Martin Luther King Jr. and influences on Black churches

[Van]

I am missing your point. The Democrats won the black vote by about 80 percent to 20 percent. Black people now support BLM. MLK was a nominal Republican and the civil rights act of 1964 was passed with mostly Republican votes as the old Dixiecrats voted against it. Blacks have rejected both MLK and the GOP in favor of BLM and the Dems.

The purpose of this thread, or at least what it accomplished, was to bash MLK. To link him in any way with the Marxists of BLM is wrong.

 

[church mouse guy]

The purpose of this thread, or at least what it accomplished, was to bash MLK. To link him in any way with the Marxists of BLM is wrong.

Oh. No, MLK was not advocating ID politics but it is black Democrats who have rejected MLK and it is their decision. I moved out of black Indianapolis during the Obama years. Blacks will move more into ID politics during the upcoming Biden years. Trump has all but run out of time. I think the electoral college votes on 11 days.

 

[Van]

Oh. No, MLK was not advocating ID politics but it is black Democrats who have rejected MLK and it is their decision. I moved out of black Indianapolis during the Obama years. Blacks will move more into ID politics during the upcoming Biden years. Trump has all but run out of time. I think the electoral college votes on 11 days.

Yes, the days ahead look dark indeed. When people forsake Truth, it is Katy bar the door...

 

[JonC]

The purpose of this thread, or at least what it accomplished, was to bash MLK. To link him in any way with the Marxists of BLM is wrong.

That was not the purpose of the thread, but some have used it for that purpose.

The purpose of the thread is to examine how MLK, who accomplished so much in terms of civil rights and helped to transform our nation for the better, came to be viewed as a Christian leader despite his testimony to the contrary.

 

[robustheologian]

I don’t care if you want to be crucified for what you believe if you want to die for a lie but I would tell you just say that you don’t want to die for a lie.

I'm not the one here believing in lies.

I agree with your condemnation of racism. This was, and is, an evil that the Church has often not only ignored but allowed to exist within her walls. The American Church, for a long time, not only did nothing about racism in it's own surroundings but aided racism to exist.

The fact, however, is that MLK is not the fictional account that you would reduce him to be. The fact is that he was not a Christian by his own writings.

No, you mean he wasn't a Christian by conservative definition. Thankfully, conservative theology doesn't have a monopoly on the truth of the gospel.

And until you can realize this you cannot appreciate MLK and his accomplishments.

I'm the one not appreciating Dr. MLK and his accomplishments?!?

If I could somehow change history so that MLK would have accepted Christ, would have been a Christian leader and a leader in the Church then I would. I hate to know that he was not a brother in Christ but the more I read his writings the more this is obvious. People have focused so long on his accomplishments in the area of social justice that they have not considered his faith.

And MLK was a man of faith. His faith was just misplaced. I am not sure that he would have been the leader he was if he were Christian (the idea of Christ being divine by opening up to God's truth and being obedient not knowing the outcome of this obedience seems to be a driving factor in MLK's writings).

But making MLK a fictional person (a "rebel flag") and romanticizing the Civil Right's movement (creating a "Dixieland") is to discredit MLK as a human being. It is not only wrong historically, but it is immoral. We have his writings on civil rights issues. We have his writings on Christianity. We know where he stood. We do not need to create lies to make the man a "god".

Everything you're saying is assumption, opinion, and speculation...EVERYTHING.

What do you believe is the real gospel of Jesus Christ?

What do you believe is the "Americanized" gospel?

An Americanized gospel is a gospel that denies systemic racism and police brutality while embracing bigotry...and only pays lip service to the real Jesus.

Was Mr. King a sinner? Yes, but that does not mean he did not love Jesus, or was not His flawed servant.

Perfectly put.

So you do condemn the Dem party. as they were the main ones supporting all of that!

I condemn the party that denies systemic racism.

 

[robustheologian]

The Democrats won the black vote by about 80 percent to 20 percent. Black people now support BLM.

Hmmm...could it be because BLM actually affirms that Black people's lives matter?

MLK was a nominal Republican

Just making up stuff I see...no proof.

Blacks have rejected both MLK and the GOP in favor of BLM and the Dems.

Yeah, that's why they go to MLK parades while you stay home. And Blacks reject the GOP because of Republican racism.

 

[JonC]

I'm not the one here believing in lies.
No, you mean he wasn't a Christian by conservative definition. Thankfully, conservative theology doesn't have a monopoly on the truth of the gospel.

Here we go with your circular arguments again.

It is a Christian definition by those who were the first Christians. It is how Scripture defines our faith.

You can say Mahatma Gandhi was a Christian, but that does not make it true. MLK denied Jesus Christ. He cannot have been a Christian, period.

