What denomination did you grow up in? I don't necessarily disagree with you on anything here--I'm not interested in biblical inerrancy and I can't really justify the idea that the Church Fathers got everything right, but from a theological perspective, the possibility that God would provide a genuine divine revelation and then allow it to get twisted entirely out of shape strikes me as equally absurd. I prefer to follow the moderate biblical scholars rather than either the liberal or conservative extreme, since I find both sides to be very reactionary. So my question to you would be whether you're simply denying inerrancy or letting your rejection of it define your approach to Scripture in a way that leaves you with an equally lopsided view. This latter has been my experience with liberal scholarship in general.
Yes, I've read Parmenides. I started out as an atheistic existentialist with pantheistic leanings, but eventually was won over by the religious side of existentialism. I've been fascinated with Christianity for a while, started investigating it more seriously, and then got distracted by a lot of Catholic natural theology instead.
My major influences are Nietzsche, Sartre, Heidegger, Kierkegaard, various different mystics from multiple traditions, Plato and Plotinus, Advaita Vedanta, a handful of different Christian Platonists and Aristotelians (particularly the Thomists), and several modern Neo-Aristotelian atheistic philosophers. I identify primarily as a Platonist because I view Nietzsche as the great anti-Platonist, and if I am no longer with Nietzsche, then I am instead with Plato. Mostly I would categorize this as the belief that a variety of the things we associate with the mind, such as awareness and moral intuitions, are not products of the material universe but can be attributed to the underlying nature of reality. I'm not kidding when I say I'm Christianized, though--I've flirted pretty seriously with the fullblown nondualism that shows up both in Vedanta and Neoplatonism, but I think I've decisively rejected it at this point. (That's because of the existentialism: I see any metaphysics that doesn't leave room for free will as fundamentally flawed, and unfortunately, very few actually do.)
So yeah, I was not really a Platonist who afterwards became interested in Christianity. It was specifically my engagement with Christianity that led me back to the Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. This is probably why my relationship with Christianity is so tempestuous right now--it's exerted so much influence over me every step of the way, going all the way back to my anti-theistic days, that I'm incapable of viewing it objectively. So I have no idea what to really make of it. I do know that my underlying approach is fairly Platonic, though, so I've settled on that label.
She.