Charlie Kirk's Cedibility Crisis: How One Biblical Scholar Systematically Exposed His Lies/Deception

[huckelberry]

Have you been through the links in the OP yet? Yes or No? because that’s what the conversation is about.

It's about whether or not Charlie Kirk intentionally deceives people. I don't think he does. He believes in his interpretations and applications of Bible verses. I'm not going to fault him for that. What I do know, is that the progressive left really doesn't have anything to throw at him that would cause college kids coming over to conservative to have a change of heart. He's had a huge effect on the minds and hearts of the youth in America. The young people are finally seeing that far left progressive liberal values lead nowhere.

I'll leave it at that.

Regards,
MG

MG, those clips from Dan are valuable. They are not pursuing a liberal program whatever that might be but they do point out shortcomings in Charlie's claims. I think your observation that it is reasonable to think Kirk is honestly presenting his understanding is ok. Dan's method of response is also honest.

What I see in these clips is Charlie Kirk makes big generalized assertions . They can contain some truth but the definitive declarations can leave out other aspects of the truth and possibly distort some. I think the format of presentation gives Charlie big advantages. He can declare the assumptions and context and conclusion. A questioner has a hill to climb to start to untangle things. There are likely many listeners unprepared to present as much analysis as Dan presents.

Perhaps some people who agree with Kirk will continue his project and perhaps some questioners will think it worthwhile to prepare ahead of time.

MG, I really do not know what sort of things you have in mind as empty liberal values. Perhaps free sex and drugs. There is plenty of emptiness there.

[MG 2.0]

It's about whether or not Charlie Kirk intentionally deceives people. I don't think he does. He believes in his interpretations and applications of Bible verses. I'm not going to fault him for that. What I do know, is that the progressive left really doesn't have anything to throw at him that would cause college kids coming over to conservative to have a change of heart. He's had a huge effect on the minds and hearts of the youth in America. The young people are finally seeing that far left progressive liberal values lead nowhere.

I'll leave it at that.

Regards,
MG

MG, those clips from Dan are valuable. They are not pursuing a liberal program whatever that might be but they do point out shortcomings in Charlie's claims. I think your observation that it is reasonable to think Kirk is honestly presenting his understanding is ok. Dan's method of response is also honest.

What I see in these clips is Charlie Kirk makes big generalized assertions . They can contain some truth but the definitive declarations can leave out other aspects of the truth and possibly distort some. I think the format of presentation gives Charlie big advantages. He can declare the assumptions and context and conclusion. A questioner has a hill to climb to start to untangle things. There are likely many listeners unprepared to present as much analysis as Dan presents.

Perhaps some people who agree with Kirk will continue his project and perhaps some questioners will think it worthwhile to prepare ahead of time.

MG, I really do not know what sort of things you have in mind as empty liberal values. Perhaps free sex and drugs. There is plenty of emptiness there.

I don’t really disagree with what you’ve said. I’ve been referring to the farther left progressive movement, not the mainline liberal/Democratic party. Even though they also seem to like higher taxes and more spending. I watched the committee hearing with Patel (FBI) yesterday. He’s brought down costs and increased productivity with fewer personnel.

The Democrats sitting at the Dias didn’t seem to be too thrilled about that. Gave him a hard time about letting people go.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

It's about whether or not Charlie Kirk intentionally deceives people. I don't think he does. He believes in his interpretations and applications of Bible verses. I'm not going to fault him for that. What I do know, is that the progressive left really doesn't have anything to throw at him that would cause college kids coming over to conservative to have a change of heart. He's had a huge effect on the minds and hearts of the youth in America. The young people are finally seeing that far left progressive liberal values lead nowhere.

I'll leave it at that.

Regards,
MG

MG, those clips from Dan are valuable. They are not pursuing a liberal program whatever that might be but they do point out shortcomings in Charlie's claims. I think your observation that it is reasonable to think Kirk is honestly presenting his understanding is ok. Dan's method of response is also honest.

What I see in these clips is Charlie Kirk makes big generalized assertions . They can contain some truth but the definitive declarations can leave out other aspects of the truth and possibly distort some. I think the format of presentation gives Charlie big advantages. He can declare the assumptions and context and conclusion. A questioner has a hill to climb to start to untangle things. There are likely many listeners unprepared to present as much analysis as Dan presents...

And we are lucky Dan puts the effort into doing it.

[MG 2.0]

MG, those clips from Dan are valuable. They are not pursuing a liberal program whatever that might be but they do point out shortcomings in Charlie's claims. I think your observation that it is reasonable to think Kirk is honestly presenting his understanding is ok. Dan's method of response is also honest.