It is not about "Americanized Christianity" because that is YOUR invention (you probably mean "Western Christianity" but cannot find the words to accurately express your meaning). That said, the gospel that MLK denies is the same gospel through all of the Christian iterations. The early church believed that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. African Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. Jewish Christians believe Jesus rose bodily from the grave. White Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. Ethiopian Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. Paul wrote that our faith is worthless if Jesus did not rise bodily from the grave. Paul wrote that our faith is founded in Jesus rising bodily from the grave.

But MLK wrote that Jesus rising bodily from the grave never occurred. That it was the first century expression of a truth that they could not comprehend except they express it biologically as a myth. MLK denies that Jesus rose bodily from the grave and therefore is not a Christian by definition.

The question is whether or not you believe what MLK believed about Christ. If so then you are not a Christian.

That does not mean that MLK was not a great man who did great things. It simply means, like Gandhi, MLK was not a Christian. He was a man who saw social injustice and dedicated his life to fighting that injustice.

I'm the one not appreciating Dr. MLK and his accomplishments?!?

Yes. You are not the one who appreciates Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. because you replace the man with a fiction of the man. He is important to you only insofar as you have benefited from his work. You do not care about his writings (about his faith) and the driving force behind the man's dedication. You only care that you benefited from his work.

 

[JonC]

Let's just cut to the chase, @robustheologian (let's see if you have the....marbles....to answer honestly).
MLK stated that Jesus was not God. Do you agree with MLK?

MLK stated that Jesus did not rise bodily from the grave. Do you agree with MLK?

MLK stated that the second coming is not a bodily return of Christ but occurs when each person opens themselves up to the truth that Jesus preached. Do you agree with MLK?

 

[JonC]

I am missing your point. The Democrats won the black vote by about 80 percent to 20 percent. Black people now support BLM. MLK was a nominal Republican and the civil rights act of 1964 was passed with mostly Republican votes as the old Dixiecrats voted against it. Blacks have rejected both MLK and the GOP in favor of BLM and the Dems.

Why do you think that MLK was a "nominal" Republican? From his accounts he seems to have simply been a Republican.

 

[robustheologian]

Here we go with your circular arguments again.

It is a Christian definition by those who were the first Christians. It is how Scripture defines our faith.

Oh the irony of stating "circular arguments".

MLK denied Jesus Christ.

This is simply not true.

It is not about "Americanized Christianity" because that is YOUR invention (you probably mean "Western Christianity" but cannot find the words to accurately express your meaning).

This is not an instance of me not accurately expressing what I mean, this is an instance of you not being able to understand the term.

The early church believed that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. African Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. Jewish Christians believe Jesus rose bodily from the grave. White Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. Ethiopian Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. Paul wrote that our faith is worthless if Jesus did not rise bodily from the grave.

Yeah, the early church also believed that they should "seek justice, correct oppression", "rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep, live in harmony with others", "love others as they love themselves", and "turn the other cheek"...all of which these American-brand Christians fail miserably at. So since they have been found wanting in all of this, are you saying that they aren't Christians? If so, I will concede what you're saying about Dr. MLK is right. If not, then your view of Dr. King is, at best, logical inconsistency.

The question is whether or not you believe what MLK believed about Christ. If so then you are not a Christian.

You're assuming you know what makes one a Christian or not.

You are not the one who appreciates Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. because you replace the man with a fiction of the man.

That's the beauty of the internet. Anyone can view this thread and see who's really the one not appreciating the late, great Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

[robustheologian]

Let's just cut to the chase, @robustheologian (let's see if you have the....marbles....to answer honestly).
MLK stated that Jesus was not God. Do you agree with MLK?

MLK stated that Jesus did not rise bodily from the grave. Do you agree with MLK?

MLK stated that the second coming is not a bodily return of Christ but occurs when each person opens themselves up to the truth that Jesus preached. Do you agree with MLK?

Like I really care about what your definition of "having marbles" is. This is nothing more than a red herring.

 

[Yeshua1]

I'm not the one here believing in lies.




No, you mean he wasn't a Christian by conservative definition. Thankfully, conservative theology doesn't have a monopoly on the truth of the gospel.


I'm the one not appreciating Dr. MLK and his accomplishments?!?


Everything you're saying is assumption, opinion, and speculation...EVERYTHING.


An Americanized gospel is a gospel that denies systemic racism and police brutality while embracing bigotry...and only pays lip service to the real Jesus.


Perfectly put.


I condemn the party that denies systemic racism.

That would be the Dem Party, and do you see as Christians those who deny the Deity of Jesus, and His physical resurrection?

 

[Yeshua1]

Like I really care about what your definition of "having marbles" is. This is nothing more than a red herring.

Heresy is a red herring?

 

[robustheologian]

Heresy is a red herring?

Wow...responding to a red herring with another red herring.

 

[JonC]

Oh the irony of stating "circular arguments".


This is simply not true.


This is not an instance of me not accurately expressing what I mean, this is an instance of you not being able to understand the term.


