Definition of False Teacher: One who presumes
to teach in the Name of the Lord when God has not sent him.
False Teacher - Martin Luther King, Jr.
Martin Luther King was a great man in terms of dedication to his cause and the results he achieved. The pertinent question we answer here is whether it was the cause of Christ to which the “Reverend” gave his life, and the answer is “no.” It was his own quest to reform this temporal world, not the ushering in of the Kingdom of God, which comes from within.
Using Christ as a Lever to Move the World
A man holds up Martin Luther King as one who personifies the incarnation
of God, Jesus Christ, in our times. Paul writes:
It has taken us a while to get back to you,
but I wanted to answer you more fully regarding what I said about
Martin Luther King.
I had written you: “Your trust has been
in men, such as the atheist ‘Christian,’ Martin Luther
King, and not in the victorious Lord and Father of spirits.
‘Do not put your trust in princes, nor
in the son of man in whom there is no salvation’ (Psalms 146:3
You scoff at my description of Martin Luther
King as a “Christian” atheist,
but he isn’t really the issue. You are the issue, because
you are the one who puts his trust in man, which makes you an atheist
at heart, though you profess Christ with your lips:
“The fool has said in his heart, There is no God! They acted
corruptly; they have done abominable works, there is none who does
It’s not what a man says with his lips that
tells the true story, but what he says in his heart, by his
what Jesus meant when commanding us not to judge by appearance,
but to judge righteously. Where is the person coming from in
says or does?
I will show you that King’s works are abominable in the sight
You extol and praise King because you think so highly of yourself,
trusting in your carnal mind and natural ability. You have put
your flesh on a pedestal, calling it “Christian” and
expecting men to honor it as Christ. This we see in your letters
to us and
in all your communications with David
Jesus Christ came to crucify the flesh with its affections and
you have enthroned your carnal thoughts and ways.
Mr. King’s Christianity, you are really defending
and justifying your own, one that is based on the presumed
power of human goodness and virtue (yours in particular). But because
mankind is neither good nor virtuous, your Christianity is
sham and a lie.
The most offensive of atheists aren’t
those who boldly claim there is no God, but those who claim
to believe in and
Him while vaunting themselves. They leave Him out of the picture
altogether. It was these whom the Lord rebuked with Isaiah’s
“This people draws near to Me with their mouth, and honors Me
with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. But in vain they
worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matthew
In my reply here, I will refute the arguments
you present to prove Mr. King’s status as a Christian, and in
doing so, I will be refuting your own Christianity. By
exposing your false religion,
the foundation will be laid for your future deliverance
from delusion, destruction, and death. Only the truth
can set men free, and the
truth will prevail in the end.
The seeds of destruction
are sown in the lies that people embrace about themselves and God, which
they do in order
their pride and the freedom to do as they please. The
seeds of life are
sown in the truth that lovers of pleasure reject, because
want to be held accountable by God for what they do.
There is no avoiding accountability, however. Eventually
the truth will prevail
through the judgment of God on all wrongdoing and wrongdoers
because He does hold all accountable.
You write of
King and others whom you consider servants of God:
“I look to them for inspiration to continue
to do all I can to make sure my own works and ways are as conformed
to the life and
of Jesus as was their own. ‘Brethren, join in
following my example, and note those who so walk, as
you have us for a pattern.’ (Phil.
And what example was that? Was it one of
social works, the forte and raison d’être
of Dr. King? What does Paul say? Let’s
start with what example he says it wasn’t:
(17) Be fellow imitators of me, brothers, and look
out for those walking this way, just as you have us
(18) For many walk, of whom often I was speaking to
you, and now even weeping I tell you, that they are
(19) whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly,
and whose glory is in their shame--who are
mindful of earthly things.
(20) For our citizenship exists in heaven, from which
also we eagerly await for the Savior, the Lord Jesus
Paul obviously wasn’t talking about Christian
life being one of seeking earthly justice or mounting
This is easily verified by reading the Scriptures,
where we find that Paul never set such an example, and
neither did Jesus.
If social justice and equal rights were
the manner of expressing the life of Christ, why weren’t
His disciples seeking those things from Rome, rather
than testifying of Christ and inviting their “human
rights” to be violated, even unto death? “The
foolishness of preaching…”?
