Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-32058610-20170520145426/@comment-3581997-20170925132509

The Trojan War still happened but when we write about the villainy of Agamemnon, we can really only use Homer's account as a reference. Likewise, Zeus, Hera and Ares are not exaggerated in the minds of those who still believe in them, but we are using stories to get that outlook. I am mainly arguing for objectivity over loyalty to the sacred. The difference between myth and religious his how popular one is over the other. Any argument that can be made for Biblical figures can be made for "mythological" figures.

I am saying the Bible is just as true as the Iliad. It was written by a professional writer, who had not witness the events for himself but had written about something he knew to be true and figures he fully believed in. If we consider one safe to write about the other should be too. -

However all that is just intellectual, because this reason was made to me last time and this part I can not argue with. We are a catalog on the internet, and certain subjects encourage trolls. And nothing inspires more trolls than modern-day religion. No matter how stringently we keep our reference materials there is always going to be some schmuck who is going to add how Satan kisses babies when they are asleep and that is where gays come from or something. And then the argument becomes, "Well I believe in it and if you don't you are A. persecuting me and B. You are a heretic!". I still say Zeus is no more false than God, but Zeus's follower won't inspire enough crazy people to be an issue.