I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm a Christian.

[aka longstroke]

Originally Posted by sillyputty

Originally Posted by AKA LONGSTROKE

Originally Posted by sillyputty

He believed in HIS god and wanted to do what HIS god wanted to do, yes. 
Thats the point here

Good or bad, this doesn't substantiate their "faith"...they just helped tons of people in the process.

A christian church having a food drive doesn't mean theres a god either.

You are correct, his actions does not prove that his God actually exists, and I am certain that King would not argue that point with you. As stated earlier, he was all kinds of wrong to many believers of the same faith just by the company he kept, then the actions he took, then even the color of his skin.
But the source of his motivation clearly was his faith, belief in God, while urging mankind to reach it's full potential. Without that faith and belief, King might not have been so successful, in fact, I am certain of that. 

Faith is faith I guess. Its the placebo people use to endure and get ahead... 
I equate them to these things:

HAHAHAHA!

True!
But in the search of the meaning of life, then seeking answers  from the supreme being, one may learn how to market and sell those silly little bands!

 

[foxdawg2000]

Originally Posted by AKA LONGSTROKE

Originally Posted by foxdawg2000

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey


Damn bro, I like to believe MLK realization had nothing to do with critcal thinking or even religion. What MLK did do "study wise" was take lessons from Gandhi, but even that isn't critical thinking. Critical thinking does not make me a moral human being. I think morality should be common sense but I suppose it isn't for some

dam stole my thunder.. MLK was a talented orator and used Ghandi's peaceful resistance example here as was used in India..His main resistance in the black community came from groups with a more militant approach (Nation of Islam) MLK was also a "sinner" by Christian standards as he had affairs on his wife.. So bad Christian = decent person?

, agreed..

This was more to LONGSTROKE and just an addition to ANTON's thought..

You are incredibly incorrect on several points, however I understand what you are trying to say.
The Nation of Islam was not King and the SCLC's main resistance, as they held no political aspirations, which was the SCLC's main focus. They were trying to force political change, while the NOI simply wanted to move away from White rule, then separate all together. They did not have the same stronghold in the Black community as did the Black church, however an offshoot movement was created by Black students called SNCC, led by Stokely Carmicheal, represented the position of those who favored the anti nonviolent stance of the NOI. The opposition was about how to approach the situation of confrontation. Should we fight back, or should we allow ourselves to be beaten while we pray for our civil rights?

But I have a question, what does King's affairs have to do with his intelligence, ability to use logic and reason, then dealing in critical thought? 

Dalliances aside, King's genius was being able to bridge the gap between the younger and older generation's approach to change, which had NOTHING to do with Ghandi. Ghandi wasn't from the hood, so King, using logic and reason, was able to keep a hold of young men like Stokely's ear, and yet still negotiate with President Lyndon Johnson, forcing him to see the moral dilemma that America was faced with.

King's faith in his God gave him the strength to keep moving forward, to search for answers at every turn. His brilliance, intellect, is what allowed him to process all forms of information, for the greater good. Even an Atheist can appreciate the result of his efforts.

I'd hate to burst your bubble but you missed my entire point


-MLK took a huge amount out of Ghandi's playbook and used it here, also used speeches from others... (sorry to discredit MLK in your eyes but if you examine history you'll see how I'm accurate here)
-NOI, anti nonviolent also known as "militant," was their main focus but they also prayed to a god (the irony!)
-I think you need to re read the end of my post, I was concluding that his affairs have nothing to do with his legacy or accomplishments as a man . I was using his affairs as examples of how he was a "bad christian" who is damned to hell but still a good person in the real world..
-You need to step off of your pro black pedestal and check out the bridges that Ghandi also had to create on a much larger scale (population wise), King was trying to bring a together a race in the tens of millions, Ghandi close to a billion, from two diff religions as well (hindu and muslim) who had a violent history of disagreement..
[color= rgb(255, 0, 0)]-Ghandi did it first and managed to actually overthrow an imperial power, king made strides but compared to ghandi.. I'd say he was quite the follower[/color]
-Ghandi wasn't from the hood? actually Ghandi was "kicked out of the hood" by black people in south africa.. Do your research, he actually took a significant amount of discrimination from blacks..
[color= rgb(255, 0, 0)]-In the grand scheme one could also conclude that ghandi was more true to his faith than MLK but why even go there..[/color]

