Moore propagandizes, “The Cross and the Confederate flag cannot coexist without one setting the other on fire. White Christians, let's listen to our African-American brothers and sisters.”
Why among these ecclesiastical milksops is it always the obligation of the White person to compromise?
If race does not really exist as some of these leftwing theologians insist when they attempt to denigrate Whites any other time, why are they reluctant to condemn the flagrant sins engaged in by certain segments of the Black community such as the deliberate destruction of property following a controversial jury verdict or law enforcement tactical decision?
If we are obligated as Christians to downplay our earthly identities for the sake of heavenly unity, why did Russell Moore not condemn the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference as an organization that does not advance the cause of brotherhood among all Christians but rather an agenda focused upon determining the worth of an individual not by the content of their character but rather by the color of their skin.
Why did this seminarian instead accept a position on the board of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference?
In his column extolling the imperative of lowering the Confederate ensign, Dr. Moore condemned White Citizens' Councils that attempted to rally and speak on behalf of what such entities construed as the interests of that particular pigmentation extraction during the tumultuous era of desegregation.
Would he accept a position in a similar agency charged with the purpose of looking out for the interests of White Evangelicals in this era where increasing accolades are lavished upon certain individuals for really no other reason than that they happen to be members of certain groups, or would Moore at least extend his blessings to the formation of just such an organization?
One could not help but notice how quickly Russell Mooore called for the surrender of the Confederate flag.
Was this Southern Baptist functionary as prompt in condemning the Knockout Game where groups of marauding Blacks pick a victim (often a Whiter person denigrated as a “snowflake”) for the sole purposes of determining how many blows to the head are required to render the target unconscious?
It is argued that the Confederate flag should be removed from the grounds of the South Carolina State House and ultimately the wider culture altogether largely because of how that banner is perceived by certain people.
If this is being done largely on the basis of feeling which as an existential inclination which cannot really be categorized as right or wrong, what if someone gets a turd crossways about the official state flag of South Carolina with the crescent moon on it which in some minds might evoke traumas and phobias associated with Islam?
Why aren't those with that particular psychological shortcoming or deficiency being catered to if entire cultures must be comprehensively altered because a few disgruntled activists are predisposed to rampaging in the streets and destroying private property when they don't happen to get their way?
But because a symbol or custom offends a particular segment of the population, does that mean the endorsement of such by the state must be rescinded?
A noticeable percentage of the population no doubt questions the legitimacy of Black History Month.
Does that mean the celebration should be ended?
And what about gay marriage?
If outspoken principled conservatives and ministers of the Gospel emboldened by the Holy Spirit can turn the tide on this issue, does that mean the state sanction for such unions should be revoked or at least the formation of additional licensed couplings prohibited because public opinion wills such?
Interestingly, the anti-Dixie mindset has not confined itself to the ranks of the Southern Baptist Convention of which the organization's leadership often crave the applause and establishmentarian approval that has doomed the doctrinal fidelity of numerous other denominations.
It has even spread to a number of Independent Baptists where is has predictably taken on even more fanatical tones as often occurs in this related divergent ecclesiastical movement.
In their analysis of Russell Moore's column regarding the Confederate flag, Sean Harris of the Berean Baptist Church in a SermonAudio podcast was baffled by and mocked the Southern Baptist functionary's confession that the only things Moore loved more than his native Mississippi were Christ, the Church, and his family.
Harris contemptuously verbalized that, in this day of social mobility and diversity, how is it that an individual could possess such an emotional devotion and connection to their native state.
In his online biography, Pastor Harris details his distinguished career in the U.S. military.
So why is expressing such dedication to your country in that particular manner on the part of a Christian acceptable but not to a particular jurisdiction within that particular country?
Does the pastor ridicule missionaries with a heart for a particular area or people group?
As a carpetbagger from Massachusetts, perhaps Pastor Harris ought not to ridicule that which he does not understand.
Just because he has lived a life of globetrotting, it does not follow that everyone else is so required by either inclination or circumstance.
It has been suggested that the Confederate flag should be removed because those that marched under it shot and killed American soldiers.
Should the American flag be equally exiled because General Sherman, marching under that ensign, destroyed civilian property?
Pastor Harris assured that he is so dedicated to the Lord that he doesn't even want to be associated with the flag of the United States.
Then why do his online biographies provide significant detail regarding his military service?
If patriotism is to be viewed as something little better than wicked, isn't listing such achievements akin to someone in the porn industry not only listing what films they appeared in but what roles they played.
Pastor Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church argued that no Christian should display the Confederate flag because of the hurtful connotations associated with it.
People have also been hurt in the name of the Cross and the Bible as well.
Some Jews won't even look up at a steeple as they pass by a church.
So ought Christians to also renounce these symbols of culture and creed while we are at it?
If certain churches are bent on jumping on the anti-Confederate bandwagon, that is certainly their prerogative under the First Amendment.
Likewise, no American is obligated to remain in a church that bashes a specific heritage (especially that of those that have been with that particular theological grouping or ecclesiastical affiliation for decades and generations) in order to attract another or to win favor with the self-appointed benefactors of such demographics.
By Frederick Meekins