What I see in these clips is Charlie Kirk makes big generalized assertions . They can contain some truth but the definitive declarations can leave out other aspects of the truth and possibly distort some. I think the format of presentation gives Charlie big advantages. He can declare the assumptions and context and conclusion. A questioner has a hill to climb to start to untangle things. There are likely many listeners unprepared to present as much analysis as Dan presents...

And we are lucky Dan puts the effort into doing it.

And here she is again. A nothing burger put up right after I’ve made a post. Kinda’ weird maybe?

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

The common thread among progressive liberals would be their belief in more government rather than less. More regulations rather than less. More taxation rather than less. More spending rather than less. Essentially, more influence and control over the lives of everyday Americans. This general description can of course be broken down into granular parts.

Sounds like a blurb right from the Heritage Foundation's website. While I wonder if you can expand on any of this coherently, let's go with it for the moment.

Tyler Kirk had apparently moved away from conservatives values and found Kirk’s values reprehensible.

So what you're saying, is that the accused had come to believe more government and regulation is necessary, more taxation is necessary, and that American's lives should be better controlled, therefore he murdered his victim?

[MG 2.0]

The common thread among progressive liberals would be their belief in more government rather than less. More regulations rather than less. More taxation rather than less. More spending rather than less. Essentially, more influence and control over the lives of everyday Americans. This general description can of course be broken down into granular parts.

Tyler Kirk had apparently moved away from conservative’s values and found Kirk’s values reprehensible.

So what you're saying, is that the accused had come to believe more government and regulation is necessary, more taxation is necessary, and that American's lives should be better controlled, therefore he murdered his victim?

I think that Tyler’s messed up mind was due more to the fringe stuff that is a ‘tag-a-long’ category to the folks that would claim to be progressives. The whole ‘my body, my choice’ movement that results in abortion on demand, gender dysphoria taken to its extreme, furries, and that kind of claptrap.

I doubt he, personally, was much wrapped up in the sorts/details of philosophical views that progressive social democrats have regarding the economy, taxation, and social engineering. Stuff that is probably in your leftist wheelhouse of expertise.

He was most likely on the superficial and somewhat troubled fringe. That’s my opinion at this point anyway. I don’t think he was far right. He was definitely far wrong. We can probably agree on that.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

And we are lucky Dan puts the effort into doing it.

And here she is again. A nothing burger put up right after I’ve made a post. Kinda’ weird maybe?

Regards,
MG

It was right after huckleberry made a post. Have you looked into any of the links provided in the OP yet? Not even one? Why not? More information is always better, right? So why are you point blank refusing to look at stuff that might give you a different perspective about Kirk?

[Gadianton]

I think that Tyler’s messed up mind was due more to the fringe stuff that is a ‘tag-a-long’ category to the folks that would claim to be progressives. The whole ‘my body, my choice’ movement that results in abortion on demand, gender dysphoria taken to its extreme, furries, and that kind of claptrap.

A lot of the stuff you're talking about falls into the libertarian category as much is it does the progressive category. People doing what they want for themselves. Your first list of supposed draconian progressive values has been implemented better by the present administration than any democrat presidency (then again you voted Harris so maybe you understand that). But let's go with it.

So you're saying that the accused was so set upon women choosing and people wanting to identify as various genders and dressing up as animals, that he plotted and carried out murder?

progressive social democrats have regarding the economy, taxation, and social engineering. Stuff that is probably in your leftist wheelhouse of expertise.

I'm not a leftist. By your description of progressive social democrats, Ajax18 is the biggest leftist on the board.

He was most likely on the superficial and somewhat troubled fringe. That’s my opinion at this point anyway. I don’t think he was far right. He was definitely far wrong. We can probably agree on th

Let me ask you a question. I had a friend from mission/BYU who was squeaky clean, nearly puritanical in morality, who suddenly came out of the closet to me in a conversation on campus one day. Over the next several weeks he "came out" to more people, and within a couple years he was dead. He made some really extreme choices including drugs. Would you say the best description of my friend's choices goes something like this: Johnny grew up in a strictly conservative Mormon home, became an eagle scout, served an honorable mission, and began pursing higher education at the Lord's University. At a certain point during college for reasons we don't understand, he went crazy and began making choices aligned with the political left -- embracing homosexuality and drug use, which ultimately because stark contributing factors to his death.

[Fence Sitter]

It’s striking that so much of the discussion around Kirk’s death centers on whether ideology drove him to commit a horrific act, while there’s barely a word about the lax gun laws that made it possible to pull the trigger in the first place. More than 50 people in the U.S. are killed every single day at the hands of someone else with a gun—yet all the attention is on this one case. Shouldn’t the real conversation be about how to prevent gun violence, rather than framing it as just another left-versus-right battle?

[Abaddon]

interesting write-up on the killer in npr today:

https://www.npr.org/2025/09/18/nx-s1-55 ... ter-motive