Did Rome treat
the Jews and other peoples as equals, with equal
privileges and voice in the running of
far from it! Some
Jews in Rome were slaves, and most did not have the
rights of Roman citizens, particularly in the Roman
of Israel. Yet we
hear one word of complaint calling for resistance
to establish independence from, or equality with,
the Romans. We don’t see the Lord
Jesus Christ or any of His followers doing anything
to attain this end,
one which you have deified and used to make an idol
“Jesus answered, My Kingdom is not of this world. If My Kingdom
were of this world, then My servants would fight so that I might not
be delivered to the Jews. But now My Kingdom is not from here” (John
Despite the total absence of support for the notion that
pursuing a social agenda to transform the world is the essence of
godliness in action, you make this outrageous claim: “If
Jesus had come in 20th century America, instead of 1st Judea, one hardly
he would have looked, sounded or acted any differently than Dr.
What we actually see is quite the opposite: We don’t
see anything about Dr. King that resembles Jesus or His disciples.
Even the title
of “Dr.” is a giveaway of what side King was on. Those
who called themselves “Doctor” were the ones who persecuted
the Lord and His disciples. Here is what Jesus said about them:
“Their lives are perpetual fashion shows, embroidered prayer
shawls one day and flowery prayers the next. They love to sit at the
table at church dinners, basking in the most prominent positions,
preening in the radiance of public flattery, receiving honorary
degrees, and getting called ‘Doctor’ and ‘Reverend’” (Matthew
Until he was turned from his sin, the apostle Paul
was one of those “doctors,” and
here’s what he said about such degrees after he met Christ:
“The very credentials these people are waving around as something
special, I’m tearing up and throwing out with the
trash--along with everything else I used to take credit
for. And why? Because
of Christ. Yes, all the things I once thought were so important
are gone from my life. Compared to the high privilege of
Jesus as my Master, firsthand, everything I once thought
I had going for me is insignificant--dog dung. I’ve
dumped it all in the trash so that I could embrace Christ” (Philippians
And what does our Lord and Master say about
active or passive disobedience and willful demonstrations
of rebellion, through
the wisdom He
“My son, fear the LORD and the king; and do not fellowship with
those who are given to change” (Proverbs 24:21 MKJV).
“Let every soul be subject to the higher authorities. For there
is no authority but of God; the authorities that exist are ordained
by God. So that the one resisting the authority
resists the ordinance
of God; and the ones who resist will receive judgment
to themselves” (Romans
“For the rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the bad.
And do you desire to be not afraid of the authority? Do the good, and
you shall have praise from it. For it is a servant of God to you for
good. For if you practice evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the
sword in vain; for it is a servant of God, a revenger for wrath on
him who does evil” (Romans 13:3-4 MKJV).
Even if King was willing
to lay his body down to be burned for the agenda of human rights
(as he perceived it), he wasn’t laying
it down for the Lord Jesus Christ. King was doing it for himself
and man, and we know that it’s Satan who savors the things
The cause of human rights has the cart in front of the
rights come first, not man’s. We owe it to Him and ourselves
to serve Him and not our own interests, as we perceive them. We
are wrong in our perceptions, in our thinking and ways:
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor your ways My ways,
says the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are
ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts” (Isaiah
The truth is that men suffer injustices because
put God first or walk in His ways. Seeking to force change
on the authorities of the land is to come against the judgment
of God through
the powers He has ordained. (I am not saying there isn’t
a place to speak the truth or take a stand, when given
but that isn’t the same as pursuing an agenda of
change in the Name of God when He hasn’t sent you.)
King was willing to suffer for his narrowly defined cause
of human rights, true Christians suffer only for
the Name of
Christ, the Ruler of Heaven and earth Whom they worship
in spirit and in
1 Peter 4:14-16 MKJV
(14) If you are reviled for the Name of Christ, you are
blessed, because the Spirit of God and of glory rests
on you. Truly
according to them, He is blasphemed, but according to
you He is glorified.
(15) But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief,
or an evildoer, or a meddler in the affairs of
(16) But if one suffers as a Christian, let him not be
ashamed, but let him glorify God because of this.
“Then they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing
because they were counted worthy to be dishonored on behalf of the
Jesus” (Acts 5:41 EMTV).
Where do we see this example
in King’s life? Where
do we see him suffering for the Name of Christ? We don’t,
unless you wrongly label social activism “Christ.” And
that is indeed what you have done, Terrance, creating an
and false god.
The world loves its own and admires those
who suffer for championing its causes, as King did for
in its selfish
and destructive wisdom, despises as utter foolishness
the notion of suffering
for the Name of Christ:
“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are
perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For
it is written: ‘I
will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the understanding of the
prudent I will annul’” (1 Corinthians 1:18-19
“For since, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom did not
know God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save those
who believe” (1 Corinthians 1:21 MKJV).
