[ben_w]

The problem with religion is not the stories that they tell, from those about Amaterasu to those of Zoroaster[0], but that people take those stories and mistake them for truths.

In this regard, I agree.

[0] Is it just my imagination (or perhaps someone trolling Wikipedia), or does Zoroastrian eschatology seem a bit suspiciously like the Book of Revelation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroastrianism#Eschatology:_Re...

[edgyquant]

1. Those stories do contain truths about humanity. Simulation theory doesn’t from what I gather, it’s purely a materialistic concept.

2. Abrahamic religions are extremely influenced by Zoroastrianism. Christianity maybe the most influenced due to it competing with Persian monotheism for the dominant near east religion.

[ben_w]

To the extent that I would accept that religious myths and legends contain truths about humanity, I assert that so too do all the other good stories — that The Fellowship of the Ring was popular because of the Fellowship rather than because of the Ring, that Star Trek and Doctor Who are popular because they gel with the political issues at the time of filming rather than anything to do with subspace fields and the polarities of neutron flows. (Yes, all the settings and technobabble/magical conlangs also allow for very spectacular scenery and events, but I don't think that's what sells them in the long term (it sure does for pure popcorn-spectacle blockbusters, but those are quickly forgotten), for good fiction it's just the icing on the cake).

Likewise for religion, the Greek[0] myths about jealous and infidelious gods speak to mortals in the same situation, and gods playing games with mortals echos with politicians doing the same with their people (especially given the various times and places where leaders have been deified in their own lifetimes).

But there was no Helios driving a chariot across the sky, and Icarus never flew too close to the sun; Ilúvatar never turned the world into a sphere in order that mortal men could no longer sail The Straight Road to Aman; and not only is Noah's Ark nowhere near large enough if taken seriously[1], a majority of Herod biographers and "probably a majority of current biblical scholars" consider the story fabricated or unhistorical[2]. (Also neither of the two kings called Herod line up with the Christian calendar, but a few years here and there is only really a problem for fundamentalists, not normal believers).

[0] now I think about it, it's kinda weird that the Greek ones are more famous than the Roman ones… I suppose the Roman Empire turning Christian part way through has something to do with that?

[1] Depending on which value of cubit you use, about the size of Berlin Zoo's monkey house.

[2] page 171 https://books.google.de/books?id=mWnYvI5RdLMC&q=Herod+and+th...