[Maxel]

AnthonyB, I admire the thoughts that you've come up with and the skill with which you presented your case. If I may, I'd like to comment and offer my opinion.

Originally Posted by AnthonyB

The biblical/historical example that comes to mind is Babel. People were one nation and through sinfulness God divided people into nations. God in his redeeming nature developed various cultures through which we can glimpse the creative nature of God expressed through these diverse nations. We still sometimes see the negative outworking of this sin in the strife between nations. IMHO God’s answer to this is not that people should become one nation (with a single culture, language and custom). Rather that we should recognize our unity as humans (the beings made in his image) whilst rejoicing in the diversity of our expressions of that humanness.

Is it better to work together for evil, or work apart for good? In the same vein, is it better to work together for good, or work apart for evil? In which manner will a group of people accomplish more?

One moral of the Tower of Babel is that it is better that man work apart for good than to work together for evil. However, that truth does not affect a situation where the choices were working together for good, or working together for evil. In that situation, the only question is: is it better to work together, or apart?

May I suggest that working together is to be unified, and working apart is to be divided? May I suggest a central theme of Christ's message is to be unified, and to put away our divisions?

What does it mean to be divided? Is division the same as diversity? If I like to dance, and you like to paint, does that mean we must live in a different culture, speak a different language so that our communication is hindered, and believe different things about the same God? If I like to dance the tango, and you like to dance traditional waltzes, can we not celebrate our diversities together and still worship the same God and belong to the same religion?

What diversities are important? Is a diversity among religion the same thing as a diversity of wholesome culture? If I believe in the concept of the Trinity, and you believe in the concept of the LDS Godhead, is that as trivial as if I like American food and you like Italian? If I believe, wholeheartedly, in the Nicean Creed and you reject it as a work of man, is that as inconsequential as preferring watching Soccer to Baseball? Are all things we encounter and do in this life of equal value?

Can not a single culture encompass all of the valid diversities we see in the world? Could not one culture include Mexican architecture, Indian cuisine, and American sports? Could it not include people who looked different, act different, like different entertainment?

It could- but it falls to the people who live inside that culture to be accepting of diversity.
Religion strikes human beings at the very heart of the soul: it deals with who we are, where we came from, and where we're going in this life. Pure religion is the greatest philosophy, the greatest system of ethics, and the greatest supplier of inspirational anecdotes the world has ever seen. No creation of man rivals the institution of pure religion: because pure religion was given to this earth from a power higher than man.

No culture that encompasses the whole of wholesome human creativity could unite under anything other than the True Religion.

If a man sees a doctor because his knee is broken, what will the doctor tell him? The doctor sets the leg and counsels the patient. The patient must care for his knee: he must know what to do and what not to do. He must wait for weeks, walking on crutches and coddling his knee. A big race is coming. Before the end of it, he must have recovered and be running with all his might, or else he has failed.

------------------------------------------------

The preceding was a stream-of-consciousness piece that I am content with. As such, I will not edit or condense. My apologies for the loquacious writing, and the fact that a valid conclusion was not reached for my argument. The rest will be much more on point.

Originally Posted by AnthonyB

The parallel to the church is that we were once a single church. We sinned and failed to stay unified. This often led to strife to between Christians. Rather than seeking to return to one church, we should see the redemptive work of Christ in all our churches. We should recognize our unity as disciples of Christ whilst rejoicing in the diversity of our expressions of that faith.

Should we rejoice in the diversity of our doctrine, or in the parts where our faith is unified? What do you mean by the 'expressions of that faith'? If you mean the expressions of charity and service that is often characterized as Christian, than that is the expression of a common theme of our faith, not a differing doctrine. If you mean something else, forgive me not understanding you.

A hard fact of human life is that expressions of philosophies differing from our own is hard to bear. It's so hard to bear, in fact, that immature and corrupt men will punish anyone who makes such expressions (religious, philosophical, and artistic intolerance of the Dark Ages, for example). It was such intolerance that lead the Pilgrims to the land that would be deemed 'America'.

May I posit a theory. In times past, before the Church was restored, the religious state of affairs was as you described. There was no true Church to join, so Christians had to grin and bear it and do the best they could. However, would unity wait until the Second Coming?

Before Christ appeared on earth in the flesh, at the meridian of time, He sent His prophet John the Baptist to prepare the way for Him. John's message was one of preparation, of spiritual preparation for the advent of Christ's ministry. Before Christ came again, he would again need a forerunner. However, because the second time he would manifest himself to the whole world, he would need a forerunner that could bring His message to 'every creature': he would need His organized Church.

Malachi 4:5-6
5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord:
6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

The Lord shall send Elijah to us before the Second Coming. Indeed, the Lord has sent Elijah to us. He not only returned the hearts of the fathers and children to each other, his coming signified the commencement of the gathering of Israel. His coming was one of the signs that the Lord's work had commenced. And, the Lord does not work among men, except he reveals his will to his prophets.

God scatters us to curse us for our sins, he gathers us to bless us for our righteousness. Without an organized entity already established well before the national crises that will herald the 'beginning of the end', the Lord would have no way to authoritatively make his voice known to the inhabitants of the earth. He warned the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, and of Babylon. He will not leave us without warning, and such a warning must come from His authorized ministers. Furthermore, his ministers must be trained in the godly life and have His priesthood to be able to work in His name. That could not realistically happen without a Church of God in place to teach those ministers correct doctrine, and to help their families raise them in righteousness.

Such a unity is needed, it is the only healthy state of affairs the world can function in.

The wheat must grow up with the chaff, only to be separated at the day of the harvest. That means that in these last days, when the evil chaff of the world is at its strongest, the righteous wheat of the world must also be at its strongest. All the blessings past Christians have ever enjoyed must be present today, and then some. That includes a unified, authoritative church.

Remember that Christ came at a time when many false Christs were proclaiming to be the Messiah. Christ was one man, and during his lifetime his influence was barely felt beyond his immediate presence. However, He was not just a man; he was God, and His power and influence swept the whole world. Similarly, His Church is one among many that make the same claim. The truth of the matter lies beyond words, it lies in man's communion with God.