If you all yourself a Christian, you are a Christian. That's all that matters... if you want to claim only good Christians are actually Christian, then you're kidding yourself.
I don't believe that there are only good Christians. I just point out that sometimes we have to judge the word Christian with what actually means to be a Christian. Obviously the muderers of Hypatia and the crusaders were not the best example of Christians, yet bashers of Christianity like you, very much try to present those groups as the embodiment of what a Christian is just because they fit their arguments and their reasoning.
Bias I would say.
Obviously the religion I follow did not have roots at the time of Hypatia, so I don't quite understand what you call ''the origins of our religion''. The religion I believe in, started with whom I accept as the Son of God on the Cross.
Now to the other stuff.
I revolt at the idea of trying to draw a line between philosophy and Christianity as opposing forces. Obviously you have only a limited idea of what the Platonic, Stoic and Neoplatonic schools of thought represent, otherwise you would not make claims such as:
Classic Roman philosophers followed a specific approach to their learning and teachings, which was arguably not compatible with Christian teachings.
or as in your original post:
Philosophers of the age increasingly saw Christianity as incompatible with their moral codes and the Neoplatonism philosophy that underpinned their lifestyles. The philosophers of the future would be pagans, and firmly opposed to the Church, but they would suffer and for centuries by slaughtered for this opposition.
Stoicism and Platonism can we well considered as the philosophical predecesors of Christianity , yet without the supreme ethical value of the latter. There are differences true, but there are many similarities and certainly there are not opposing forces as you try to picture them.
The claim that all future philosophers would be pagan and that they would oppose the church, is not only biased, it's also not historic and plainly false. Pagan philosophers did not have a monopoly on what is called philosophy and the contributions of Christian philosophers in the early ages and afterwards are truly invaluable. We both understand what is the issue here and I think that I have exposed the fallacy of your reasoning. I also gave examples so there is no excuse here.
It's not the facts about Hypatia that I disagree with, or that some bad Christians of her age murdered her. I truly feel ashamed for them.
It's your view that you are trying to present underneath them that I have a problem with, as it is obviously faulty.
Here are some resources for you if you want to do the digging and see the error of your reasoning.
On Stoicism and Christianity.
Neoplatonism and Christianity.
Hit it harder mate
Bias.