So, I guess, we in our own time are to be heterodox and ignorant. Forget all that stuff about "study to show thyself approved" and "with all thy getting get understanding".
Joe Smith also attracted the ignorant. Jim Jones: appealed to some of the ignorant, humble, and sincere. Benny Hinn: appeals to some of the ignorant, humble, and sincere. You obviously like Moon. Tell me, on the basis of what you've said, why is Moon preferable to Benny Hinn? Do you even have a reason?
I think you missed my point. Among Jesus' contemporaries, he was largely rejected by the intellectual elites among his co-religionists. The common folk had no problem believing in him. But the clergy did not believe he was the promised messiah.
I can think of two reasons why they'd reject him.
Number one, he taught things that contradicted their principle tenants. For example he said that those who honor their father and mother more than him were not worthy of God's Kingdom. There are lots of examples of this.
Number two, the rumors. John the Baptist was Jesus' cousin. Mary's sister Elizabeth was married to Zacharias, a priest at the temple. They all knew each other and they also knew that Mary became pregnant before her betrothal. It must have been rumored at the time that Jesus was an illegitimate child.
Picture this obvious heretic and possibly illegitimate child going before the temple leaders and claiming to be sent to them by God. They had good reasons, according to their understanding, to disbelieve Jesus.
Hence, imperfect knowledge can be an obstacle to understanding. The religious leaders of the time did not understand God's providence as it was unfolding and so they blew their opportunity. He WAS the one they were waiting for after all.
To answer your question then, should we be heterodox (as regards the 2nd coming)? (def: contrary to or different from an acknowledged standard, a traditional form, or an established religion) It would have helped the religious leaders at the time had they taken an unorthodox view because Jesus, by any definition of the time, appeared as unorthodox as possible.
Finally, heterodoxy is not the same as ignorance. It is more like healthy skepticism.
Tell me, on the basis of what you've said, why is Moon preferable to Benny Hinn? Do you even have a reason?
I don't know much about Benny Hinn but Rev. Moon has developed a comprehensive, logical and insightful theology that includes a rational overview of providential history from the beginning. Exposition of the Divine Principle It's good reading.
There's also a theological seminary @ http://www.uts.edu/
Furthermore, there is a philosophical institute with an intro to Moon's Ontology, epistimology, axiology, ethics, theory of history and so forth at Unification Thought Institute.
Regards