 

[aka longstroke]

Originally Posted by foxdawg2000

Originally Posted by AKA LONGSTROKE

Originally Posted by foxdawg2000

dam stole my thunder.. MLK was a talented orator and used Ghandi's peaceful resistance example here as was used in India..His main resistance in the black community came from groups with a more militant approach (Nation of Islam) MLK was also a "sinner" by Christian standards as he had affairs on his wife.. So bad Christian = decent person?

, agreed..

This was more to LONGSTROKE and just an addition to ANTON's thought..

You are incredibly incorrect on several points, however I understand what you are trying to say.
The Nation of Islam was not King and the SCLC's main resistance, as they held no political aspirations, which was the SCLC's main focus. They were trying to force political change, while the NOI simply wanted to move away from White rule, then separate all together. They did not have the same stronghold in the Black community as did the Black church, however an offshoot movement was created by Black students called SNCC, led by Stokely Carmicheal, represented the position of those who favored the anti nonviolent stance of the NOI. The opposition was about how to approach the situation of confrontation. Should we fight back, or should we allow ourselves to be beaten while we pray for our civil rights?

But I have a question, what does King's affairs have to do with his intelligence, ability to use logic and reason, then dealing in critical thought? 

Dalliances aside, King's genius was being able to bridge the gap between the younger and older generation's approach to change, which had NOTHING to do with Ghandi. Ghandi wasn't from the hood, so King, using logic and reason, was able to keep a hold of young men like Stokely's ear, and yet still negotiate with President Lyndon Johnson, forcing him to see the moral dilemma that America was faced with.

King's faith in his God gave him the strength to keep moving forward, to search for answers at every turn. His brilliance, intellect, is what allowed him to process all forms of information, for the greater good. Even an Atheist can appreciate the result of his efforts.

I'd hate to burst your bubble but you missed my entire point


-MLK took a huge amount out of Ghandi's playbook and used it here, also used speeches from others... (sorry to discredit MLK in your eyes but if you examine history you'll see how I'm accurate here)
-NOI, anti nonviolent also known as "militant," was their main focus but they also prayed to a god (the irony!)
-I think you need to re read the end of my post, I was concluding that his affairs have nothing to do with his legacy or accomplishments as a man . I was using his affairs as examples of how he was a "bad christian" who is damned to hell but still a good person in the real world..
-You need to step off of your pro black pedestal and check out the bridges that Ghandi also had to create on a much larger scale (population wise), King was trying to bring a together a race in the tens of millions, Ghandi close to a billion, from two diff religions as well (hindu and muslim) who had a violent history of disagreement..
[color= rgb(0, 0, 255)]-Ghandi did it first and managed to actually overthrow an imperial power, king made strides but compared to ghandi.. I'd say he was quite the follower[/color]
-Ghandi wasn't from the hood? actually Ghandi was "kicked out of the hood" by black people in south africa.. Do your research, he actually took a significant amount of discrimination from blacks..
[color= rgb(0, 0, 255)]-In the grand scheme one could also conclude that ghandi was more true to his faith than MLK but why even go there..[/color]

I didn't miss anything, but I am not here to argue about how big of an influence Ghandi was on King. At the end of the day both lent themselves to better humanity through their faith, actions,  while using their belief in a higher power.
Perhaps you should pay more attention to both Men on how to handle disagreements, while using logic and reason. 

