MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. AND THE WEIGHTIER MATTERS OF THE LAW
One of the most common criticisms leveled against Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in conservative evangelical circles concerns his theology. He is often dismissed as a “liberal theologian,” and his legacy is questioned on the grounds that he supposedly denied core Christian doctrines—the bodily resurrection of Christ, the miracles of Jesus, and the virgin birth.
Historically speaking, these claims are more complicated than they are usually presented. Some of King’s early academic writings, produced in a liberal seminary context, reflect engagement with modernist theology and raise questions about how he articulated certain doctrines at that stage of his life. At the same time, his later sermons, prayers, and public ministry are saturated with biblical language, Christ-centered hope, and resurrection confidence. Scholars continue to debate how his academic theology related to his preaching faith. What cannot honestly be said is that his theology can be reduced to a few disputed academic statements and dismissed wholesale.
But even if—for the sake of argument—we grant the strongest version of the criticism, a deeper problem remains.
Why is King rejected for holding allegedly false views on certain doctrines, while others are embraced who affirm orthodox doctrines yet openly disregard what Scripture teaches about justice, racial equality, love of neighbor, and the dignity of all people made in the image of God?
Jesus Himself answered this question long ago. He rebuked religious leaders who were meticulous about doctrinal precision while neglecting “the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, and faithfulness” (Matthew 23:23). The Bible never treats belief in truth as optional—but it also never treats obedience to truth as secondary.
King clearly believed—and taught—large portions of the Bible that many of his critics still resist or minimize. He believed that all people are created equal before God. He believed racism is sin. He believed injustice offends the heart of God. He believed Christians are commanded to love their enemies, to reject violence, and to bear suffering without retaliation. These are not peripheral themes in Scripture; they are central, repeated, and unmistakable.
By contrast, it is possible—tragically common, even—to affirm the virgin birth, the resurrection, and biblical inspiration, while simultaneously ignoring or excusing racial injustice, oppression, and hatred. The New Testament never presents such selective obedience as faithfulness. Right doctrine paired with wrong living is not biblical Christianity; it is hypocrisy.
The irony is difficult to escape. King is often rejected for holding views some consider theologically deficient, while those who dismiss him continue to overlook commands he clearly obeyed. In doing so, they elevate certain doctrines as the sole measure of faithfulness while minimizing others the Bible itself calls “weightier.”
Dr. King did not believe less of the Bible than his critics. Maybe he believed different parts of it—parts that demanded personal cost, public courage, and sacrificial love. And that, more than any theological disagreement, explains why his legacy remains so unsettling.
BDD
