Paul's Writings Underpin Western Thought

[Succubus]

Sounds like yet another fuckhead walking around clothed in a sandwich board.

Yes. This other super liberal oh so reasonable cultural atheist immediately springs to mind.

Wanker.

[Graufreud]

Tom Holland, atheist writer and historian has some interesting points about Paul.

"Compacted into Paul's writing is almost everything that explains the modern world"

"International law, human rights...go back to Paul"

"His letters...along with the Gospels, are the most influential, most impactful, most revolutionary writing that has emerged from the ancient world."

"Paul was a depth charge deep beneath the foundations of the classical world. Paul sets up ripple effects of revolution throughout western history... [including] the enlightenment. They spilled out so much now in the 20th century we don't know where these ripple effects came from--we just take them for granted."







I am interested in discussing the complete premise. If you don't listen to the whole 5 minutes, I am not interested in discussing it with you.

The entire interview can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlf_ULB26cU

Special thanks to RR for telling me about this podcast. I really enjoy it.

Apparently there is a great competition among Christian writers and historians, so in order to make a living you have to pretend to be an atheist. 

Or be an opportunistic atheist who pretends to be a Christian... 

Well, "Everyone's got a mortgage to pay."

[Fake Messiah]

Paul's Writings Underpin Western Thought

Even the forgeries like Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus? Those Christians will find anything divine as long as it's in the Bible.

[The Grand Nudger]

It;s unsurprising to find western thought espoused by "paul".  The author would have been living under roman rule as either a gentile or a hellenized jew in the first or second century. It;s equally unsurprising when "paul" has views that diverge from judaism, jesusism, and western thought. Whomever wrote the work, he was the bridge between those three through the vehicle of christ.

[brewer]

Is it that Paul was an early humanist (maybe not the correct term) that, unfortunately, couched the characteristics/traits in a fantasy delusion which required obedience or punishment? 

Yet still condemned gays and really had a big problem with sex in general. 

Paul is not that unique or special.

[Brian37]

I do get sick of the narcissism of religion. No sorry Steve, Paul didn't invent the modern world all by himself, not to mention the book of Paul was way after the fact and is a pseudo name like a ghost writer.

Just knock it off Steve. You ask a Hindu, and they will argue that their religion is the seat of humanity. Ask a Muslim they will argue their religion is the seat of humanity. Ask Jew, they will argue they are the seat of humanity. Ask a Buddhist and they will argue the same.

The concepts of Senate were around longer than the Jesus myth in Greece and Rome. But even in Polytheist Greece and Rome they had ruling families to which the senates had no real impeachment power of their king.

Constantine adapted Christianity for political expedience, regardless of his personal beliefs. I could give a shit less if he believed in Paul. Rome did not become a modern western society. They still had kings, and during the history of the Vatican, the Pope was the dictator of his own Papal state. The Vatican you see today isn't it's entire history. It had money and power and it's own state,, and while some Popes might have been kinder, many were brutal dictators of their state.

Religion does not make a person good, much less a religious leader.

This was just another convoluted argument to make the naked assertion that you got it right. So what, everyone of every religion thinks they got it right.

[Whateverist]

Tom Holland, atheist writer and historian has some interesting points about Paul.

"Compacted into Paul's writing is almost everything that explains the modern world"

"International law, human rights...go back to Paul"

Unless Paul's views on human rights include the right of a woman over her own body, the rights of every person to live free of slavery and the right to freedom of religion including no religion, I'm not impressed.

[The Industrial Atheist]

Paul didn't say people can't have slaves. He just said they were equal under god. While he did say you can't have sex with people you aren't married to,(shitty to unmarried people but would prevent some rapes) he didn't say you can't rape your child wife. Which I'm sure happened.

He never even said the people at the top can't economically exploit those at the bottom. That still went on and still goes on today.

I find his statement "if you don't work you don't eat" to significantly contribute to the way right wing Christians often exclude those too disabled to work.

Much of what he said was just a repetition of the mores of the time. Like saying women have to be submissive to their husbands and can't speak in Church. Wouldn't want to hear any of the strange thoughts of those inferior weemens.

---

In terms of Christianity in general it's so ridiculous they'll tell you it's wrong to masturbate. That's trying to impose a violation of your basic right to control your own body.

I don't believe the people that wrote the Bible were so stupid as to think that you stop thinking about sex if you don't masturbate. They couldn't all have had near nonexistent libido.

It's calculated to make being single a punishing experience so that anyone with the slightest chance to reproduce within marriage will do so.

They really didn't care what it does physically and mentally to anyone who can't marry.

This was manipulative and a sick violation of both rights and basic decency.

If the Christians outbred the Muslims or whoever else, that's all they cared about.

[Graufreud]

Paul's Writings Underpin Western Thought

Even the forgeries like Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus? Those Christians will find anything divine as long as it's in the Bible.

I agree with the last sentence.
But are you sure about Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus really being forgeries?

[Angrboda]

Constantine adapted Christianity for political expedience, regardless of his personal beliefs.

Christians composed a very small minority of the Roman populace at the time. It's hard to see in what sense adopting Christianity would have meaningfully been any kind of political expedient.