So you have a new idea, a way of interpreting the faith that has been uncommon, or even unknown in our history. I don't have a problem with that. I think that's possible. While I think we should regard the people who knew Jesus personally as the strongest witness to what he actually meant, I can accept the idea that they were also culturally-bound, and truths might gradually emerge.
You disagree with 2000 years of other Christians, who presumably also had access to the Holy Spirit. I can see the possibility of that as well. I'm not writing that off as impossible. What I do find hard to accept is your absolute assurance that you are right and 20 centuries of other Christians are wrong. That, in and of itself, disqualifies you from further participation in the discussion.