Red herring is still a red herring. You know and I know that many of these issues did not make it into the Creeds because they were still being contested at that time. For example, Mary as Mother of God doesn't show up in the creeds until a little later (I think mid 400s.) I also never said that Baptists ascribe to any creed. If you knew about Baptists, we are non-Creedal people. The local church decides what it believes based upon Scripture. What I did say is that they would not find anything to disagree with as long as the words of the creed were properly understood (such as small c catholic). Those were the officially agreed upon teachings at the time. Baptists would have fit right in there. Later, they wouldn't have because the Creeds start adding diffent things that aren't in Scripture into them or things which the Scriptural interpretation thereof would not be acceptable to Baptists or most Protestants (are we to believe that the Catholics have the ONLY possible interpretation of the Eucharist and almost ALL Protestant and Baptist denominations have gotten it wrong? Clearly, Scripture has allowed enough gray area on that subject that you can come up with various interpretations).
We are not going to agree, it is clear. But be careful when quoting me. When I say Baptists identify more closely with the official teachings in 300, I am discussing the officially voted upon Creeds of the church. Not the other doctrines which Catholics officially accepted later as matters of faith and official doctrine.
So do the Baptists believe what's stated in the Apostles Creed or not? It was you who pointed to the Apostles Creed as evidence that early Church doctrine is the same as present-day Baptist belief.
Those were the officially agreed upon teachings at the time.
The Apostles Creed was not a comprehensive catechism of all agreed upon teachings at the time. It is a summary of basic Christian belief.
(are we to believe that the Catholics have the ONLY possible interpretation of the Eucharist and almost ALL Protestant and Baptist denominations have gotten it wrong?
You are correct in that there are many interpretations of scripture regarding the Eucharist but yes, almost all Protestant and Baptist denominations have gotten it wrong. The Lutherans, Anglicans, Eastern Orthodox, Latin rite Catholics, and all Eastern rite Catholics have gotten it correct. That is, the vast majority of Christianity correctly interprets Scripture regarding the Eucharist.
Clearly, Scripture has allowed enough gray area on that subject that you can come up with various interpretations).
It isn't that Scripture allows various interpretations, as there is only one interpretation of Scripture that is correct. Otherwise you are arguing that the Holy Spirit contradicts himself.