> You wrote:
> "When you say someone believed in countless
> gods and effective magic you are necessarily
> calling them bumpkins."
> What nonsense.
> Does anyone consider Ancient Greeks or Romans, or
> for that matter modern day Hindus - who also
> "believed in countless gods" to be
> "bumpkins" ?
> Please stop promoting this ridiculous assertion -
> you are the only person who is convinced of it,
> and each time you incorporate it into your
> discussion you do yourself a disservice.
You mat wellbe right.
I believe there's a difference though. Our thought derives from Greek thought through the Romans. While the Greeks believed in "gods" they certainly did not believe in effective magic. The Greek "gods"also are almost more like legends or myths than a true religion.
I suspect most people just think of the Greeks as one step removed from superstitious bumpkins. They were primitive but no one thinks they squished their toes in corpse drippings and then waxed poetic about how good it smelled.
1790b. how harmful is thine odour, how bad is thine odour, how great is thine odour!
1916-3 (Nt. 738). Great is thine odour, pleasant to the nose, the odour of ’Iḫ.t-wt.t.
I don't remember Plato even once suggesting the Athena might stink to high heaven;
1272a. If Isis comes in this her evil coming;
1272b. do not open to her thine arms; that which is said to her is her name (of) "wide of ḥwȝ-t (evil-smelling)."
I believe my observations are legitimate whether it helps my argument or not.
They must be legitimate or the ancients wouldn't be spinning in their graves so fast. ;)