I enjoyed your brief summary. I'll add a few tidbits.
The question I ended up focusing on was who wrote the Bible.
There's some outstanding work on who wrote the Hebrew Bible, I would separate that from who wrote the Christian Bible. The so-called Old and New Testament, as Christians refer to them.
I've heard some so-called Evangelical Christians refer to the Old Testament as a "book within a book." They distance themselves from the 613 "mitzvot" (in Hebrew, blessings, in English, commandments) given by Yahweh "for all time," that are not convenient, keeping only 10.
Beginning in 325 CE with the Council of Nicea (sic) called by Emperor Constantine, Rome's purpose was to impose a state religion on the people.
The reason for this was to divide the Empire, every square inch, into Catholic Parishes where all people had to register in the Parish Registry: their names, where they lived, occupations, ages, sexes, etc. That way you could organize tax collection, raise armies, spread propaganda, and you have the Priest doing confessionals as a means of collecting the best kind of information for extortion and political espionage.
Constantine didn't give a shit what the people believed. He just told all the Bishops they must have one Bible, one belief, uniform across the Empire. So a series of Ecumenical Councils were held between 325 and the 370's or so when the final Canon as we know it was ossified.
Except, of course, the Revelation of John, which has always been controversial in meaning and importance and authorship.
Prior to that, Christianity was run amok with everyone making up their own Gospels and Books. Gospels of Thomas, Mary, Judas, etc. With Jesus living to old age having five children, riding a Phoenix, banging Mary Magdeline (sic), and all manner of fun stuff.
I wouldn't say Christianity was run amok. It was new and in the process of great growth and excitement. Every area had its own "gospels" and "revelations", letters, etc. In fact, gnostic Christians were so delighted with their new religion, the composition of symbolic, philosophical, and political (ie: theological) writings, myths, gospels, and treatises were encouraged. Many of them were soon to be considered heresy.
Especially the ones promoting the importance of Mary Magdalene over the male apostles.
And Jesus wasn't merely "banging" Mary M, he had been anointed by her, head and foot (ie: penis) for the sacred marriage (in Greek: hieros gamos) death and burial. Although whether he really died, or was even personally hung on the cross, was a matter of passionate discussion in early Christianities.
At any rate, it's extremely obvious many thought there was something quite erotic about a woman (some Mary or other, maybe of Bethany, maybe the Madgalene [maybe all the Marys were the same goddess serving in different roles at different times]) crying on his feet, anointing them with delicious whoreish spikenard, and wiping them with her unbound hair. Take a look at the fun Renaissance painters had with this image. She even got hot for his "feet" when he was dead on the cross, in their imaginations.
Mary's sexual wifely desire for Jesus was a reflection of the goddess traditions saved in the Song of Songs in the Old Testament, which is still read in the Catholic churches on her saint's day.
Mary was not from Magdala (which probably didn't exist until after Biblical times) (Jesus was not from Nazareth, either, which also didn't exist yet, although gospel writers imagined it did. He was a Nazirite, a man on a mission, consecrated to god). Mary was the migdal, the tower (in Hebrew), vowels not being noted in this language until much later. She may have been Mary of Bethany, who is represented as wife-like in the gospels. It is often assumed Mary, Martha and Lazarus were wealthy. Mary Magdalene is written to have supported Jesus and the apostles from her own purse.
So they banned all of those, burned the books, and killed people who mentioned them. Nevertheless we've discovered them in archaeological digs like Nag Hammadi and can read them again.
I have not seen evidence of the gnostic writings being actually burned. And who was killed for even mentioning them? I understand they were merely no longer considered legitimate, and were left uncopied. (In fact, many are quoted in the canonical books!) It's an amazing thing that so many were discovered, saved in jars in Nag Hammadi, from the 4th century until the middle of the 20th. As well as the Dead Sea Scrolls being discovered about the same time! It's almost like the Holy Spirit herself hid them until humans were more ready to receive them.
The Bible of today is not Christianity. It is the dictatorship imposed by the Romans upon pain of death, and their purpose was not spirituality but administrative control and espionage upon the people of the Empire.
Well, who can say "what is Christianity?" It is whatever each person says it is. "Biblical sexuality" is basically patriarchal and misogynist, as per the needs of the tribal males of ancient days to own women and their offspring. Therefore, despite finding the Bible fascinating as the views and somewhat confused history of a certain time and place of the ancient world, I do not take much of it as a guide on how to live. You just
have to cherry pick your favorite parts. It's very inconsistent.
The Hebrew Bible, that is fascinating as a merger of Northern and Southern Kingdom traditions. One was polytheist. One monotheist. You see their creation stories appearing one right after the other in Genesis. Two sets of Ten Commandments. Christians are so ignorant of their own Bible they don't know about all these "doublets" that radically contradict one another.
There are 4 sources for the Hebrew Bible, the Elohist (god called El, translated "God"), Yahwist (god called Yahweh, translated "the LORD"), the Priestly (reflecting the desires of the elite at Jerusalem), and the Deuteronomist (secondary re-writers).
All of Israel (north) and Judah (south) was polytheist... the Levites settled in Jerusalem and sought to consolidate their power by enforcing one god and one temple to which sacrifices and tithes should be brought (for the priests and Levites to consume). The Bible was written as if monotheism started with Moses centuries earlier, but this was not true. Moses was imagined as the Hebrew Akhenaten, the iconoclast, whose bright idea for the "one god" concept only lasted as long as his reign. But the "one god" concept served the priests and Levites very well.
That's why they outlawed anything but Latin for Bibles. So that only the clergy could read them. So nobody knew.
Once the printing press was invented, you could not control production of Bibles as you could with scribes and such limited copies in circulation. It shattered Christianity with the Protestant Reformation. Confession was found to be nowhere in the Bible, so this was eliminated from Protestant practices for example.
In either case though, the Hebrew and Christian Bibles, it was the victors politically that produced the "Canon". The most savage conquerer, wow that Hebrew fellow really hated polytheism and smashed incredible numbers of idols, raised churches, etc. Forgot his name.
I'm not sure what "Hebrew fellow" would "raise churches." Maybe you're referring to King Josiah of Judah, who ordered the goddess Asherah's holy places to be "razed" to ward off Yahweh's wrath (ie, the conquering of Judah by Babylon) (which didn't work).
Asherah was worshiped as Yahweh's consort for many centuries. Finally, through much use of force and murder, she was eradicated. But the Jews couldn't do without a wife for Yahweh for long. Soon the Shekinah was thought to be Yahweh's wife/sex partner, and she still is (although many people don't know this). It's interesting that one reason Jewish men are commanded to fuck their wives on the Sabbath, is because it makes Yahweh fuck the Shekinah, which makes him happy, and causes him to bless his followers. lol Fun stuff indeed.
But in the Christian case, it was Rome. And the arch-villain in that whole story is the Bishop Eusebius, who sat at Constantine's right hand at that first great Council of Nicea (sic) in 325. He forged the most important passage Christians use as "proof" there was contemporary evidence for Jesus existing. There is none, but that forgery, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, forged by the Bishop Eusebius.
So these are not only war criminals by Nuremburg standards but forgers and weavers of tales that are internally inconsistent. It explains why you can quote the Bible for just about any purpose you want including incest, war, or Victorian Era neuroticism and peace.
Thus, however the so-called Bible covers any topic is immediately suspect as the writing is merged traditions under political compromise and control. In that first Council of 325, one of the more important matters was voting that if you cut your own nuts off to be a Eunuch, then you could not be a Christian. Someone else had to cut your nuts off.
lol
So I don't put much stock into the notion of Biblical Sexuality.
But do you have a "living faith"?
