In orthodox (real) Baptist theology, a church is made up only of the "saved." It therefore goes without saying that any ordained Baptist minister must be "saved" as well.
By asking the question on whether King was "saved," the original poster is asking a much more profound and important question than whether King is "in Heaven." Who cares where he is? The point is that if King wasn't "saved," then he was not a real Baptist minister at all. Yet some people are so blinkered they don't seem to be able to even think of this.
Look, I'm not even a chrstian, and the obsession with the afterlife and whether or not one is "saved" is not a part of my religion at all. But I see the importance of this question, even if many of you do not.
The most fundamentalist Black chrstian in existence probably doesn't give a hoot as to whether King was an adulterer or a Communist. But he/she just might care that King "didn't believe the bible." This is the most important issue about King there is.
I simply cannot believe so many FReepers either don't care about this topic or even want to suppress discussion about it!
I agree. Thus my post on the need for all to examine King's theology papers and not just his stump speeches. As I stated there would be some shocked Baptists of all color if they reviewed what this OP offered us.
Denominations are not.
So someone can belong to a denomination, have membership in it, and not be saved.
And people can be saved by faith in Christ and not belong to any denomination at all.
So don't buy into the Catholic meme that if you belong to a church, you are saved.
That is not taught at all in the NT.
I understand your point that if he's not really saved, then he's not a legitimate Baptist minister. Sad to say, he probably could be credentialed if he gave all the right answers even though he wasn't saved. Wolves in sheep's clothing comes to mind.