Malcolm’s parents were also very loving, Louise, his mother, was a home maker and Earl, his father, was a preacher who was also an active member of the local chapter of the Universal Negro Improvement Association and the avid supporter of the black nationalist leader, Marcus Garvey. Martin Jr. had a good relationship with his parents, but he wanted to please his father so he went into a career as a minister. Malcolm on the other hand had a different relationship with his parents, when his father died he
The only way to win was with the help of God, because he created man as equal. All agree that if king had lived, he would have been active not only in the black community, but would have likely taken up causes of other minorities (Jones). Martin Luther king Jr. helped improve society with trying to stop discrimination against African Americans. He wanted to stand up for his people, if it wasn’t for him we would not have the rights we have today. As Jones states, he once said, he might not have entered the promise land with us, but he had been to the mountaintop.
Instead of using time we defined everything in moments and I found something special in that. Knowing this and how Miller wrote his book in this style did not complicate the read and having a chronological order was not important. It is really about what you learn from these moments and what you take with you. From the beginning of the book we already see Miller’s trouble with understanding God. He is told by the Bible that God is a “Father.” Miller’s personal relationship with his own father is troubled.
The father is all about his son, probably the best a father could be to protect his son. His stand- point on God is he wants his son to have something to believe in when he is gone. He tries to convince the child, and possibly himself that God is still an active cause to believe in, “My job is to take care of you. I was appointed to do that by God” (77). Here and there he will make small references for the kid even though his belief is cloudy.
They both wanted change and equality, but they had different views about how to go about getting it. Both, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X were born in the early 20’s to fathers that were prevalent in the community. Martin’s father was a reverend of his own Baptist church. He believed in education and instilled the importance of it into his children. Malcolm’s father was a Baptist lay speaker.
Martin Luther King Jr. followed in his father’s footsteps and became a pastor as well. This helped to influence the way he protested. He was a nonviolent speaker and wanted blacks and whites to be equal in society together not separated. He was a very good public speaker and many blacks along with whites supported his belief of being equal. Malcom X did not have the same lifestyle that Martin had the ability to grow up with.
Martin Luther Stance against Indulgences Martin Luther did not set out to alter the world. As a young man, he came up against some techniques that the Church was utilizing that did not agree in his conscious, and he searched for answers that were biblical. Martin Luther was a German Augustinian friar, a pioneer of the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century, and also the son of a miner. He lived during a period where the Catholic Church ruled the land, he had a strong desire for the restoration of truth in the Church and a passion for the salvation. Luther saw countless of advanced developments sweep across Western Europe, some changes sparked by his words.
He had a true zeal to learn the word of God for himself and pass it on to other. “Luther trusted Christ, and that Christ was with him in his and all people’s suffering; God was accompanying, calling, bringing him and all fellow sufferers into the life of hope and resurrection.” “Most fundamental is the first step, Luther’s teaching that by faith alone we are united with Christ. Protestants loved to talk about “accepting Christ by faith,” which certainly owes a great deal to this fundamental teaching of Luther’s. Usually, however, it is presented as a decision we must make, as if it were by our own free will. Luther, by contrast, hates the very idea of free will when it is applied to matters of salvation, for our confidence in our own free will lies at the core of our efforts to be justified by good works rather than faith alone.
His courage to stand firm for faith, freedom, and education of every soul by the word of God changed the face of Christendom forever. Luther’s theology was a needed change for the times. But with new thinking comes a balance of correct and incorrect conclusions. Kittelson, James M. Luther the Reformer : The Story of the Man and His Career. Minneapolis: Augsburg Pub.
He begins by establishing rapport between himself and his audience by stating that he receives many criticisms and that he has personally decided to respond to this one because he believes the clergymen are “of genuine good will” and that their criticisms “are sincerely set forth.” The argument that the clergymen have used against King is that “outsiders [should not be] coming in” to Birmingham. King first starts to respond to this criticism by appealing to his ethos, stating that he has “the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.” He uses the authority that he has as the president of the SCLC to claim that he has a right to be in Birmingham “because [he] was invited [to Birmingham]” and that he has “organizational ties [in Birmingham].” He then proceeds to appeal to pathos when he compares himself to the Apostle Paul as a peacemaking, “gospel of freedom” teaching prophet who has come to Birmingham “because injustice is here” and he is answering “the Macedonian call for aid.” This appeal to religion is used because his audience is a