So if King
wasn’t following Jesus Christ or His apostles
in preaching the Gospel and the message of the cross,
whom was he following?
Where did he get his inspiration for social reengineering?
Who served as his role model?
Interestingly enough, that
turns out to be Mohandas Gandhi, a great man in this
world, but one who didn’t profess
to know Christ or preach faith in Him. Gandhi was a political
leader, very unlike
Jesus Christ or His apostles and prophets.
King was introduced
to Gandhi at a time when he said he had, in his own words, “despaired
of the power of love in solving social problems.” I
continue his story by quoting from Gandhi’s
Influence on Martin Luther King by Placido D’Souza:
“King was so moved that he immediately bought a number of books
on the Indian nationalist leader. He read with fascination of
the life of one who had successfully transformed the ethic of nonviolence
into a political instrument against British colonial
The impact they made on him is best described
in his own words: ‘As
I read, I became deeply fascinated by his campaigns of
nonviolent resistance. As I delved deeper into the philosophy
my skepticism concerning the power of love gradually
I came to see for the first time its potency in the area
of social reform.’
‘The “turn-the-other-cheek” philosophy and the “love-your-enemies” philosophy,’ he
went on, ‘were only valid when individuals were
in conflict with other individuals; when racial groups
were in conflict,
a more realistic approach seemed necessary. But after
reading Gandhi, I saw how utterly mistaken I was.’
King came to realize that Gandhi was the first
person in history to re-invent the Christian ethic of love as ‘a potent instrument
for social and collective transformation.’ It was a short journey
thereafter to unreserved acceptance of the Gandhian technique of nonviolence
as the only viable means to overcome the problems faced by his people.”
D’Souza, an admirer of King’s, takes some liberty
with his interpretation of events, but it’s clear to see
in King’s own words that he thinks nothing of Christ’s
power of love, and all of man’s. King couldn’t see
love could save the world, so he found his solution in the power
of unregenerate man’s love rather than the Regenerator’s.
A man who sees Christ’s love as powerless or lacking hasn’t
experienced it in his own redemption and forgiveness of sins.
The problem for King was that he was only looking at the outer, trying
to fix the world superficially because he never had the faith
Christ to deal with the root problems and transform the inner.
Once the inner is taken care of, the outer will no longer be
This is what the preaching of the apostle Paul was all about,
the very thing he was citing to the Philippians as the example
“For we are the circumcision who worship God in the spirit and rejoice
in Christ Jesus and have no confidence in the flesh….
I also count all things to be loss for the excellency of the
Christ Jesus my Lord, for Whose sake I have suffered the loss
of all things… that I may know Him and the power of His
resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made
conformable to His
death” (Philippians 3:3,8,10 MKJV).
This isn't political
philosophy and tactical strategy for social gain. It is the
forsaking of those means and goals, in order to receive the inner treasure
and peace from God that will truly transform the outer world.
King’s works were geared toward saving the world without saving
the soul of man. Of what use is that? Jesus said:
“For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world
and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his
King’s knowledge of Jesus was historical and philosophical,
which the Bible calls “carnal,” or “knowing Him
after the flesh.” King never had a supernatural and personal
revelation of Christ, as did Paul, as do we, and as do all who
are born again of His Spirit.
(It should be no wonder that, as a product of the religious institutions
of this world, such would be the case.)
Only with this knowledge, an intimate and personal relationship with
Christ (which can never come by reading about and contemplating Him
from afar), can one preach the Lord Jesus and prevail over the world.
Christ is our life, and our words are formed by His life in us, bringing
the Bread of Heaven to men on earth.
writings you gave me to peruse, I find selections where he flatly
denies the deity of Christ, His virgin birth, and
His resurrection. Let’s look at one section (emphasis mine):
“The last doctrine in our discussion deals with the resurrection
story. This doctrine, upon which the Easter Faith rests, symbolizes
ultimate Christian conviction: that Christ conquered death. From
a literary, historical, and philosophical point of view this
doctrine raises many questions. In fact the external
evidence for the authenticity
of this doctrine is found wanting. But here again the external
evidence is not the most important thing, for it in itself fails to
precisely the thing we most want to know: What experiences of
early Christians lead to the formulation of the doctrine?
of our inquiry is found in the fact that the early Christians had
lived with Jesus. They had been captivated by
power of his personality. This basic experience led to the
faith that he
could never die. And so in the pre-scientific thought pattern
of the first century, this inner faith took outward form.”
other words, the first believers who saw Christ after His
resurrection and reported what He said, on more than one occasion,
shared psychotic hallucinations. Either that or they were,
in their “pre-scientific
thought pattern,” making up stories so that their “inner
faith took outward form.” In other words, they were
lying. Is the faith of Christ a lie?
