“That’s why denominations with “free” in their name (like the Free Methodists, for instance)—along with those who believe in the necessity of personal repentance and faith—have been the most dogged supporters of religious freedom for all.
These groups of people understand that the gospel according to Jesus is not an external affirmation of generic belief, from a heart still untransformed. It is not accepting Christianity as a ticket of admission into society.”
Russell Moore
Christianity Astray Article
I would ask Russell Moore (and Christianity Astray for that matter) why it is superior to have an established Church wherein it is possible for someone to have an “external affirmation of generic belief, from a heart still untransformed,” vis-a-vis having Anabaptist “Religious Freedom” wherein it is possible for someone to not affirm any kind of faith from a heart still untransformed? Why is it superior to have religious pluralism that finds Jews, Muslims, and Atheists with no faith vis-a-vis a legal Christian state that finds false professors in the midst? Why is it better to have in one geographic area wheat fields, oat fields, cornfields, soybean fields, and sorghum fields as opposed to one wheat field that contains tares?
Secondly, why is it so criminal that Christianity might be a ticket of admission into society? Does Moore prefer that non-Christianity be the ticket of admission into society?
Thirdly, all because externalism has been a genuine threat to nations that embraced an Established church that doesn’t mean the answer is to create an environment where externalism isn’t possible because genuine Christians are being persecuted by the state.
Finally, genuine Christianity, while necessarily inward and internal still requires an external affirmation of faith and there is nothing wrong that such an external affirmation of faith be a ticket into a Christian society.
Stick with the Belgic Confession of Faith and start now detesting the error of the Anabaptists and all other seditious people.
