But they're constructed in a way so as to make it clear that they're not to be taken as true events that ever happened. Did you ever wonder why they're all about animals? If the Bible were simply a set of parables not meant to be taken literally there are many literary ways to make that abundantly clear to the reader.

[MadMojoMonkey]

At the same time they teach Freud they also teach that it's nonsense. The teaching of his theories is not provided because they want you to accept those theories; it's done because they want you to understand how the field originated and developed. Big difference.

Wasn't everything Freud said "a scientific theory that was based on just whatever storybook he read the previous night, and everyone blindly accepted that theory until it was overwhelmingly proven false?"

I have yet to see a Bible where it says 'and Noah put two of each animal on his ark (But not really, it's just a story). The Earth is the centre of the universe (except now we know it isn't)', and so on.

No, I'm trying to hold them to the same standard of evidence for their claims about things that can be studied.

We have science to do those things. That's not what religion does.

Religion isn't about facts and evidence and measurable things. Religion is about ethics and morals and parables.

Aesop's fables are also relatable. But they're constructed in a way so as to make it clear that they're not to be taken as true events that ever happened. Did you ever wonder why they're all about animals? If the Bible were simply a set of parables not meant to be taken literally there are many literary ways to make that abundantly clear to the reader.

Again, you're asserting that the readers want a different story than the one they have, or that the story they like is the wrong one.

Telling people what they like is folly.

[Poopadoop]

Wasn't everything Freud said "a scientific theory that was based on just whatever storybook he read the previous night, and everyone blindly accepted that theory until it was overwhelmingly proven false?"

No. It was entirely conjecture and understood as such. The fact that some accepted it was because they had no evidence for anything better. Once that evidence was obtained, Freud hit the garbage pail.

[Poopadoop]

Religion isn't about facts and evidence

Not to you, because you're a scientist. To many religious people it is.