If I am correct to presume you do not mean Gnostic apologetics, sure, that would be great. The canon often refers to "mysteries," but not in any deliberately opaque way; again, each such reference describes mysteries to the extent possible, neither stating nor implying the writer or anyone has any greater understanding than that presented in the text, and usually suggesting no better understanding is possible for man. The other sources and external evidence of which I am aware are all decades (if not a full century) after the canonical Gospels, making it hard to accept the premise their philosophy predates that the canonical Gospels express. I do at least try to remain objective, so if you have sources not vulnerable to those criticisms, please do share, with my thanks.