Dr. Martin Luther King Jr..

Odd way to observe Martin Luther King Day, by declaring he's probably burning in Hell.

Perhaps on Presidents' Day you can go through the list and tell us who's saved and who "could very well be in Hell right now".

 

Daisy,

I don't know if what he says is true or not, but I would note that you did not dispute any of the accusations. This is interesting how you responded without actually responding to the post. Very clever.

I was also curious if on Presidents Day you would celebrate it by saying anything positive about President George W. Bush or if you will take that opportunity to play liberal Democrat Politics and accuse him of being a liar about the war, etc...

Joseph Botwinick

 

I don't know whether it's true or not either, but that's beside my point that it seems inappropriate to celebrate the day by observing that he's probably in Hell.

And I thought I actually did respond, not to the letter, but to the spirit.

I don't play a liberal; I am one, but not exactly a Democrat. I don't presume to know whether W will burn in Hell or not; nor will I discuss that on Presidents' Day.

As for his lies, I won't make a special point of them in honor of the day, but should the topic come up, I won't shy away.

So what about you? Have you anything to say about Dr. King?

 

Gee Daisey,

What would you like for me to say about Dr. King?

Joseph Botwinick

 

andy,

Points taken. Thanks for explaining so courteously.

 

Mmm, but a lot of them seem to get disappeared.

I can defend aspects of the legacy. We liberals tend to see things in shades of gray, rather than the conservative black and white (in this case, perhaps it should be shades of brown, with some red, yellow & green thrown in). Deifying men will always lead to disappointment and disillusionment, if you're at all susceptible to reason, IMhO.

But you do manage to defend slavery, or do I have you confused with someone else? (I don't always pay proper attention to who posted what).

But that's not enough, you know, to just say; you have to say why. For instance, do you believe, as andy seems to, that bad theology makes a person evil?

Of course. I knew that when I started posting here. With a few exceptions, I find the posters here remarkably civil (for rabid conservatives) and the debates good fun as well as enlightening.

 

Anything pertinent to the O/P.

Since you ask.

 

Mmm, but a lot of them seem to get disappeared.</font>[/QUOTE]Daisy, I had noticed that too!

 

Martin Luther King does have the (dubious?) distinction that he is the most famous American baptist in history.
I have no idea who the most infamous American baptist in history is. I guess I should read up on the religious affiliation of all those serial killers that plagued the American countryside.

Yes it feels good to know that there aren't any widely known Dutch baptists.

 

You forgot Billy Graham. I'd think he'd rank ahead of Dr. MKL.

 

Graham more famous than King?
Certainly not! Outside Evangelical Christian circles Graham's name recognition goes downhill fast.
The non-christians I've run into throughout my life usually didn't have the foggiest idea about who he was when I mentioned him.
Graham is worldfamous in the United States so to speak. Most in the US probably think he is this huge celebrity worldwide, but in thruth, outside the USA he just isn't that well known outside the subculture of Evangelical Christianity.
While moving in RC circles I can always score some points by mentioning the fact that I am a baptist just like MLK, but bringing up Graham's name only causes a response of: "Who?"

 

You forgot to include Lincoln

 

MLK had many communist ties and was a womanizer.

 

andy,

Can you please cite sources for your opening post. Can you give speeches, sermons, or writings of MLK where he states his anti-literal Biblical beliefs.

 

That was covered elsewhere. His "communist ties" are loose at best. Dr King clearly wan't a member of the communist party. This allegation has been made several times on this board, and it's blatantly false. The confusion over this arises ofer that fact that two of his advisors had previously been members of the communist party. And on one occaision, he accepted an invoitation to speak at a non-profit group that was discovered to have ties to the communist party.

As for his womanizing, if we were to exclude every adulterer from having a holiday or recognition, we'd have to exclude Columbus, Jefferson, and Washington.

To pretend he was a perfect superman is ridiculous. But to consider whether or not his contributions to society warrant recognition of a national holiday is the issue. I believe his contributions do so warrant it, and don't have a problem with the holiday. His contributions were to the equality of all people of every race, and we're all better off because of his stance on civil rights.

 

I guess you would say that about Malcolm X, too.