@frankiespeakin- I agree, I have always wondered why it is ok to question standing doctrine when one rises to the upper echelon of the hieracrchy but it is considered an offense for anyone else. I guess it depends more on your proven loyalty based on your current position.
@problemaddict- I appreciate your response. The belief that there are more anointed than those who comprise the FDS is understood. If, however, there is "no line of truth" as noted in your comment, or no actual succession of FDS representation, that would imply that there was no collective group of Christians. This could easily be argued based on the premise that if there was no FDS than there were no domestics to feed. Otherwise, how to you justify that there was indeed a group of Christians, if there was no one to feed them. The reasoning is circular, that is realized, but it is not difficult to see how readily the idea of no annointed after the death of the last apostle and only anointed after the foundation of the modern day FDS. This is not much different than Mormon theology, i.e. all real biblical interpretation depends on the modern mormon movement from Joseph Smith to present.