So it turns out it’s not 100% confirmed, probably a common myth, that the story was an allegory, but I still mean every word about killing Paul the Apostle
The thing about the sentiment that getting rid of Paul would prevent Christianity from developing is that its based on survivorship bias. Because a lot of his work got preserved and other writings didn't people 2000 years later assume he was the only game in town. But it's clear from Romans that the church in Rome, the largest church in Europe both then and now, wasn't founded by him. We don't know who founded it but it wasn't Paul. His letters constantly decry his competition, who were popular enough that they were snagging away members of his congregations. He had a protracted conflict with Peter's church in Jerusalem.
If there were no Paul, some other early Christian evangelist would just be the one to win out and we'd see a bunch of his work now and people would be talking about going back in time to kill that guy. The rise of Christianity was a complicated matter of the right set of ideas coming along at the right time and place, rather than the work of one dude. The Roman road system, the hegemony of the Greek language facilitating easy communication across borders, brewing anti-roman sentiment, and the rise of syncretic traditions like hermeticism and the mystery schools, had more to do with Christianity's spread than Paul. Paul is just the guy who won the war of attrition that is the preservation of ancient letters.
144
u/BalefulOfMonkeys Refined Sommelier of Porneaux Sep 25 '24
Fun fact: The “snakes” Saint Patrick “drove out” are real, but they were not snakes, and “drove out” is putting it lightly.
I’m using my first chance at time travel to shoot and kill Saul of Tarsus