I don't completely understand this. You "read 'em & enjoy 'em", but "then ignore them"? I understand this regarding, say, the Pistis Sophia and the Gospel of Judas, and even the Gospel of Mary (though the echoes in Mary of other "post-resurrection" literature is clear). I can see where the Gospel of Philip might be too much to take too. But do you include in your "ignoring" the Gospel of Thomas as well? I'm not an expert on gospel archaelogy, but I believe the original of Thomas is thought to originally stem from 50-60 A.D., and there are clearly echoes of G of Thomas in all the 4 traditional gospels. I'm surprised you would include such a work as Thomas in your complete rejection of the Gnostics. Not that I don't understand a love of the traditional gospels. I'm just curious as to your seeming total rejection of the others. Peace.