An alternative chronology for the lost authorship of the Gnostic Gospels
A critical examination and analysis of the manuscript evidence debunking the idea of "early Christian" authorship. (Edition: April 2011)

Bart Ehrman quoted - on the Christian Exterminators Editor paraphrasing - on the "history" of the Gnostic Exterminatees

"The victors in the struggles
to establish Christian Orthodoxy
not only won their theological battles,
they also rewrote the history of the conflict"

We have 4th century comparanda evidence for the modus operandi of the "history rewrite"
The victors retrojected the Nicaean Controversy into a fabricated pre-Nicaean history,
by the insertion of references and mentions of popular 4th century "Gnostic Gospels and Acts"
into their special "Ecclesiastical Version" of the "Historia Augusta"

"later readers then naturally assumed
that the victorious views had been embraced
by the vast majority of Christians
from the very beginning ...

... and still assume ...

"The practice of Christian forgery
has a long and distinguished history ...
the debate lasted three hundred years."

The false history rewritten by the victors declared the debate lasted "three hundred years",
but despite the fact that we'd like to believe them, and assume they told the truth, they lied.

Authorship of the "Gnostic Gospels" commenced c.324 CE in reaction to the Constantine Bible.
Constantinian damnatio memoriae, exile, and other forceful measures destroyed the books,
the name and the political memory of the Post-Nicaean gnostic author(s), with the result that
the "Greek debate" was "fascistly outlawed" inside "three hundred days", then imperially
suppressed and destroyed within "three hundred weeks".

Pachomian renegades reopened the "book debate" in Coptic. Others reopened it in Syriac.
But these, in turn, were "fascistly outlawed" inside "three hundred months".

The practice of Christian forgery certainly has a long and distinguished history,
but the evidence of the practice of Christian forgery appears with the 4th century.
The debate submerged for "three hundred leap years" while civilisation recovered.
The debate has been renewed with the recent discovery of ancient manuscript evidence.

"Lost Christianities,
Bart Ehrman.
"Lost Gnostic Histories",
via Eusebian Retrojection
Arnaldo Momigliano: "But I have good reason to distrust any historian who has nothing new to say or who produces novelties, either in facts or in interpretations, which I discover to be unreliable. Historians are supposed to be discoverers of truths. No doubt they must turn their research into some sort of story before being called historians. But their stories must be true stories. [...] History is no epic, history is no novel, history is no propaganda because in these literary genres control of the evidence is optional, not compulsory. ~ Arnaldo Momigliano, The rhetoric of history, Comparative Criticism, p. 260


Debunking the idea that the "Gnostics" manufactured manuscripts before Nicaea (325CE)

Index | Nag Hammadi | Gnostic Gospels | Gnostic C14 | TAOPATTA | Leucius Charinus | Leucian "Acts" | Mountain Man Graphics