There is a far simpler
explanation. The eye witnesses
were telling the truth. And we know this is true because
Christ has confirmed
this in us, as He did for the apostle Paul, who was initially
vehemently opposed to the report. And here’s
what Paul said about what denying the resurrection means:
“And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless;
you are still in your sins!” (1 Corinthians 15:17 EMTV)
exactly what I have said about King’s
faith – it
is worthless, nonexistent! To him Christ is not God,
or the Son of God by miraculous birth, and has no power
death by His resurrection.
That makes King a “Christian” atheist. He
was still in his sins.
The reason King thought Christ’s
disciples were “captivated
by the magnetic powers of his personality,” is
exactly what he experienced with his own followers. King
fostered a cult of personality, but not so with Christ.
Here is His record:
“He is despised and rejected of men; a Man of sorrows, and acquainted
with grief; and as it were a hiding of faces from Him,
He being despised, and we esteemed Him not” (Isaiah 53:3 MKJV).
that has been King’s attitude toward Christ.
The argument you use to show King’s works came from
God is actually proof positive of the opposite, that King’s
works came from corrupt man. The christ whom King served,
which you describe as follows,
was a false one made in King’s own image:
“As far as Martin Luther King’s atheism is concerned,
quite sorry but that is utter rubbish…. His writings
are infused with the call to social justice in the
tradition of the Hebrew prophets
and moral teachings of Jesus. All of his preaching
and self-sacrificial social action centered around
the moral ideals of Jesus….”
Not true; King’s
preaching centered on his moral
ideals. Jesus Christ is not a moral idealist with a
agenda. He came to fulfill
the Law, and now He requires that of us - to walk with
God by His grace. He didn’t come to teach us how
to exert moral ideals to get what we wanted from others,
gathering en masse and demanding
compliance through passive resistance. Show us in Scripture
where He or any Hebrew prophet ever did such a thing. They
did; they spoke the truth
and taught all men (the rulers and the ruled) to love
their neighbors, not to organize themselves into divisive
coercive forces in order
to bend the will of others.
You continue about King:
“… and like Christ, he was martyred
by wicked men who wished to silence his Kingdom movement. Atheism
never has and never will produce a
man like Dr. King. Only real power from God above can
produce a King, a Mother Teresa, a Savonarola.
‘Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright: for the end of
that man is peace.’ (Ps. 37:37)”
There is no comparison
between the betrayal of Christ by the Jews, a public execution on
record, and the murder of King by a secretive
lone gunman. Even if there were a government conspiracy to kill
King (which isn’t proven), that wouldn’t be martyrdom.
King was embroiled in the politics and affairs of this world, whereas
Christ died for the testimony and Kingdom of God.
King was a politician
who used the pulpit to gather the masses
to effect social change. That was his stated strategy and goal.
a matter of faith to him, but of emotionally appealing to the
senses of dissatisfaction, injustice, entitlement, and heroic
by which he and his followers would bring the Kingdom of God
(as they presumed it to be) to earth through human willpower
That wasn’t the Kingdom of God, however. Jesus
said the Kingdom of God comes without observation, because
it is within.
(by his actions), “Phooey on that hooey, let’s
get ours now; you come and follow me, and we can make it happen.”
the people wanted to follow Jesus as king to set up their
version of the Kingdom of God on earth, here’s what happened:
“Therefore when Jesus perceived that they would come and take
Him by force, that they might make Him a king, Jesus withdrew again
the mountain alone by Himself” (John 6:15 MKJV).
was a religious man of this world, not a stranger because
a citizen of the next. So it goes for many religious
mistake their followers make is to assume that their murder
is martyrdom. For example, the Mormons believe that Joseph
was martyred when
a lynch mob in Missouri got to him, but Smith didn’t
die for the testimony of God in Christ (which he never
had). Like King, Smith
was a political agitator after power in this world, who
stirred up strife and suffered the fallout. Like King,
Smith was an unregenerate
sinner who reaped what he had sown.
Are you not aware that
King was an unrepentant adulterer and whoremonger, even
according to his friends?