 

[foxdawg2000]

Originally Posted by AKA LONGSTROKE

Originally Posted by foxdawg2000

Originally Posted by AKA LONGSTROKE

You are incredibly incorrect on several points, however I understand what you are trying to say.
The Nation of Islam was not King and the SCLC's main resistance, as they held no political aspirations, which was the SCLC's main focus. They were trying to force political change, while the NOI simply wanted to move away from White rule, then separate all together. They did not have the same stronghold in the Black community as did the Black church, however an offshoot movement was created by Black students called SNCC, led by Stokely Carmicheal, represented the position of those who favored the anti nonviolent stance of the NOI. The opposition was about how to approach the situation of confrontation. Should we fight back, or should we allow ourselves to be beaten while we pray for our civil rights?

But I have a question, what does King's affairs have to do with his intelligence, ability to use logic and reason, then dealing in critical thought? 

Dalliances aside, King's genius was being able to bridge the gap between the younger and older generation's approach to change, which had NOTHING to do with Ghandi. Ghandi wasn't from the hood, so King, using logic and reason, was able to keep a hold of young men like Stokely's ear, and yet still negotiate with President Lyndon Johnson, forcing him to see the moral dilemma that America was faced with.

King's faith in his God gave him the strength to keep moving forward, to search for answers at every turn. His brilliance, intellect, is what allowed him to process all forms of information, for the greater good. Even an Atheist can appreciate the result of his efforts.

I'd hate to burst your bubble but you missed my entire point


-MLK took a huge amount out of Ghandi's playbook and used it here, also used speeches from others... (sorry to discredit MLK in your eyes but if you examine history you'll see how I'm accurate here)
-NOI, anti nonviolent also known as "militant," was their main focus but they also prayed to a god (the irony!)
-I think you need to re read the end of my post, I was concluding that his affairs have nothing to do with his legacy or accomplishments as a man . I was using his affairs as examples of how he was a "bad christian" who is damned to hell but still a good person in the real world..
-You need to step off of your pro black pedestal and check out the bridges that Ghandi also had to create on a much larger scale (population wise), King was trying to bring a together a race in the tens of millions, Ghandi close to a billion, from two diff religions as well (hindu and muslim) who had a violent history of disagreement..
[color= rgb(0, 0, 255)]-Ghandi did it first and managed to actually overthrow an imperial power, king made strides but compared to ghandi.. I'd say he was quite the follower[/color]
-Ghandi wasn't from the hood? actually Ghandi was "kicked out of the hood" by black people in south africa.. Do your research, he actually took a significant amount of discrimination from blacks..
[color= rgb(0, 0, 255)]-In the grand scheme one could also conclude that ghandi was more true to his faith than MLK but why even go there..[/color]

I didn't miss anything, but I am not here to argue about how big of an influence Ghandi was on King. At the end of the day both lent themselves to better humanity through their faith, actions,  while using their belief in a higher power.
Perhaps you should pay more attention to both Men on how to handle disagreements, while using logic and reason. 

King was a Cafeteria Christian and great orchestrator of Ghandi's principals, the importance of their faith can be debated but yes they did great things for humanity.. Last time I checked this is a peaceful debate

I stand by that, if it erks you in any way I apologize but facts are facts my friend ..

 "and these are our heroes"

 

[aka longstroke]

