I don’t understand. “Scripture” is intolerable for at least 2/3 of the populatio

I don’t understand.
“Scripture” is intolerable for at least 2/3 of the population. Even among the 1/3 that is devoted to it, the evidence is that it’s largely indoctrination. Yet there is a percentage of the population is so dependent on empathizing (feelz) that they require a proxy (a figure) they can empathize and sympathize with and imitate, and simple rules that insulate natural human neuroticism.
Aquinas was right: if the science falsifies the scripture then the science decides. Hence his direction of the church and the faithful to natural law (which is what we do). And hence the catholic church’s emphasis on god and dogma in support of natural law rather than the bible and jesus common to protestants.
What the church should have simply done is to state that they were right all along they just lacked the skill to understand the works of god in god’s own language: the laws of the universe.
The reason being that Christianity once germanicized, gave women, slaves, and serfs a means of obtaining status and virtue by doing no wrong rather than the aristocracy’s requirement for virtue that required education training resources wealth and the capacity for war.
So Christian ethics can be reduced to about five rules. It turns out that these five rules solve the problem of the prisoner’s dilemma, and are necessary for the production of mindfulness, and subsequent production of a high trust society.
But largely it’s just the same process as masculine stoicism with ‘feminine characteristics’ of caretaking.

Reply addressees: @jrayrealhealth @univcompass