Individualism in Abrahamic religions

First...as to his fascination about God.  I totally understand that.  I thoroughly enjoy discussing/ruminating on the 'idea' of a god, gods or God.  But it's so hard to find anyone who wants to discuss it objectively...ie without having a strong opinion one way or the other and without the baggage of having their very 'being' and 'identity' tied up in whether there IS a god and if there is...what is said God like.

As to him no longer considering himself an atheist, I wonder if it is due to him rethinking what atheist means or if it reflects a change is what the concept of god/God is or is he actually changing his basic beliefs about God?  For me...I'm pretty certain there isn't a 'god' like the Christian God or any of the other major religion's gods.  But if I entertain the idea of some sort of universal consciousness...a consciousness 'field' that gives humans and other life forms our consciousness, am I entertaining the idea there might be a 'god' and that I am no longer an atheist?

As to the third, since one can cherry pick from a myriad of ideas from ANY religion, it seems it would be easy to find a basis for almost anything in almost any religion.  What about Christianity makes you think it was critical/important/a foundation for 'Western individualism?'  First, define what you mean by Western individualism and then which parts of Christianity from. say, the NT promotes this individualism? Seems to me lots of Paul's teachings were anything but promoting individualism.  How does what he says compare with Acts where the author speaks of all being in one accord?

I'm sure individualism has been around far longer than the Archaic Greek Period, whether you want to call it an ideology or not. For as long as civilization has been, there has been the individual. The question is to what role the individual had in society, and which individual, and how many, had any say as how society was ran. When it comes to ancient Greece, we should keep in mind that the culture and society we read about in ancient Greece is coming from the privileged few in Athens who had wealth, owned slaves, and generally had the luxury of free time to wile away the days writing down their musings. Plato's, Sophocle's, and Thucydide's experiences were not the norm in classical Athens and sure as fuck weren't the norm in the rest of classical Greece. So, when they talk freely about Greek life, politics, religion, and culture I tend to take their talk with boulder sized grains of salt. Life, for the vast majority of Greeks was a feudal shit hole, like it was for most people the world over at that time.

As for Christianity's individualistic roots...you're going to need to explain that. As far as I see it, the earliest forms of Christianity are all about building a community at the expense of the individual. In its earliest years this was a smart survival tactic, considering the sporadic persecution Christians had to endure from Roman authorities made individualism a liability in the Roman Empire. As Christianity gained prominence, the individual became even more obfuscated as the dogma that coalesced into Roman Catholicism weeded out gnostic teachings and persecuted heretics, forcing all Christians to adhere to orthodoxy. The power and prominence of the church increased throughout the middle ages at the further expense of the individual. It was the Protestant Reformation that broke this trend. Protestantism removed the need of the structured Catholic hierarchy to mediate belief in God. It was now up to the individual. Everyone had their own relationship to God, which resulted in the scattershot of Protestant denominations. Some Protestant leaders bent more towards free thought and expression and others became more even repressive, proto-"woke"...but they're all the result of the rejection of Catholic orthodoxy which suppressed the individuals ability to mediate their relationship to god by forcing all Christians to adhere to their teachings. The Protestant Reformation turned Christianity into a market, with all sorts of denominations to suit every individuals taste.

So, with Protestantism comes Capitalism, and with Capitalism comes the erosion of 'morals' and 'values' that the Catholic Church upheld via its repressive authoritarianism. Peterson likes Capitalism for the wealth and "freedom" it has granted Europeans, and their colonial successors such as himself, at the expense of the rest of the world, but he abhors the erosion of religiousness and "Judeo-Christian" values that are the consequences of Capitalism. Like so many other right-wing "thinkers", he cannot bridge this divide, and so he must obfuscate when called on the many contradictions in his own thought. An example: on one appearance on Joe Rogan, he bemoaned the lefts obsession with equality of outcome saying that that no one will ever achieve the same outcome in any one area because of inherent differences in ability amongst individuals, and to try to force equality is destructive to the will of the individual (equality = communism blah blah blah). Then, IN THE SAME FUCKING INTERVIEW, he suggested that forced monogamy (like Marx in regards to communism, he doesn't explain how that would work) would be good in counterin the weakening of the nuclear family (nevermind that the nuclear family is a purely modern invention) and declining birthrates in 'western' countries (why this is a big deal, he doesn't go into). Joe Rogan actually called him out on this by correctly pointing out that a forced monogamy program would eradicate the individuals ability to find sexual partners...something that some people are better at than others...and so it promotes equality of outcome which is EXACTLY THE SAME FUCKING THING THAT PETERSON HAS BEEN BITCHING ABOUT FOR HIS ENTIRE TIME IN THE PUBLIC LIMELIGHT. Peterson only responds by saying, "Oh, hmm I hadn't thought of it like that, but I still think I'm kind of right" and appealing to drivel about the well being of children being preeminent over hot dudes getting their dicks wet every night (nevermind that existing government programs like foodstamps help impoverished children, but promote 'equality of outcome' by his deranged mindset) and Joe is too stupid to hold his feet to the fire, so it doesn't go any further.

TLDR, Peterson doesn't know what he's talking about on any subject. He likes 'western culture' because as a privileged white Canadian, he has benefited from 'western culture'. And he thinks that religion, specifically of the 'Judeo-Christian' tradition, is important because it has been the dominant religion of 'western culture' in one form or another. That's it. That's as deep as it goes. He likes the culture he was born into because he has lived a comfortable life thanks to that culture. This informs and reinforces his worldview, and he will bend and contort his beliefs to keep the structure standing.