Originally Posted by foxdawg2000

Originally Posted by AKA LONGSTROKE

Originally Posted by foxdawg2000

I'd hate to burst your bubble but you missed my entire point


-MLK took a huge amount out of Ghandi's playbook and used it here, also used speeches from others... (sorry to discredit MLK in your eyes but if you examine history you'll see how I'm accurate here)
-NOI, anti nonviolent also known as "militant," was their main focus but they also prayed to a god (the irony!)
-I think you need to re read the end of my post, I was concluding that his affairs have nothing to do with his legacy or accomplishments as a man . I was using his affairs as examples of how he was a "bad christian" who is damned to hell but still a good person in the real world..
-You need to step off of your pro black pedestal and check out the bridges that Ghandi also had to create on a much larger scale (population wise), King was trying to bring a together a race in the tens of millions, Ghandi close to a billion, from two diff religions as well (hindu and muslim) who had a violent history of disagreement..
[color= rgb(0, 0, 255)]-Ghandi did it first and managed to actually overthrow an imperial power, king made strides but compared to ghandi.. I'd say he was quite the follower[/color]
-Ghandi wasn't from the hood? actually Ghandi was "kicked out of the hood" by black people in south africa.. Do your research, he actually took a significant amount of discrimination from blacks..
[color= rgb(0, 0, 255)]-In the grand scheme one could also conclude that ghandi was more true to his faith than MLK but why even go there..[/color]

I didn't miss anything, but I am not here to argue about how big of an influence Ghandi was on King. At the end of the day both lent themselves to better humanity through their faith, actions,  while using their belief in a higher power.
Perhaps you should pay more attention to both Men on how to handle disagreements, while using logic and reason. 

King was a Cafeteria Christian and great orchestrator of Ghandi's principals, the importance of their faith can be debated but yes they did great things for humanity.. Last time I checked this is a peaceful debate

I stand by that, if it erks you in any way I apologize but facts are facts my friend ..

 "and these are our heroes"

What's underlined is the insult, which is offensive, then creates confrontation, which is not in any way peaceful. It is was intentional slight, which suggests an agenda, one which I refuse to participate in.
So again I say, there is something to be learned from both King and Ghandi, the thing that you've obviously missed. You seem smart, knowing about Ghandi, so perhaps you do need Jesus as well.

Didn't hurt King, not at all.

 

[foxdawg2000]

Originally Posted by AKA LONGSTROKE

Originally Posted by foxdawg2000

Originally Posted by AKA LONGSTROKE


I didn't miss anything, but I am not here to argue about how big of an influence Ghandi was on King. At the end of the day both lent themselves to better humanity through their faith, actions,  while using their belief in a higher power.
Perhaps you should pay more attention to both Men on how to handle disagreements, while using logic and reason. 

King was a Cafeteria Christian and great orchestrator of Ghandi's principals, the importance of their faith can be debated but yes they did great things for humanity.. Last time I checked this is a peaceful debate

I stand by that, if it erks you in any way I apologize but facts are facts my friend ..

 "and these are our heroes"

What's underlined is the insult, which is offensive, then creates confrontation, which is not in any way peaceful. It is was intentional slight, which suggests an agenda, one which I refuse to participate in.
So again I say, there is something to be learned from both King and Ghandi, the thing that you've obviously missed. You seem smart, knowing about Ghandi, so perhaps you do need Jesus as well.

Didn't hurt King, not at all.

How is it in an insult? Because he chose to cheat on his wife which is directly against the principals of Christianity.. Cafeteria Christians are ones that only follow the "rules of Christ" that my feel are right for them at the time.. Therefore, he can be included in that group. Don't be mad at me bruh, I didn't tell him to do it and exclaim his faith in the next sentence.. Facts are facts, or are you willing to dispute those as well?

On top of that you previously have shown ignorance to the achievements of the man that King so creatively chose to follow in the steps of.. (Ghandi)
You then proceeded to throw him under the bus for not being from the "hood." Which you fail to notice that "hoods" were significantly different in the 1950s and 1960s U.S. than what they are in the modern day United States.. Google these terms: crack epidemic, Section 8 housing etc...

[color= rgb(255, 0, 0)]I then proceeded to show you that Ghandi faced discrimination from multiple races, not just one, including blacks..[/color]

If what I type is offensive to you I apologize but by Christian definition the guy really failed as a faithful follower (and husband)

I personally don't see a personal need for Jesus especially if his followers are constantly failing by cheating on their wives...

Sorry if your hero isn't the christian you thought he was...If anything I respect him more for the fact that he showed that he had flaws and wasn't the Christian folk hero people like you make him out to be..

dude chose to get down like any other unfaithful male ..