Someone stole the body!

[Godscreated]

  I think you need to give some dates for what you consider the early church.
 The church of the first century did not decide what letters would make up the NT, they didn't even know there would be a NT joined to the OT. The disciples preached mostly from the OT showing the people that the Christ prophecies of the OT were about the man Jesus that came and witnessed to them. 

 Why do you think that each writer of the Gospels had to put every little detail in their writings. This is where so many make the mistake of believing there are contradictions in the scriptures. You can take the four Gospels put them together and have a book with more detail a fuller Gospel. Luke did not use his imagination to write his Gospel, Luke states his Gospel was the testimonies of many witnesses of Jesus life.
 By the way I have read the text many times, I've read the Bible from cover to cover and studied it for years.
Like I said above you need to date the years of the church you are speaking of, as far as I know the first century church didn't baptize infants. The first century church were taught by the disciples that traveled to different areas to help the early Christians and from the letters sent to them from the disciples, some which became the NT.

GC

The only "disciple" of Jesus whom scholars have information about is Paul, who never even met Jesus, even though they were practically contemporaries.  A whole host of contradictions exist within the Gospels:

http://infidels.org/library/modern/paul_...tions.html

 
 You keep harping on this same thing and all you do is post from biased sites on the net. You do no research of your own and you never go to Christian sites to learn. When I went to the site you posted the first thing to come up was the genealogy of Jesus, showing how it's contradictory.
 
Let's look at he genealogy of scripture, here is the genealogy my Matthew and the one in 1 Chronicles 3:10-12, these are the very same genealogies.

 1 Chronicles 3;10-12                                                           Matthew 1:8-9
     Asa                                                                                      Asa
     Jehoshaphat                                                                        Jehoshaphat
     Joram                                                                                  Joram
     Ahaziah (Uzziah)                                                                    Uzziah
     Joash
     Amaziah
     Azariah
     Jotham                                                                                 Jotham
     Ahaz                                                                                     Ahaz
     Hezekiah                                                                               Hezekiah
     ect.                                                                                       ect.  
 As you see Matthew didn't write down all the genealogy, Matthew when saying Uzziah was the father of Jotham it can mean he was the father who lead to Jotham. Just as the Bible says that Abraham was the father of a nation or the angel said to Joseph, "Joseph son of David." This was the tradition of the ancient times to refer to a man as the father of a great great great grandson or even more distant. Matthew had a reason to eliminate the names, but what he didn't do was to write them out of order. So there is nothing wrong with Matthew's written genealogy, he for reasons unknown to us didn't include all the names. You need to remember that he had access to the genealogies at the temple and could have written them down as recorded in earlier manuscripts. So in the end there's no contradiction with the two, as I stated previously the writers didn't necessarily put down all the facts because they didn't feel it necessary for the times.

GC