Dr. King, Argument from Authority

[Neo-Scholastic]

And our point is that the charity you seem dead set on only focusing on is not a religious act, but a human one, and one that would be happening, christianity or no.

Prove it! Your claim goes against King's own words on the matter. You must think he was lying.

[Thumpalumpacus]

King Denied the Bodily Resurrection, Virgin Birth, and Deity of Jesus Christ

In the same sketch, "An Autobiography of Religious Development," King wrote that, although he accepted the teachings of his Sunday school teachers until he was about twelve . . .

"...this uncritical attitude could not last long, for it was contrary to the very nature of my being. I had always been the questioning and precocious type. At the age of 13 I shocked my Sunday School class by denying the bodily resurrection of Jesus. From the age of thirteen on doubts began to spring forth unrelentingly."

While it is widely believed that Martin Luther King, Jr. was committed to the “Christian religion,” he was far from it. He denied some of the most fundamental components of historic Christianity. He repudiated the doctrine of the deity of Jesus, and he rejected the concept that the Lord was raised bodily from the dead. King disdained the New Testament affirmation of Christ’s virgin birth, asserting that the early Christians devised a mythological story to account for the moral uniqueness of Jesus of Nazareth. His theology has been profusely documented in The Christian News Encyclopedia.

1. In his paper "What Experiences of Christians Living in the Early Christian Century Led to the Christian Doctrines of the Divine Sonship of Jesus, the Virgin Birth, and the Bodily Resurrection," MLK thought that in order to understand the true meaning of orthodox creedal doctrines—like the divine Sonship of Jesus, the virgin birth, and the bodily resurrection—the literal element needed to be stripped away in order to uncover the true experiential foundation beneath it.
MLK believed that doctrine of Jesus’ deity developed due to Greek philosophical influence and because the early church saw him as the highest and the best
MLK believed that the “virgin birth” was unscientific and untenable; like divine Sonship, this doctrine developed as a way for the early church to indicate how highly they valued the uniqueness of Jesus.
MLK believed that the doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus was an attempt by the pre-scientific early church to symbolize the experience that they had with Jesus.
2. Read in light of the above, it is clear to me that in the paper, "The Sources of Fundamentalism and Liberalism Considered Historically and Psychologically," MLK is self-consciously identifying himself with classical theological liberalism and rejecting the doctrines of fundamentalism.
MLK praised theological liberalism. In addition to the denial of the doctrines of divine Sonship, the virgin birth, and the resurrection, MLK points out that there is also a denial of Scriptural inerrancy and the doctrine of the fall.
MLK scorned theological fundamentalism. MLK seems not to believe in the direct creation of the world by God, man as being in the image of God, the historical account of Adam and Eve, the person of the Devil, the Fall, hell, the Trinity, the substitutionary atonement, and the Second Coming.
3. In his paper, “A Study of Mithraism,” MLK suggests that the doctrines of the early church grew out of the Greek mystery religions and cults which flourished at that time.
4. In an interview with Time Magazine, MLK seems to indicate that it was at Crozer Theological Seminary (the setting for the term papers quoted above) that he saw that the ministry was a framework by which he could express his philosophy of social protest.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Wolves/mlk_jr.htm Note that the source is a Christian website.

I'm glad he accomplished as he did; members of my family have opportunity they would not have had if Dr King had not stood up with his courage and eloquence.

[KevinM1]

And our point is that the charity you seem dead set on only focusing on is not a religious act, but a human one, and one that would be happening, christianity or no.

Prove it! Your claim goes against King's own words on the matter. You must think he was lying.

No one thinks King was lying.

What people are saying is that even if King wasn't Christian, he very likely would have done the same things because his struggle stemmed from being a black man in the American south in the early-to-middle parts of the 20th century rather than because he was Christian.

IMO, the most we can attribute to his Christianity is his oratory style, which was undoubtedly forged in the church, and which made his message more palatable to hear for many.

[FatAndFaithless]

(Not to mention King worked closely with socialists and atheists, for which he was often attacked.)

[Davka]

Sooo. Your saying Dr. king was fictional?

Hone your reading comprehension skills and you will not be asking stupid questions.

And pigs will fly.

[robvalue]

Small sample size and unproven causality.

People do good and bad things. Christianity does nothing. But people can change their mind about what is good and bad, depending on their religion. Since the good things religion teaches are just common sense, that just leaves the harmful, dangerous teachings.

[vorlon13]

(Not to mention King worked closely with socialists and atheists, for which he was often attacked.)

And Bayard Rustin, an early pioneer for gay rights. King took quite a bit of grief for that, just from Thurmond.

[robvalue]

Further: to join a religion is to take the bad with the good. You validate both the good and bad aspects of it, and the stupid book which is filled with horrific immoral acts as well as blatantly obvious "teachings".

By not buying into the religion, people can just take whatever good lessons they think the religion may have without propping up all the shitty side of it too. I'd be interested to hear one moral teaching Christianity has to offer that isn't just completely obvious common sense. And if there is one, why I should support a load of supernatural horse shit when I can just learn from it and move on?

[Spooky]

I'll sell my left nut to watch one of our forum members tell King that the bible condones slavery.

[Crossless2.0]

So MLK derived his tactics of non-violent protest from a Hindu, counted among his closest advisors several secular people, clashed with a majority of 'good' Christian southern pastors regarding his tactics and timing, and shamed the southern powers-that-be by appealing to the American creed that all men are created equal (not exactly a refrain that runs through the Bible). Oh, and though he was undeniably a Christian pastor, he also expressed doubts about core tenets of the faith. Add to that the simple fact that none of his campaigns, tactics, or values require faith in Christianity, and what are we left with?

An OP with no real point.