I said science and philosophy are at odds with religion, not with each other. Religion has been concerned mainly with holding society together, not with figuring out the objective facts. Science came along and changed the standards, so religion had to compete on that newly established level. The result in the West is the pseudoscience of systematic theology, the misreading of myths, and the trivialization of religious claims by literalizing them, as in fundamentalism.

The claim that God exists would be like the claim that Harry Potter is real. You need to suspend your disbelief to enjoy the show in the latter case, and you need to believe that God exists to maintain the community spirit and your society's brand identity. To keep society together in the old world, you needed to trust in the gods. That doesn't make "God exists" objectively true, since "God" is obviously not well-defined.

Religious myths are subjectively true at best, because they deal with phenomenology, or with what it's like to be alive as a person. That's their timeless, universal, existential aspect, which is consistent with the fictive status of myths.

You've never heard what objection, that theism is a subjectively meaningful fiction that has had some social utility?

I briefly put up that new article but I took it down again because I'm trying to put it on Interfaith Now. Unfortunately, the editor there has been on vacation or something and isn't posting as regularly. But it should be up again there soon.