Who Is Martin Luther King On Christian Liberty

Although the word was never directly stated beyond the Bill of Rights, the abstract concept of ‘freedom’ underscores all of the documents, most eloquently in the Declaration of Independence. The idea “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights” extends far beyond pragmatic polity; it defines the American spirit. Its lyrical rejection of “absolute tyranny” courses through our veins, precipitating American individualism: a culture of independence

In hopes of creating a better sense of credibility, which encourages people to accept his idea or “dream”, King mentions the Declaration of Independence. Dr. king makes himself credible by challenging what citizens known as the unalienable rights. Unalienable rights, are rights that cannot be taken away from a human being. They are considered rights given to people by God himself, when they are born. In the third paragraph he quotes, ‘the unalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. “This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” He uses the quote to show that the Supreme Court should be on his side. However, he then goes on to tell how even though it should be on his side it is not. “It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note.” He is stating that the American government has neglected their promise to ALL of the American people. By doing this he is asking the readers to ask themselves, why has America failed to reach the expectations of equality? Why is the injustice only occurring to blacks? And most importantly, What can be done to change this? In another attempt to appear more credible, King often times quotes the bible. His use of the bible can cause an emotional response, but

By drawing assurance that faith frees from the law, Luther discusses God’s promises to “fulfill the law” through “believ[ing] in Christ” (Luther 2003). Similar to how good works do not justify righteousness, the law is not established through justification. On the contrary, the law does the opposite of justify; it is a prison to those who have not yet obtained grace. In this prison, humans tend to stay in the confinements of the cell in fear of the law; their obedience is inspired by fear. What kind of righteousness is expected to be obtained by only obeying in fear of punishment? Luther explains that those who strictly follow the law this way will eventually fail (Luther 2003). Yet, it is through faith in God that one can rely on His promises “to fulfill the law and not covet” (Luther 2003). However, Luther uses this concept to warn those who do not believe that they will not "fulfill all the works of the law" (Luther 2003). Through Christ, Luther corrected this misconception by believing that humans can be freed from the law only through a strong bond to faith.

Mankind has been fighting for Liberty and Freedom for as long as we can remember. Liberty and freedom has been a topic which has been debated for many decades. What does it mean to be free , and how far can we go to strive for freedom. These important questions have been answered and studied by two of the greatest English philosophers, John Locke and John Stuart Mill. Locke and Mill men will attempt to uncover the mysteries of Liberty and Freedom and unveil the importance of being free. This essay will look at John Locke’s principle works” Second Treatise of government” and John Stuart Mills. “ On Liberty and Other Essays”. This essay will attempt to compare and contrast Lockes ideology on Liberty and Freedom to that of Mill.

On the other hand, unlike the other freedoms mentioned, religious freedom addresses a different type of need. It addresses the concept of personal fulfillment, or perhaps, self-realization. Religion attempts to give answers to basic questions: From where did the world come? What is the meaning of human life? Why do people die and what happens afterward? Why is there evil? How should people behave? As a word religion is difficult to define, but as a human experience it seems to be universal. The 20th-century German-born American theologian, Paul Tillich, gave a simple and basic definition of the word: "Religion is ultimate concern." This means that religion includes that to which people are most devoted or that from which they expect to get the most satisfaction in life. Consequently, religion provides adequate answers to the basic afore mentioned questions.

While many are unaware, the Protestant Reformation continues to be impactful in how people in America today view freedom, government, and rights. In general, the Reformation has played a role on the construction of America’s social order and diversity, the day-to-day natural life, and religious freedom. Beginning with the American Constitution, the foundation of Christianity (unversed in any other part of the world), unites religious moral standards with the American way of thinking regarding cultural diversity, equal rights, religious belief, and sexual characteristics.

In Martin Luther King Jr.s book, Stride Toward Freedom, he has discussed how the people of oppression have dealt with the conditions they are being put in. Within the book King will explain three ways that people have chosen to handle the issue. Using chronological order, King will demonstrate his thesis that acquiescence, violence, and nonviolence are the three behaviors of the oppressed. Throughout the book the use of description, allusions, and word choice can all be found.