Yeah, the early church also believed that they should "seek justice, correct oppression", "rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep, live in harmony with others", "love others as they love themselves", and "turn the other cheek"...all of which these American-brand Christians fail miserably at. So since they have been found wanting in all of this, are you saying that they aren't Christians? If so, I will concede what you're saying about Dr. MLK is right. If not, then your view of Dr. King is, at best, logical inconsistency.


You're assuming you know what makes one a Christian or not.


That's the beauty of the internet. Anyone can view this thread and see who's really the one not appreciating the late, great Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

I know that the gospel means. And it is not different (there is not different gospels). That does not mean that there was/ is not issues with American Christianity in how they live out the gospel of Christ. There is (most seem just to believe stuff without living out anything).

That said, you are wrong to denounce MLK's writings as reflecting his beliefs. Anyone can read what MLK said of his own beliefs by simply going to The Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute at Stanford University. That is the source I provided.

Therein MLK denies three things: 1. The Virgin Birth, 2. The Divinity of Christ, and 3. The Resurrection of Christ. I do not believe that Christianity hinges on one's view of the Virgin Birth (MLK is not the first to say that Mark could have been saying a young woman and the other Gospel writers pushed the point to myth).

BUT denying the Divinity of Christ and the Resurrection of Christ is a heresy that excludes one from being a Christian - NOT just in America, but period. And this is what MLK did. Read the papers for yourself (assuming you are able).

MLK denied that Christ is divine (that Christ is God) but wrote that this was simply how the early Christians (those who followed Christ) expressed his "magnetic personality" and spiritually. He was so unique that they attributed this uniqueness biologically by calling him "divine". In truth (per MLK) Jesus was only divine in the sense that he was a man who had opened himself up to the spiritual truths of God and in that sense shared both humanity and divinity. MLK was not, by his testimony, a Christian.

MLK denied the resurrection of Christ. MLK did speak of the Resurrection and the Empty Tomb. BUT he said that this was just a mythological outward expression of what His followers experienced. Jesus did, of course, not come back to life because that is scientifically impossible. But the truths to which Jesus lived and under which Jesus died could not die with the man. That is the Resurrection and the Second Coming is when men open up their minds to these truths. Again, MLK was not, by his own testimony, a Christian.

What I want to know is whether you share MLK's views. If you do then you are also not a Christian and have no business posting on Christian forums.

You can act like a spoiled child and say you do not see the MLK Research and Education Institute....or that someone must have forged those writings....or that Stanford University has created the site to slander MLK. But you cannot with any integrity or character deny what MLK has actually written.

 

[robustheologian]

That would be the Dem Party

So the Democrats, and not Republicans, are the ones denying systemic racism?? Okay, prove me wrong....do YOU believe systemic racism against black people exists?

 

[Yeshua1]

Here we go with your circular arguments again.

It is a Christian definition by those who were the first Christians. It is how Scripture defines our faith.

You can say Mahatma Gandhi was a Christian, but that does not make it true. MLK denied Jesus Christ. He cannot have been a Christian, period.

It is not about "Americanized Christianity" because that is YOUR invention (you probably mean "Western Christianity" but cannot find the words to accurately express your meaning). That said, the gospel that MLK denies is the same gospel through all of the Christian iterations. The early church believed that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. African Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. Jewish Christians believe Jesus rose bodily from the grave. White Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. Ethiopian Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. Paul wrote that our faith is worthless if Jesus did not rise bodily from the grave. Paul wrote that our faith is founded in Jesus rising bodily from the grave.

But MLK wrote that Jesus rising bodily from the grave never occurred. That it was the first century expression of a truth that they could not comprehend except they express it biologically as a myth. MLK denies that Jesus rose bodily from the grave and therefore is not a Christian by definition.

The question is whether or not you believe what MLK believed about Christ. If so then you are not a Christian.

That does not mean that MLK was not a great man who did great things. It simply means, like Gandhi, MLK was not a Christian. He was a man who saw social injustice and dedicated his life to fighting that injustice.
Yes. You are not the one who appreciates Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. because you replace the man with a fiction of the man. He is important to you only insofar as you have benefited from his work. You do not care about his writings (about his faith) and the driving force behind the man's dedication. You only care that you benefited from his work.

Based upon their own words, both Gandhi and Mlk are in hell, sad to say!

 

[JonC]

Based upon their own words, both Gandhi and Mlk are in hell, sad to say!

But God did use both men.

 

[Yeshua1]

So the Democrats, and not Republicans, are the ones denying systemic racism?? Okay, prove me wrong....do YOU believe systemic racism against black people exists?

I think that people who are lost sinners will have some degree of racism against others, blacks to blacks, whites to whites, blacks to whites, whites to blacks etc!

 

[Yeshua1]

But God did use both men.

Yes, but that was due to His plans and purposes, not themselves!