Yes. We shouldn't accept at face value the accounts given by religious group (A) about the beliefs and practices of religious group (B), because history suggests that people who are religious misrepresent rival beliefs.
Granted. The Greeks themselves were certainly suspect in this practice.
When we only have accounts from religious group A about group B - as is the case with much pre-Christian and early heterodox Christian practice - then we should admit our relative ignorance.
While I'm happy to admit to "relative ignorance", let me remind you that the claim I'm responding to is the claim of absolute ignorance - "One can assert precisely nothing about the subjective psychological experiences of people 2000 years ago." But I dissent further that we do not only have accounts from religious group A about group B, and in any event you qualify even this claim yourself by using the word "much". So if you are only going to defend assertions about "relative ignorance" and not absolute ignorance, then I can say we are in close agreement since I've already asserted, "it's not as robust of a record as we might like..."
To suggest that the proper notions of piety, love and faith only obtain in a post-Christian environment - something which you asserted in #63, above - is an article of faith, nothing more.
And here I again ask you to reread the Euthyphro, and ask you what are the proper notions of piety, love and faith? I said nothing about what I thought was proper, and only that the definition of piety that pertains to a particular religious practice today does not pertain to every manner of religious belief. I said nothing about what was proper, superior, or anything of the sort.
And I didn't ask you to define a Christian mindset.
My apologies then, but if you didn't ask me to define a Christian mindset, what did you mean by "Why is the defining criterion for a "mindset" pre-Christian and post-Christian?" That "defining" there misled me to think you were asking for some sort of definition.
My question is why should the criterion of a pre-Christian vs. post-Christian mindset be important to you, when assessing the relative experience of piety, reverence, love and faith?
Your question is tangential to the topic as I see it, which has nothing to do with asssessing the relative experience of piety, reverence, love, and faith, but instead has to do with imagining what the experience of piety, reverence, love, and faith are likely to be given the normal cosmology of a D&D game which is as I said polytheistic, pluralistic, and animistic. All I have said is that these features are highly unlikely to generate anything like, for example, the otherwise superbly written "Bastion of Faith" book by Bruce Cordell, where he took features particular to Medieval Catholicism and wielded them haphazardly to a cosmology and a theology wholly unlike Medieval Catholicism. In the context of the thread, I was suggesting this view of what a 'cult' is, which is grounded in Catholic views of heterodoxy, heracy, and it's view regarding other religious practice, is probably not one that makes sense in the setting.
How do you measure these things?
I'd be happy to just describe them, much less measure them.
How do you know what the supplicant felt when the Pythia pronounced her oracles?
You don't.
Well, unless we get some description by that supplicant themselves or someone close to them.
But even if we lack such personal accounts, it's not hard to imagine how a person might have felt in response to this pronouncement, "
Now your statues are standing and pouring sweat. They shiver with dread. The black blood drips from the highest rooftops. They have seen the necessity of evil. Get out, get out of my sanctum and drown your spirits in woe."