I also have the Nag Hammadi library and I can see the attraction Gnosticism must have had for people. I don’t particularly mind a Gnostic thinking I’m not one of the special wise ones because they at least weren’t running around killing people who disagreed with them. As you say, I think Gnosticism could be a bridge.

It’s not Christianity per se, but Orthodox Christianity that is the problem. The rest of us can co-exist.

And I agree with you entirely about the first century until the fourth – an age of faith – Pagan faith. When Christians say Paganism was already dead and moribund, all the evidence shows that Paganism had reached its highest flowering.

Insisting all entire Pauline corpus is genuine is as absurd as insisting all the Gospels are true. Factually, historically, it just doesn’t work. The one thing I am convinced of personally is that Paul was not a Jew; if there was anything Jewish about him at all (and he clearly had some knowledge of Judaism) he was what they called a “God-Fearer.” It is my sense that he combined his sketchy knowledge of Judaism with his knowledge of “mystery religions” and magic and gave us Christianity.

But scholars who know far more than I do argue about all that.

You mention the problem with some of the non-genuine epistles. There are also problems with some of those that are seen by most to be genuine. 2 Corinthians is an example.

Hans Dieter Betz discusses the strange interlude in 2 Cor 6:14-7. Betz shows that these passages cannot be Pauline in origin and points to parallels in the Essene Qumran literature found in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

He notes that “because of these parallels and the frequency of non-Pauline concepts found in the passage, some scholars have suggested that it must be regarded as a non-Pauline interpolation.”

Scholars who have come to this finding include such notable names as Bultmann, Bornkamm and Koester. Betz suggests that these passages represent the views of Jewish Christian critics of Paul’s missionary activities.

Hans Dieter Betz, “2 Cor 6:14-7:1: An Anti-Pauline Fragment?”JBL 92, (1973), pp. 88-108.

As you say, there were once more tolerant Christians – though the intolerant ones like Tertullian were there as well – but all that came to an end with the “orthodox” victory. By the way, I assume you’ve read Bart Ehrman’s “Lost Christianities”? You’re obviously well familiar with the era and its developments.

So, essentially, the fundamentalism arm of the early Church was creating pious forgeries to justify its doctrines, marginalizing the richer, mystical and gnostic traditions, and permanently corrupting Christianity as a whole. It’s especially disturbing when you compare that to an earlier time, before the end of the 2nd century, when Christians were indeed more tolerant and open, and some worshipped Pagan Gods alongside Christ. Have a look at page 143 here:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=Cmey73GtfuUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=coptic+christianity&cd=1#v=snippet&q=servianus&f=false

And yes, there are plenty of reasonable Christians out there, like the Jehovah’s Witnesses I wrote about recently, and my family back in Minnesota, and others. Unfortunately, the moderates are not the ones with the pull right now. I’d like to see more moderate Christians speak out against the dominionists and the Religious Right.

Thanks for the link. And unless I misremember, Mithras rose again too and was born in a cave, etc. Christians always say the Mithraists stole their doctrines and liturgy but I think given Paul’s birth in Tarsus, a huge Mithraic center, that we know it’s the other way around.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7495006.stm

The resurrection story of Jesus (risen after 3 days), could based on a pre-Christian Jewish story found on this ancient tablet from near the Dead Sea

“Chrysostom recommends, no doubt to applause, that his listeners should not hesitate to give a good punch in the face to misbelievers. Equally bellicose words are heard from other bishops in eastern and western pulpits. They occasionally join as combatants in the riots they have aroused or which they have certainly directed and sustained. Their clergy have been seen, above, beating and stabbing each other in the cause of Bassianus at Antioch.” (Voting about God in early church councils, 63)

But hey, Christians aren’t all bad. I just had a chat with this conservative on a Catholic forum, and laid out some good historical facts for him to ponder. We had a good, civilized chat. He recognized the destruction caused by Christianity as truly bad and misguided, and though he thinks that Christianity is the only way, he’s quite willing to listen to other views. I laid out my reasons for my beliefs, and he did the same. It turned out to be quite an interesting experience. If only all conservatives were like that…

This quote by Michael Gaddis, in “There is no crime for those who have Christ” explains the persecution complex that Christians have, and that they had since the beginning. It falls under the heading of “repressive tolerance”, meaning that co-existing with others is itself a form of persecution:

“Even under the Christian empire, some claimed to suffer
it simply because they were forced to tolerate the continued existence of pagans and heretics. This “repressive tolerance,” as Herbert Marcuse might have characterized it, seemed to some as little more than a subtler form of persecution—for certainly it was not right, they thought, that truth be forced to live on equal terms with falsehood.” (Gaddis, pg. 6)

There is is, explained by scholarship.

Best regards,
Metatron