Here's the latest load of crap from Carrier:
"Jackson: I’m curious to find out what books by Acharya S/Murdock have you actually read? Did you actually read her book Christ in Egypt or no?
[Richard Carrier responds] "I have read her section on Luxor there, yes (which, BTW, does not say some of the things her defenders claim it says, so they are doing her no favors by misrepresenting her claims and arguments). Note that I am reporting what Brunner says (an actual Egyptologist), and choosing my words carefully. Make sure you actually have right what I have in fact said, before comparing it to what she said (and not just what you think she said).
But if you are reading her book, then take note of how my blog post is designed to expose her tortuous logic there. For example, note that she agrees Amun appears to the queen in the disguise of her husband at Luxor; but doesn’t explain why that makes sense unless he planned to have sex with her. Otherwise, why pretend to be her husband? Likewise, both temples were constructed by the same person and thus cannot plausibly be telling two completely different religious stories, yet one of them (the longer redaction) is sexual, as even Murdock admits. So she has to hope you don’t notice that, in effect, the same author told two radically different versions of the same story at the same time for no reason. And so on. So it’s important to notice what she avoids talking about, as much as what she attempts to argue."
- So, saying "I have read her section on Luxor there, yes
" doesn't actually claim he read the book, which implies he probably didn't but doesn't want to admit it. Why couldn't he have been categorically clear and just say, "Yes, I read the Luxor section from the book." He may have even gotten glimpses of that section from Google books rather than the book, which leaves out quite a bit. I mention it here because Carrier's goes on and on about Dr. Brunner in such a way that Carrier seems oblivious to the fact that Acharya read Brunner's book and that's where much of her information on this issue came from. If Carrier actually read the book or even the online article he would know that Acharya cites Dr. Brunner and several other Egyptologists. So, to me, Carrier's blog comes off as disingenuous. He doesn't substantiate a single claim he makes with any source citations to back up his claims.
- (From the article) "She simply cites other people making the same mistake she did, as if a mistake many people make ceases to be a mistake, which is a non sequitur. "
Is Carrier claiming Brunner made a mistake? Because Acharya provides commentary from Brunner as well, which even the article explains. In fact, that's how she figured out Carrier was looking at the wrong scene. The error is Carrier's and he just can't admit it.
- (From the article) "Brunner himself agrees with me in concluding that the narrative depicts sex"
How exactly does Egyptologist, Dr. Hellmut Brunner agree with you when he died in 1997? Acharya cites several Egyptologists, including Brunner, in which they demonstrate Carrier to be in error. Is Carrier claiming everyone else is wrong and that only Carrier has it right?
- Not sure what Carrier is even referring to regarding "defenders ... are doing her no favors by misrepresenting her claims and arguments
" since he gave no examples. Same with "not just what you think she said
- "both temples were constructed by the same person
Notice Carrier provides no source for this claim?
- "(the longer redaction) is sexual, as even Murdock admits. So she has to hope you don’t notice that
If Carrier read the article careful enough he'd notice that she discusses that so, the claim that she hopes one won't notice is just dumb.
I haven't had time to address the article yet so, I guess I'll start here:
RC: "There is sex in the scene and plenty of lurid details, pillow talk, and everything I say, couched in the coy terms of ancient writers"
So, there's sex scenes, lurid details of it, plus, pillow talk and everything else Carrier says? Right after that Carrier then says:
RC: "one should not obsess on whether Egyptian iconography depicts beds the way you see them at a Sears showroom, or whether pillow talk actually involves pillows. That’s just silly. It’s the words that describe what is going on. And the words say in effect just what I said they do. That I relate them into modern analogs is besides the point."
So, Carrier is categorically clear that he concedes that the Egyptian iconography at Luxor shows no sex scenes. At least that's a start.
RC: "The D text she refers to is the narrative accompanying the panels at the Deir el-Bahri Temple Complex built by Queen Hatshepsut in the 15th century BC. The Luxor Temple was built at the same time by the same queen."
Notice Carrier never cites a source to substantiate his claim regarding both temples being built at the same time by the same person? We've all heard the phrase: "Rome wasn't built in a day." Neither were the Deir el-Bahri Temple Complex nor Luxor.