What is the connection between "genuine" and "sincerely"? What tone do these words and phrases create, and why does King use them? Why does King begin his answer is paragraph one "in what hipe will be patient and reasonable terms." ? What tone does it set for the piece? In paragraph 2, what does the the line "when the hour came we lived up to our promise" imply about King's character and beliefs? How does this line help strengthen King's argument? In the 3rd paragraph, whom does King compare himself? How does his comparison support his reason for going to Birmingham and impact the tone of the text? What can you infer about King's character and his audience based on this comparison? How does the argument King offers in paragraph 4 fit or relate to the other reasons and evidence he has shared?

The terms “genuinely” and “sincerely” are terms that are commonly used interchangeably to connote feelings of truthfulness and honesty. However, there is a slight difference between the two words. Namely, that “genuine” is an adjective and thus used to describe a noun while “sincerely” is an adverb and is therefore used to describe the manner in which something is done. It will be noted that Dr. King correctly uses these terms by using the word “genuine” to describe the general character of the individuals addressed in the letter and the term “sincerely” to characterize the concerns raised by these individuals.
King’s use of the words “genuine” and “sincerely,” particularly in a letter that is responsive to criticism from some of his colleagues, creates a tone of understanding and patience in which he assumes that the criticism comes from a place of concern and not malicious criticism. By doing this, King’s letter is set up to be seen as an explanation of his actions rather than a counter attack against those who criticized him.
Similarly, King states that he will answer the criticism in what he "hopes will be patient and reasonable terms” to further convey that his correspondence is not a counter attack but is rather an attempt to answer the criticism of his colleagues in a manner that is complete and logical.
In paragraph 2, King informs the reader that he had been asked, by an affiliate organization, to “engage in a nonviolent direct-action program if such were deemed necessary.” King then informs that reader that he had assured the affiliate program that he would do as requested and that, eventually, it did become necessary to engage in a nonviolent action program. Essentially, King is telling the reader that he made a promise to another organization to support them if it were necessary and that he kept his promise to this organization. This statement implies that King is a man of integrity who keeps his word. This line also helps strengthen King’s argument. In the first sentence of this paragraph, King alludes to the criticism that he was an “outsider coming in” to Birmingham and sets up the rest of the paragraph to argue that, although he is from another place, he was not actually an outsider. This is true, in part, because his organization is affiliated with other organizations that operated in the Birmingham area. It is also true because, as he states in the second to last sentence, he was invited to Birmingham. Both of these arguments are supported by the statement that "when the hour came we lived up to our promise.”
In paragraph 3, King compares himself to the prophets of the 8th century B.C. and, the Apostle Paul. This comparison supports his reason for going to Birmingham by providing an example of individuals who had to go beyond their homes to carry a message and further a cause. This impacts the tone of the text by giving it concrete and serious undertones that solidify the strength behind his mission and the purpose behind his actions. This example allows the reader to infer that King had strong religious knowledge and inclinations that he shared with those that this letter was addressed to.
The argument in paragraph 4 relates to other reasons and evidence he shared by attacking the entire idea of an “outsider agitator.” This relates to King's previous argument that he was not an outsider and builds on this idea to argue that the entire idea of an outsider should be disregarded in these circumstances.