justindetmers.com

*Disclaimer - A man wiser than myself has said that people should think about the word “heretic” like they would the word “rape.” Heresy is a such a serious claim that it must only used when it has to be. I concur and I squirm in the presence of excessive suspicion and those who want to split hairs.

But, because I hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that I can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it (Titus 1:9); I must be the provocateur, faithful to my theological & intellectual commitments. Thus, from my historical examination, I do not see King as a faithful steward of the Gospel of the risen God-man Jesus Christ, who is to get primacy and priority in everything. Further, I wonder if King could be called a Christian, as far as historical orthodoxy is concerned.

In his 1949 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 appears to deny these historic orthodox Christian doctrines: 1 – the Bodily Resurrection, 2 – the Virgin Birth, and 3 – the Deity of Jesus Christ.

1 – King argues the doctrine of the Deity of Christ (Jesus was God) was developed by the early church from the influence of Greek philosophy and was thus not a historical fact.

Because Christians are people of the scripture, it is there we find a total rejection, unless we doubt the clarity, authority, and reliability of the text itself. In Mark 2:28, Jesus claims to be the Lord of the Sabbath (Exodus 20:10), He claims to be greater than the prophet Jonah (Matt 12:41), King Solomon (Matt 12:42), and even the Temple itself (Matt 12:6). In Mark 2:1-12, Jesus claims authority to forgive sins and miraculously heals to prove it; something blasphemous and crazy if He wasn’t God. Jesus told the Pharisees, “…before Abraham was born, I AM!” – another divine title (John 8:58-59) that references one of God’s name in the Old Testament. John called Jesus “the eternal God” in clear and powerful language, and he sites John the Baptist’s agreement on Jesus in John 1. Peter and Paul also affirmed the divinity of Christ scores of times, e.g. Colossians 1:15. (To site all the references in the text would be ridiculous, just pick up a Bible if you think I’m bluffing)

2 – 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.

Nope. I’ll let wikipedia take this one for the sake of space and time.

3 – The resurrection of Jesus was an attempt by the pre-scientific early church to symbolize the experience that they had with Jesus.

Paul is very clear about what this doctrine means to Christianity:

“…if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.”

(1 Corinthians 15)

In sum:

Because I’m not aware of MLK recanting on these central doctrines, I’m left with two unfortunate conclusions about this great civil rights leader. If he believed these, he couldn’t be a (by definition) a Christian, and if he taught these, he would have to be (by definition) considered a heretic.

His efforts for justice were undoubtedly good and deserving of the Noble Peace Prize. BUT, without the Gospel or instead of starting with the Gospel and letting a concern for social justice flow out of that; the Gospel was either omitted or spun into something else.

The Gospel is not about justice or sexual purity or any good thing as ultimate. Those things cannot truly save humanity and cure the affects of sin. Anything not ultimately centered on the atoning work of the divine Jesus will be based on a relatively cheap morality and the futility of human effort. We will be with a hope that is not eternal and a righteousness rooted in imperfection. But, when get the Gospel at the center, we truly have inspiration, hope, morality, justice, and all good – which all flow from the Gospel; we’ll have a true and eternal perspective that glorifies what God has done and empowers His people to truly be virtuous.

That is why Paul addresses those who are,

“…turning to a different gospel, which is really no gospel at all…trying to pervert the gospel of Christ.” [He continues] “…even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!” (Galatians 1:6-9) And in 1 John 2: 22, John also has harsh words for those that don’t affirm Jesus as He claimed to be.

*If you want a thick explanation of the Gospel, click and listen here.