In the first century , there were 12 Apostles, 12 disciples.
There are many since then that are called disciples, but it's common knowledge that the 12 originals were unique.
Same with the Apostles.
This thread was obviously meant to say that Smith was an Apostle of Jesus Christ, in the same way the original 12 were.
I'm sure the LDS didn't recognize those on your list (except the original 12) as the list of Apostles that they were adding Smith's name to.
Those seeing this thread I'm sure mostly see it as saying that Smith is an Apostle along the lines of the original 1st centuary ones.
Your question at the end of your missive is a moot point, and a leading question that doesn't have a ‘right’ answer.
It's rhetoric.
Plus the Catholic church is part of main stream Christianity whereas Mormonism isn't.
>Your list of Apostles is a list of straw men.
It is not my list; it is history. I merely call attention to the fact that the word “apostle” has more meanings that only the 12 who traveled with Jesus. The word has been used throughout history by various churches to describe someone their religion considers to have been “called” to be a messenger. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostle_%28Christian%29
>In the first century , there were 12 Apostles, 12 disciples.
You are incorrect; there were at least fourteen apostles. You overlook Matthias, who was chosen to replace Judas. You also overlook Paul, who became an apostle after the death of the Savior.
You are also incorrect about the disciples. Jesus had scores, perhaps even hundreds of disciples during his lifetime.
Quote — “The term apostle ... should not be confused with a disciple (who is a follower or a student who learns from a “teacher”).” See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostle_%28Christian%29
>Your question at the end of your missive is a moot point...
My questions were directly specifically to Mr. Robinson.It is for him to decide whether he considers them moot or wishes to answer them.