I constantly hear that we can praise MLK for what he got right, which usually means his ethics concerning civil rights. Let me suggest that his ethics flow from his heresies, not counter to them.
First, King was an enemy of orthodox Christianity and fully embraced what he called liberal theology, but was more of a combination between neo-orthodoxy and liberation theology. Of course, he held classically liberal views that declared the Trinity, deity of Christ, virgin birth, substitionary atonement, resurrection of Christ, second coming, etc. to be all mythological nonsense that orthodox, what he called "fundamentalist," Christians have believed throughout the centuries.
His Christ was a man who sensed the divine within by depending upon God fully and seeking justice in every place. Man is one united entity made by God and so all of humanity is the image and children of God. This is where his heresy connects to his liberation ethics.
Inclusivism is not a Christian idea. It is the religion of the Western, Enlightenment-oriented deity, who wishes all men to stop fighting and be united under the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. Hence, racism is a product of exclusivism and exclusivism is wrong because God is not exclusive and all mankind is one group that is not distinguished by God.
Inclusivists rightly argue that racism is a result of exclusivism, but wrongly argue that the answer is seeing God contrary to the biblical revelation, i.e., the only way we would actually know what God is like, as inclusive. Nor is it right to see mankind, again, contrary to the way God sees mankind, i.e., in two groups, not one. I've argued before that the answer is seeing the right kind of exclusivism rather than excluding based on sinful criteria.
The orthodox, biblical answer to racism is to understand that all who are in Christ are united as brothers and in harmony with God as His children. They are the images of God because they are united to the image of God, who is the fullness of deity dwelling in bodily form. They can be reconciled because Christ was a substition for them on the cross, where He paid the price for all of their sins, including all of their hatred toward one another. Hence, they can forgive one another, not by sweeping it all under the rug, but with confidence in their Savior's work, that he has taken ALL of their sins against Him and against one another, and fully paid for every single one. There are no more pounds of flesh to take. His death is more than sufficient to reconcile us to one another.
Outside of Christ, however, this isn't true. There is no basis for reconciliation except injustice, since one has to ignore the evil done and just move on without ever punishing it. This was King's view of course. Others who disagreed with him still wanted, and want, a punishment of those who performed acts of hate themselves, or are related to those who performed those acts by race. This is also unjust because it punishes people who did not commit the crime, and in fact repudiate the actions of those who did, for simply having the same skin color as those who did. Hence, there is no just way the world can deal with the issue.
In King's theology, Christ isn't a perfect sacrifice who can reconcile anyone to God because He isn't God and wasn't born of a virgin. He didn't die to pay for sins, so there is no basis in King's theology to move on without doing so unjustly.
Furthermore, it is not merely in his denial of orthodox theology concerning the deity of Christ and His work that makes King a heretic. It is the very nature of inclusivism itself. Inclusivism denies the necessity of Christ as mediator to reconcile man to God. Man already is in relationship with God as His children. There is no need to be reconciled to one another through Christ and His work on the cross, as we just need to realize that we already are brothers who just need to get along.
The celebration and quoting of a man who presented an antichrist (i.e., replacement Christ) and the religion and ethics that directly follow from them by the average Christian is rather alarming. King's civil rights ideas were a result of, not despite of, his heretical theology that damns mankind by lifting it up apart from Christ and tearing the true biblical Christ down as necessary for any genuine and just reconciliation to take place.
King is not a hero. He's a villain. This is not even to mention his unrepentant sexual immorality, which although can hit anyone, we are told that it is a staple characteristic of false teachers.
I urge any Christian to celebrate Christ on this day, and realize that if someone doesn't get Christ right, they get nothing right.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.