I think your comment perhaps inadvertently exposes the fragility of the Christian narrative—not as a unified divine truth, but as a socially managed construct that required central authority figures (like Paul) to keep it from fragmenting.
This observation aligns seamlessly with the idea of Christianity as a Useful Fiction—a system that depends on institutional control to maintain coherence. When figures like Paul were no longer around to enforce a singular interpretation, the fiction naturally began to splinter into multiple denominations, each interpreting the story to fit their own needs.
This begs the question: If Christianity were truly divine in origin, why would it require continuous human intervention to keep its doctrine from falling apart? Why would an all-knowing, all-powerful God allow His "one true message" to be interpreted in thousands of conflicting ways—all supposedly inspired by the same Holy Spirit?
The reality is, the moment Paul/Rome ceased to be a unifying force, Christianity began to fracture along human lines, not divine ones. That’s exactly what we would expect if Christianity were not the revealed truth of an omniscient deity, but rather a socially engineered belief system maintained through political influence, doctrinal control, and strategic adaptation—all hallmarks of Useful Fiction.
Re "Useful Fiction" I am also arguing this HERE - so feel free to take a peek and use whatever quotes you want to, here in this thread.
