I think John F. enjoys his constant use of the term, “Creedal Christians” for his categorizing of me on this blog. He mentions this term because of his firm conviction that I derive the idea of the Triune God not from the Bible but from perceived corrupt church history creeds sourced in human imagination under bondage or unenlightened.
I use to be bothered by this on the HI4LDS blog, for you could almost track the history of all this if you have lots of time to waste. (To be fair, I am sure that not all would be disturbed by the term. I just came across The Pondering Pastor today. As a pastor in the ELCA, perhaps he might accept the description of “creedal Christian” from any insistent LDS. It might be fun to ask him, especially as he has just started this series of comparing LDS Articles of Faith with Lutheran doctrine.)
But today, I really don’t fault John F. for this belief. He is only parroting the underlying conviction of Church headquarters in SLC.
If it is alright for the LDS Church apologists and apostles to continue labelling me a “creedal Christian” rather than a biblical Christian, is it acceptable for me to label them as “Joseph Smith’s Saints” rather than latter-day saints.
Aren’t genuine evangelicals, living in 2008, latter-day saints?