I'm sure you're right. It doesn't really harm my critique though. We can point to individual figures and philosophers among the educated elite of pagan societies that were more or less critical of aspects of the popular pagan religion, which pretty much aligns with what I said here: >>2628
. I have read dialogues such as Cicero's 'On The Nature of the Gods' which gives a good survey of the diverse views held by pagans in pre-Christian Europe. They oftentimes mock the crude and vulgar myths, and recognize them to be immoral. They make it quite clear that the common folk literally believe this nonsense though. Over time we see a trend in pagan religion that attempts to allegorize and explain away the actions of the so-called 'gods'. They recognize, due to the law written on their hearts, that these stories are immoral. So they attempted to cope with the material they had on hand in order to soothe their conscience. Along with this we see many alternative conceptions of the gods such as that of the Epicureans, where the gods lived in Intermundia region, immortal and in tranquility. The Stoics believed in a sort of pantheistic materialism, identifying God with Zeus. Stoic figures such as Marcus Aurelius juggle between gods and God with little concern it seems. We can see all sorts of baseless speculation like this in the philosophical schools, while the popular religion trudged on as normal, worshiping idols, animals, demons and everything else under the sun. According to the most common interpretation of Genesis 6, i.e. the idea that the fallen angels have come and forced themselves upon the daughters of men, this is where a good deal of the Greco-Roman myths concerning Zeus and other deities having intercourse and children with women comes from. Later generations, removed from the historical origin of such events, grew uncomfortable and attempted to allegorize it all away. As flawed as these men were, they were in some sense participating in true knowledge of God, as early apologists such as St. Justin Martyr said in his Apology. And as the other anon mentions, we can certainly find a few examples of atheists and those who attempted to say that the gods didn't really exist. But these people are notable and known today precisely because they were novel and unorthodox in their own day.
This is like when people point at Hindus and say that they are some sort of super profound fount of wisdom for humanity, when we can also find stories from the last few years doing human sacrifice in India.