I'm Gnostic Christian and I wanted to take a few moments to respond to a few things JFOD said about the Gnostic gospels:
It's not accurate to say Gnostics saw Jesus as just "some eastern mystic" or just a "wise teacher" or anything like that. While the Gnostic view of Jesus is somewhat different than the orthodox view, there is generally agreement that Jesus was the divine manifestation of God in the world.
For example this quote from the Gnostic Gospel of Philip relates to the divinity of Jesus: "Truth did not come into the world naked, but it came in types and images. The world will not receive truth in any other way. There is a rebirth and an image of rebirth. It is certainly necessary to be born again through the image. Which one? Resurrection."
Also The Gospel of Truth -"The gospel of truth is joy to those who have received from the Father of truth the gift of knowing him by the power of the Logos (Christ), who has come from the Pleroma and who is in the thought and the mind of the Father; he it is who is called "the Savior," since that is the name of the work which he must do for the redemption of those who have not known the Father."
And also this quote from Treatise on the Resurrection: "It (the resurrection) is no illusion, but it is truth! Indeed, it is more fitting to say the world is an illusion, rather than the resurrection which has come into being through our Lord the Savior, Jesus Christ. "
Also Gnostics have varying ideas about divinity, I think it is more accurate to say that when Gnostics talk about being a "Christ" it is more about being the physical embodiment of Christ in the world, not becoming a little "god" or reaching our on divine potential in some new-age type of way. In orthodox Christianity, we are taught to become "Christ-like," while the Gospel of Philip says something to the effect: "Not like Christ. A Christ." It is a small distinction, and IMO more of a commentary on the purpose of becoming like Christ than anything else.
Also it is Thomas that supposedly went to India, not Christ.
Acts of Thomas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gnosticism, like JFOD said, is subversive in a lot of ways, but I think it is fair to say that it is ultimately very similar to orthodox Christianity. We happen to share a LOT with orthodox Christianity. For instance, the (genuine) writings of Paul are extremely important to us, as well as the canonical Gospel of John, which is quite possibly Gnostic in origin.
Yes none of us really believe in a literal eternal Hell, and Gnostics aren't concerned with whether or not people are gay, however it would be ignorant for me or anyone to force my understanding of Christianity on anyone else or to go around saying, "I am right and they are all wrong." It is dangerous to say Christianity should have been "this way" or was "hijacked" by "these people" b/c pretty much anyone who doesn't think Christianity is the way they want it to be whines about another group "hijacking it" or not representing it the way it truly should be.
Despite the multitude of disagreements we have with orthodox Christianity, I don't think many, if any, modern Gnostics have a problem with people being Protestant, Catholic, or whatever. We just happen to have a different way of looking at what is ultimately the same thing.