Statesboro, GA, USA
Lucius Domitius Aurelianus ... had as one of his objectives to set in force a one-god religion....though it was the religion of the Sun God. In order to do this, it may well be he destroyed valuable texts that did not fit his ultimate agenda, which may well have included the original scrolls of the gospels as this place would have been a tremendous repository. That may well have been where the gnostic gospels were housed, as well.
Iliana, if his goal was to establish worship of a "sun-God" similar to the earlier Egyptian deity, then orthodox Christian texts would stand in his way much more than the gnostic texts (which are far more sycretistic). The New Testament is not idolatry-friendly, to put it mildly.
And as for the origins of Christianity, I hope you're not making a connection with Aurelianus. The Jewish monotheism (the root of Jesse, as it were) is doubtless the foundation for the Christian religion. Christian and non-Christian scholarship concur on that point.
Constantine then took the Sun God notion a step further when he worked that into switching the Sun God religion to the Son/God religion with Mary then replacing Isis or the Greek or Roman Goddess equivalent.
I have no problem in seeing a connection between Roman Catholic exaltation of Mary, and Isis. However the Jewish Messiah, and his very human but pious mother (as portrayed in the Gospels) has no such connection.
Since Christianity was birthed in a very Hellenistic world ... I see both a good and bad blending with Greek thought, as inevitable. But again these are only ingrafted branches, into that Jewish olive tree which is the root of Christianity.
I am still sticking to my belief that things were discarded, picked and chosen.
I'm not asking you to shed that belief. I believe that too. I would only add that there were valid textual reasons behind the choosing, as opposed to merely selfish and political ones. Believing the latter, I still maintain, is a popular form of historical recontruction, and is based on a "hermeneutic of suspicion" as N.T. Wright once called it.