I think the analysis may have evolved over time but I recall that there was an era in which it was believed that the Gnostic Gospels may have preceded the Gospel of Matthew and Epistles of Paul. One huge problem with understanding the chronology is the uncertainty over how long the oral tradition went on, and when any "original" manuscripts appeared, how many are deliberate forgeries, and why the authors are all anonymous. (Fundamentalists don't seem to understand that the names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were all invented by the early Church, not that they were autographs.)
One of the theories I had learned decades ago, which I find especially intriguing, is that the "mainstream" Christian writings were "an answer" to Gnosticism. The Gospel of Thomas, for example, casts Christ in a very impersonal light, although he is the anti-pater (if that's the word). In other words, he is the force introduced to balance the indifference and even malevolence of the Creator God. (And probably especially the indifference to living under Roman rule.) But the Gnostic Jesus is cast in a flat character, without a persona (much like the bizarre rendering of the characters in the Book of Revelation).
As for how or why certain books were preserved: I did once come upon the Ecclesiastical History written by Eusebius. It's of course biased toward the mainstream Christianity of the day (as we imagine it anyway) but at least Eusebius makes an effort to catalog the works in his possession (at the Library of Alexandria) and it remains an important work for that reason alone.
The mere existence of so many "heretical" works that were worthy of saving at the Library speaks to the appreciation of all literature by earlier librarians and scholars, regardless of the validity of any writing under the Christian schema. (Writing itself might be considered divinely inspired regardless of content?) At least many heretical works were not burned before Eusebius took over (despite various fires at the Library, probably even intentionally set to crush intellectualism). He does seem to play a role in deeming heretical those documents he so chooses.
My personal opinion is that this preservation of the materials prior to Eusebius probably was not due merely to tolerance of heresy. In fact there seem to have been many kinds of intolerance practiced. As a I recall, Islam is in part believed to have sprung from the introduction of banned Christian beliefs (esp. Manichaeism) in Arabia. Not only banned, but the followers were evidently banished there. (Eusebius had a prescript from Diocletian ordering the Manichaeans to be burnt, approx in the era Spidergoat referred to, ca. 300 AD.)
How and why Christianity as we know it came to arise out of the murky political, religious, ethnic, philosophical and literary past of the Levant, and--of all places--Rome (and Byzantium), is to me a far more interesting question than the highly frivolous questions that modern Christianity seems to concern itself with--such as whether a woman should have the right to terminate a pregnancy, or whether gays should be treated equally under marriage, family and property laws, or whether the teaching of science (and education in general) should be left to the judgment of scholars in those respective fields, rather than regulated by boards pregnant with Judeo-Christian and Judeo-Christian-esque ideologies.
What would the world be like today if every child's introduction into western religion began with a survey course that explored mythology, the rise of animism and pantheism, the effect of Greek and Roman cultural assimilation by Jews and early Christians of the Levant, the use of symbolism in the Gnostic and canonic documents, the connection to Babylonian, Persian and Egyptian traditions, legends and myths, the Stoic movement in Greece and its probable influence on the Zealots (Jewish freedom fighters in rebellion against Rome) and Essenes (possible authors of the Dead Sea scrolls, and probable inventors of baptism), and the fragmentation of Judaism into so many sects at just about the time Jesus magically appeared to some of them, ether as a flat character of Gnosticism, or as a virtual Socrates (or Greek drama in general; compare the Passion to say, Antigone) . . . all of this would take many years of schooling to roll out into a coherent explanation of the likely causes of Christianity, but I certainly think this (or something more historically correct) is, and someday will be, the kind of story that even schoolchildren will be able to piece together as as sort of recital, or "show and tell", about how the world got so mired down in this bizarre tradition.
Not nearly enough is ever said about the "hidden" works of the early Christian era--the Apocrypha represents part of the digression into a "new" canon . . . but the Pseudepigrapha is probably much more important a set of works for Christians to study--if they are ever to understand the arbitrary and frivolous roots to the stories they hold sacred.
Anyone who is curious about what I'm talking about can research the Gospel of Thomas. I would also suggest looking into the Ethiopian version of Enoch, which seems to be an entirely different "prediction" of sectarianism yet to come, and also to look into the ancient tablets of Mesopotamia, such as at Nineveh (another great library), esp. the epic of Gilgamesh, the writings of the Ugarit (Phoenicia), the legend of Marduk, the code of Hammurabi and the Persian invention of a fiery hell, and the evolution from Zoroastrianism to the Roman version of Mithraism (with parallels to the Passion of Christ and the Last Supper).
Stuff like this really ought to be developed for consumption by the young and impressionable students of the Christian world, as a sort of vaccine against the various forms of propaganda many or most of them will inevitably have to endure before they truly begin to think for themselves.
This is probably more than you asked for from your post. I'm still very interested in Gnosticism by itself, as a historical context for understanding the Christian phenomenon, its roots and evolution.
Thanks for your remarks. They kind of wired me up.
. I like this thread. (Hopefully I haven't harshed its mellow.
:m
PS. Note to the sane: in the event of a factual/logical emergency, break glass to extract the axe labeled "Spidergoat rules, Fundies drool." Then just go chop, chop, chop. It works kind of like the crucifix on Dracula, or the Holy Water on the little girl in the Exorcism. Basically, it takes all the air out of their tires, removes the lug nuts and leaves them up on blocks.
PPS. If there was a cabinet level position for Secretary of counter-Disinformation (or something of the sort) I would give 25% of my available life energy to get Spidergoat (or his designee if he's not up to it) to fill that position.
Go, Spidey.