In “the gospel of freedom”, King’s diction reminds us of his connection to the clergymen in profession and shared Christian values. Another instance of King using allusion appears in his discussion of St. Thomas Aquinas, a Catholic saint, who said “An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law” (King). In citing Aquinas, King is appealing to a Catholic audience and displaying his knowledge of the Catholic faith after studying to become a preacher. In using the phrase “not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws” King’s diction appeals to his audience of clergymen and their morality due to their faith. Citing Jewish philosopher Martin Buber on the topic of segregation, “Segregation… substitutes an ‘I it’ relationship for an ‘I thou’ relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things” (King).

King realizes the impact of allusion of the holy bible to his clergymen counterparts and uses it as leverage to exemplify his argument. King continues to state that "One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all." (Letter From a Birmingham Jail p.91). This statement further pushes kings argument of resisting the unjust laws that are oppressing his people onto the clergymen and with the help of his allusion of St. Augustine, his argument is laid out with power and conviction. King supplements this argument with yet another religious allusion in which an ethical appeal is given off to his audience, the clergymen, as King states, "To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any Law that degrades human personality is unjust." (Letter From a Birmingham Jail p.91). Through this quote, King is showing his fellow clergymen that they are going against their own teachings and that these laws passed against his people aren't just an unfavorable law passed by the government, but an immoral law according to the guidelines set out by St. Thomas Aquinas

We must keep in mind that King specifies his use of peacefulness in order to keep his honest conscience from playing a part in his actions. He considered the fact that he was a faithful member of the church in order to validate his reasoning behind his peaceful procedures. For instance, King conveys that, “I am grateful to God that, through the influence of the Negro church, the way of nonviolence became an integral part of our struggle” (King 5). He suggests that he is grateful to God because of his background being part of the church. King states that he wants nonviolence to become a part of their struggle due to the fact of his need of a good moral character and a clear conscience. He wishes for a nonviolent method of gaining free will since he is called for being a leader which obliged him to making honest decisions. King’s use of God gives the reader an idea about how much of a moral man he is. He not only abides by the law that governs him, although the law of the time might have been positioned in the wrong direction, but also to the principles set forth by himself to implement the correct judgments. Not only does King appeal to his religious beliefs in order to obtain freedom from the chains of oppression, but also to the values of the United States of America to sequentially be granted the God-given right, free will. For example,

Furthermore, Mr. King believed that rules have to be followed only if they are just morally and ethically. He did not hesitate to brake laws when he found them offensive or umiliating. Doing so, he "educated" his followers to doubt the current situation and find the way to change

Just as every plants and animal as evolved and changed throughout the course of its existence so has the definition of freedom while its’ meaning has stayed constant. Freedom has a perpetual meaning, however, humans have tried to change the definition based upon moral, ethical, social, and legal ideals that have through history been debated upon and never satisfied all. Freedoms’ perpetual meaning is that everyone, no matter race or gender, has the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint. As time progresses and new ideas flourish the definition of freedom either flourishes along with society or takes a drastic spiral downward usually with the opinions of humanity. In this essay we will be

John Stuart Mill discusses the conception of liberty in many ways. I’d like to focus of his ideas of the harm principle and a touch a little on his thoughts about the freedom of action. The harm principle and freedom on action are just two subtopics of Mill’s extensive thoughts about the conception on liberty. Not only do I plan to discuss and explain each of these parts on the conception of liberty, but I also plan to discuss my thoughts and feelings. I have a few disagreements with Mill on the harm principle; they will be stated and explained. My thoughts and feelings on Mill vary but I’d like to share my negative opinion towards the principle and hope to put it in a different perspective.

John Locke (1632-1704) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) are two important thinkers of liberty in modern political thought. They have revolutionized the idea of human freedom at their time and have influenced many political thinkers afterwards. Although their important book on human freedom, John Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government (1689) and John Mill’s On Liberty (1859), are separated 170 years, some scholars thinks that they are belonging to the same conceptual tradition, English Liberalism. In this essay, I will elaborate John Locke and John Stuart Mill view on human freedom and try to find the difference between their concept of human freedom despite their similar liberal tradition background.

By contrast, “the ‘positive’ sense of the word ‘liberty’ derives from the [individual’s] wish … to be his own master” (178). Exponents of positive liberty focus on internal factors rather than external actors by painting the self as essentially divided, typically into a higher and lower self. The higher of these selves, distinguished perhaps by rationality or length of outlook, represents in some sense the true realization of an individual’s potential, nature, or entity. This being is marked by possessing full self-consciousness, bearing full responsibility for one’s choices, and not being a slave to one’s nature or “unbridled