MiddleMan

I'm currently reading Carrier's reply to Turkel's reply to his (Carrier's) refutation of Turkel's "Impossible Faith" (following along so far? hee hee..if not, here's the link to Carrier's article and YOU figure out where in the epic it belongs! )

Anyway, under the heading Factor 5: Behavioral Prescriptions: Carrier reproduced an exchange with Turkel and then posted his reply to Turke's criticism:

I hope Carrier sees this post because I think he made a mistake here. In Carrier's first response (marked by the "H" above) he states that (as I read it, and apparently Turkel, too), "polytheistic superstition...for its time was so tough-minded that Romans compared it to atheism." Romans compared polytheistic superstition to atheism? That's what seems to be the idea. Turkel took that meaning as well as he states that Carrier's take is contrary to his own notion that "it was Judaism and Christianity (not superstitious polytheism as Carrier had said) that were comparable to atheism, from the Roman view." (my bold)

Carrier goes on to answer Turkel's question by actually proving Turkel's point and not his own.

Does anyone else read it that way?

Diogenes the Cynic

That's my take too. I think RC was calling Xianity "tough-minded" not Roman polytheism. He didn't phrase it well and I think he misunderstood Turkel's objection. It's just a miscommunication, I think.

MiddleMan

I agree entirely. But if you're familiar with Turkel's work, he'll pounce on that like a cat on a mouse....and he won't let go. I hope Carrier will make the correction so as not to give Turkel a dagger with which to stab him.

Diogenes the Cynic

The hell of it is that even if Carrier does make the correction or try to clarify himself, Turkel will probably just accuse him of "backtracking" or "changing his story."

Toto

If you diagram Carrier's sentence, it is clear that "that for its time was so tough minded" is a dependent clause modifying "release".

If that clause had been intended to modify "polytheistic superstition", the sentence would have to read "Christianity offered to pagans a release from THE polytheistic superstition that for its time was so tough-minded. . . " which makes no sense, since polytheistic supersition is not usually referred to as "tough-minded."

The commonplace that Christianity was referred to as atheism by the Roman pagans is so widespread, I don't know how anyone could read this sentence any other way.

Carrier will not see this unless you email him.

MiddleMan

Oh, then I just might do that. I am certainly no fan of Turkel (but a great admirer of Carrier) but if I can misunderstand that quote in exactly the same way as Turkel, Carrier might think of clarifying the issue. As you say, Christianity's equation with atheism was so widespread that anyone reading Carrier's sentence should know better: But, I was not so aware so I read the sentence differently! No reason to give Turkel points when he hasn't earned any!

Steven Carr

Is it just my imagination or is Richard Carrier now writing under the pen-name of Brian Holtz?

MiddleMan

:rolling: :Cheeky: WHOOPS! ahahhaahhahhaa I honestly dont' know HOW I made that mistake! My apologies to BOTH men! (Maybe it's because Turkel refuses to identify him other than by calling him "our critic." Turkel has so many, including Carrier and Holtz, that I confused them. Damn that Turkel. Just name the men, for Pete's sake!)


And...on second thought, I think I will not notify Carrier/Holtz. I think I'll let Turkel embarrass himself by not noticing what Toto said should be readily apparent to anyone familiar with the history of the time. I've never made claim to have that familularity. Turkel, however, boasts of it.