“Once you throw out the interpretations of the the early Christians united completely on Eucharist,Baptism etc...”
If you read the New Testament OR the church fathers, it becomes obvious that early Christians were united on very little. It is also obvious that when we look back, we can easily read into what they said things they never intended (such as Purgatory & 1 Corinthians 3, per the NAB footnotes).
This post was intended to point out that while there is large agreement on what constituted MOST NT scriptures, there isn’t unanimity even today - and even less so if one considers books written prior to the life of Christ on earth.
“Try spending more time in prayer than thinking of yourself as being some modernist prophet of free republic”
I don’t think you know much about my prayer life...and I fail to see how reviewing the development of the NT canon is in any way trying to be a “modernist prophet”.
Care to explain?
Nonsense! They were 100 percent united on Eucharist being the actual body of Christ.
You make Christianity a religion of self interpretation like the Islam ,Judaism and Hinduism
Neither can you read exactly the dogma of the Holy Trinity. Sure, the three Hypostases are mentioned by name at various points in the scriptures and among the early Fathers, but the nature of the Triune God, as defined by the Church after the 4th century is not readily discernable from anything written in the NT.
That's why it took the Church until the 4th century to come up with a definition just what (not who—that was easy) was it the Church believed in.
Review the hours you spend responding to posts on free republic and see if it your prayer time matches or exceeds the time spent on free republic.