Deconstructing the MLK myth | Blaze Media

Americans widely celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. as a civil rights icon, but does his full legacy receive the scrutiny it deserves? While his activism for racial equality earns recognition, his theological views reveal a concerning departure from biblical orthodoxy. From denying Christ’s divinity to promoting the social gospel, King’s beliefs raise significant questions for Christians today.

Every January, Americans honor Martin Luther King Jr.’s life and legacy. Schools, streets, and monuments bear his name as enduring symbols of progress and justice. His iconic “I Have a Dream” speech continues to inspire people worldwide, and his leadership in the civil rights movement remains transformative. However, beneath the public adulation lies a more complex story — one that complicates the perception of King as a paragon of Christian orthodoxy.

King’s embrace of a gospel stripped of Christ’s divinity and resurrection ultimately undermines the eternal hope of salvation, leaving a legacy that Christians cannot fully endorse.

As a pastor, theologian, and leader, King’s words carried immense weight, shaping not only the civil rights movement but also America’s moral and spiritual landscape. However, his writings and sermons reveal notable theological departures that deserve closer scrutiny.

How should Christians reconcile King’s transformative contributions to social justice with his deviations from foundational biblical doctrine? To fully understand his legacy, we must move beyond the public mythology and examine his beliefs through a biblical lens.

Born Michael King Jr. on January 15, 1929, in Atlanta, Georgia, he later became Martin Luther King Jr. after his father renamed himself and his son to honor the 16th-century reformer Martin Luther. This name change reflected a connection to Christian tradition and reform. However, King’s theological journey would eventually diverge from these roots.

As the son of a prominent Baptist pastor, King grew up immersed in church life. He attended Morehouse College, where exposure to liberal theological ideas began shaping his intellectual and spiritual development. This influence deepened at Crozer Theological Seminary and Boston University, where he embraced theological views that strayed from traditional Christian orthodoxy.

Rejecting core Christian doctrines

King’s writings during his academic years reflect a clear rejection of essential Christian doctrines, including Christ’s divinity, the virgin birth, and the resurrection. These departures place him outside the bounds of biblical orthodoxy. In his paper on the “Humanity and Divinity of Jesus,” King wrote:

The orthodox attempt to explain the divinity of Jesus in terms of an inherent metaphysical substance within him seems to me quite inadequate. To say that Christ … is divine in an ontological sense is actually harmful and detrimental … so that the orthodox view of the divinity of Christ is in my mind quite readily denied.

King’s denial of Christ’s divinity naturally extended to other foundational doctrines, including the resurrection.

This doctrine (the resurrection), upon which the Easter faith rests, symbolizes the 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.

King also dismissed the virgin birth, the second coming of Christ, and the existence of a literal hell. Such theological positions directly conflict with core Christian beliefs, as underscored by the apostle Paul.

Now, if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. (1 Corinthians 15:12-14)

By rejecting these doctrines, King’s theological framework departs significantly from the faith he publicly represented, challenging the integrity of his spiritual leadership.

The ‘social gospel’ and its implications

Walter Rauschenbusch’s social gospel profoundly influenced King’s theology, emphasizing transformation of society over personal salvation. This reinterpretation of Christianity shifted the focus from the redemptive message of Christ’s death and resurrection to economic redistribution and social justice. King’s calls for a “warless world” and “a better distribution of wealth” clearly reflect this influence.

In a letter to Coretta Scott King, he wrote:

Let us continue to hope, work, and pray that in the future we will live to see a warless world, a better distribution of wealth, and a brotherhood that transcends race or color. This is the gospel that I will preach to the world.

While noble in its aspirations, this focus on temporal solutions often overshadowed the eternal hope found in Christ’s resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). By sidelining the gospel’s redemptive message, King’s theology contributed to a broader shift in American Christianity, where social justice increasingly took precedence over gospel-centered ministry.

The theological and ideological tension between King and traditional Christianity became evident in his relationship with the National Baptist Convention, the largest black Baptist denomination in the United States. Under Dr. Joseph H. Jackson’s leadership, the NBC placed institutional engagement over confrontational tactics like sit-ins and mass demonstrations. This approach clashed with King’s activism, culminating in a dramatic split during the NBC’s 1961 convention.

The division resulted in the formation of the Progressive National Baptist Convention, which aligned with King’s civil disobedience and social justice emphasis. However, this split also marked a theological departure, as the PNBC put activism above the gospel’s eternal message.

Truth matters

King’s legacy offers valuable lessons, but it also serves as a dire warning. His fight for racial equality transformed America, but his theological deviations reveal the dangers of placing social activism over biblical truth. King’s embrace of a gospel stripped of Christ’s divinity and resurrection ultimately undermines the eternal hope of salvation, leaving a legacy that Christians cannot fully endorse.

Theological integrity matters. When leaders compromise core biblical doctrines for societal transformation, they abandon the unshakable foundation of the gospel. King’s life serves as a powerful reminder that no matter how noble the cause, the truth of God’s word must remain uncompromised.

Many of the compromises King introduced have shaped today’s landscape, where private businesses are often pressured to bow to perceived injustices, further entangling the gospel with cultural activism. As Christians, we are called to evaluate every leader and movement against Scripture, refusing to trade eternal truth for temporal gains. Social transformation without the gospel is not only incomplete but ultimately hollow.