“But let not fornication, and all uncleanness, or greediness,
be named among you, as is fitting for saints” (Ephesians 5:3
Yet you say of this man, who never repented or lived as a follower
“Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright: for the end of
that man is peace” (Psalms 37:37).
The more appropriate Scriptures
are those preceding:
“I have seen the wicked in great power, spreading himself like
a green tree in its native soil. But he passed away, and behold, he
Yes, I sought him, but he could not be found” (Psalms
You mention “Mother Teresa” and
Savonarola as inspiring examples of God’s handiwork.
But these two are products of the Catholic
nothing to do with the Lord
Jesus Christ. That’s why they are praised by
those who don’t
“And He said to them, You are those who justify yourselves before
men, but God knows your hearts. For that which is highly
esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God” (Luke
“I just wanted to share this excerpt from
the Kings Papers Project, as but one example of Dr. King's total
commitment to genuine Christianity….”
The example you gave of King’s “total commitment to genuine
Christianity” is nothing of the sort. The Montgomery Improvement
Association is an excellent example of King’s commitment to his
agenda of social equality for black people. And as we have pointed
out, that is not to be confused with following Jesus Christ. Christ
didn’t come to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic, but
to put away sin and the sinner altogether, making a new creature from
In God’s ordering of the affairs of men, He has used
even slavery as a way to do His work with people. He put Israel under
of slavery in the iron furnace of Egypt, forging them into a nation
and not releasing them until the time was fulfilled, and then only
by His own mighty arm and doing. It wasn’t by Moses and Aaron
forming the “Goshen Improvement Association,” discovering
an effective method to push Pharaoh’s buttons by training
the Israelites in the principles of passive protest. That is not
It’s understandable that men would want to undertake
a mission to relieve a people of any amount of suffering, and
condemning all such efforts. Here is the issue, however, with
King: Let’s not confuse man’s works and ways with God’s
judgments and ways. King was mixing the two, doing the former
in the name of the latter. Here’s what he said to the people
he was organizing:
“We believe in the Christian religion.
We believe in the teachings of Jesus. The only weapon that we have
in our hands this evening
is the weapon of protest.”
For one to truly believe in
the teachings of Jesus, he must first believe in Jesus Christ
Himself. By belief we are talking
the Biblical definition of total commitment of one’s
life, trusting in Him for everything. If King had this kind
of belief, how could
he say that the only weapon in their hands was the weapon
of protest? Protest is geared toward moving man by man’s
machinations, but faith is geared toward trusting God Who
does the impossible.
And He never calls men of faith to protest in the manner
“For though walking about in flesh, we do not war according
to flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but mighty
God to the pulling down of strongholds” (2 Corinthians
King went about his protest in the most admirable
among men, but what has been the end result of his works?
obtained free the black people from the bondage of sin?
“But I want to tell you this evening that
it is not enough for us to talk about love, love is one of the pivotal
points of the Christian
faith. There is another side called justice. And justice is really
love in calculation. Justice is love correcting that which revolts
Did King bring justice and correction to those
whose behavior revolted against love (whether to his
protesters or to those against
whom they protested)? Did he bring them into the faith and obedience
of Christ, Who is love incarnate, the Judge of all the earth,
Who alone can correct? Did Martin Luther King bring true liberty to
the oppressed by the correction he sought to apply on their oppressors?
The answers are self-evident to the one who has experienced genuine
liberty in Christ. The one whose eyes are opened need only
glance around today to see the results of King’s handiwork. Black
people, while better off materially and socially in many cases,
are worse off morally and spiritually in many ways since King
it can all be laid at his feet, but he bears some responsibility).
He fostered a legacy of victimization and entitlement
mentality, destructive twins born of man’s pride.
roots of destruction are internal. Only Jesus Christ effectively
deals with the sin nature, creating a new man in His image
who is just and walks in the love of God. Expecting (and
own version of love and justice from unregenerate man, as
King did, and calling that following the “Christian religion” and
the “teachings of Jesus,” is deceitful. It is
version of Christ, which has nothing to do with Him, but
only uses His Name for selfish purposes. Indeed, it is anti-(instead
Martin Luther King trusted in his carnal mind,
natural ability and goodness, which is the enemy of God:
(5) For they who are according to the flesh mind the
things of flesh, but they who are according to the Spirit
(6) For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually
minded is life and peace
(7) because the carnal mind is enmity against God, for
it is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can
(8) So then they who are in the flesh cannot please God.
Following King’s ways brings death and destruction, but following
Christ’s brings life and peace.