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

[Everybody Wang Chung]

If any of you had doubts about the extent of deception in Charlie Kirk's public debates, it's time to doubt those doubts. Charlie Kirk's credibility has taken a serious hit. Biblical scholar Dan McClellan thoroughly and repeatedly refutes Charlie's public claims in these videos, leaving no room for doubt about the extent of Charlie's deceptions.


Charlie Kirk lying about abortion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bYDByjN7mg

Charlie Kirk lying about socialism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vNH7aJN5KM

Charlie Kirk lying about Deuteronomy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Br3jUTf7HsI

Charlie Kirk lying about Jesus:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzjukK8AhiQ

Charlie Kirk lying about Christian Nationalism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nq9-rh7rj8A

Charlie Kirk lying about immigration and the Bible:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iG6EnokkC8

Charlie Kirk lying about the Bible and homosexuality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBc56AJbvVM

Charlie Kirk lying about slavery and the Bible:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgjnR6HCoQI

Charlie Kirk lying about separation of church and state:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3eyXaxlw9o

Charlie Kirk lying about the standard of moral good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWB_lNUk0Go

Charlie Kirk lying about the government:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h-P-IH4qEU

[I Have Questions]

That cannot be true Everybody Wang Chung because MaGa 2.0 has told everyone Kirk was “a good man”.

[drumdude]

McClellan is such a breath of fresh air. He's single-handedly taking down the most prominent disseminators of Christian propaganda and deception.

Mopologists should feel lucky that he uses such kid gloves when dealing with them.

[Hound of Heaven]

Charlie Kirk's credibility has taken a serious hit.

Not only are you a master fibber, but it seems you’ve also joined the ranks of this Dan character in the not-so-bright department!

I checked out his first video, and honestly, you'd have to be a complete buffoon not to see that the definitions Dan tossed up in the video are basically what Charlie Kirk claimed a fetus is—just a tiny human being!

[Chap]

I know the Bible quite well, though I have got a little out of practice in instant text citation.

However, I have looked at all those links, (actually I think I missed the one about the government), and they do indeed show how "Dan McClellan thoroughly and repeatedly refutes Charlie's public claims".

By the way, I think I know how Kirk ended up affirming that the Latin word 'fetus' means 'a little human being' (it doesn't today, and it never did mean that). It is because he is mixing that word up with 'homunculus', a diminutive form of Latin 'homo' for 'man'. It was once (wrongly) claimed that each sperm contained a complete miniature human being (homunculus), which grew into a baby in the mother's woman, making the father into the only real parent. Kirk would I think have liked that. But it isn't true.

Oh, and I don't think he should have been shot. Refutation is a much better way of dealing with such people, and it really isn't very difficult to do if you know what you are talking about.

[MG 2.0]

I know the Bible quite well, though I have got a little out of practice in instant text citation.

However, I have looked at all those links, (actually I think I missed the one about the government), and they do indeed show how "Dan McClellan thoroughly and repeatedly refutes Charlie's public claims".

By the way, I think I know how Kirk ended up affirming that the Latin word 'fetus' means 'a little human being' (it doesn't today, and it never did mean that). It is because he is mixing that word up with 'homunculus', a diminutive form of Latin 'homo' for 'man'. It was once (wrongly) claimed that each sperm contained a complete miniature human being (homunculus), which grew into a baby in the mother's woman, making the father into the only real parent. Kirk would I think have liked that. But it isn't true.

Oh, and I don't think he should have been shot. Refutation is a much better way of dealing with such people, and it really isn't very difficult to do if you know what you are talking about.

I have watched some of Kirk's "Ask Me a Question" campus visits. Not a bunch, but some. Usually the students are somewhat unprepared, it seems, to take him on. I congratulate them, however, for their courage. But in the world of 'ideas' they don't seem to be able to stand up successfully to his conservative ideology. You would think that on some of these college campuses there would be a leftist/progressive that could successfully take him down. Maybe there has been.

Anyone have a link for an Ask Me a Question session where someone had the better argument and Kirk didn't have answers? He drew a complete blank?

I agree with you, Chap, we seem to be going down a slippery slope in manifestations of violence. Young people are being radicalized to hate which ultimately results in violence if not checked.

I don't think or expect Kirk is necessarily always going to get correct scriptural exegesis/interpretation every time he uses scripture to make a defense/point.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

I know the Bible quite well, though I have got a little out of practice in instant text citation.

However, I have looked at all those links, (actually I think I missed the one about the government), and they do indeed show how "Dan McClellan thoroughly and repeatedly refutes Charlie's public claims".

By the way, I think I know how Kirk ended up affirming that the Latin word 'fetus' means 'a little human being' (it doesn't today, and it never did mean that). It is because he is mixing that word up with 'homunculus', a diminutive form of Latin 'homo' for 'man'. It was once (wrongly) claimed that each sperm contained a complete miniature human being (homunculus), which grew into a baby in the mother's woman, making the father into the only real parent. Kirk would I think have liked that. But it isn't true.

Oh, and I don't think he should have been shot. Refutation is a much better way of dealing with such people, and it really isn't very difficult to do if you know what you are talking about.

I have watched some of Kirk's "Ask Me a Question" campus visits. Not a bunch, but some. Usually the students are somewhat unprepared, it seems, to take him on. I congratulate them, however, for their courage. But in the world of 'ideas' they don't seem to be able to stand up successfully to his conservative ideology. You would think that on some of these college campuses there would be a leftist/progressive that could successfully take him down. Maybe there has been.

Anyone have a link for an Ask Me a Question session where someone had the better argument and Kirk didn't have answers? He drew a complete blank?

I agree with you, Chap, we seem to be going down a slippery slope in manifestations of violence. Young people are being radicalized to hate which ultimately results in violence if not checked.

Regards,
MG

From where did you source those videos? I ask because it is suggested that he edited and manipulated those videos to present himself in a good light, and only distributed videos where he was seen to have the upper hand.

[MG 2.0]

From where did you source those videos? I ask because it is suggested that he edited and manipulated those videos to present himself in a good light, and only distributed videos where he was seen to have the upper hand.

If that is so, wouldn't you think that with all the colleges that he has visited that someone would make an 'uncut' and unedited video of the whole event? All I've seen is what I've said. Charlie pretty much making a dunghill of progressive/liberal ideology. I would be more than impressed if you can find two or three uncut videos where Charlie was taken down at one of these "Ask Me a Question" events.

Seriously. Maybe he has. I just haven't seen it. You have?

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

From where did you source those videos? I ask because it is suggested that he edited and manipulated those videos to present himself in a good light, and only distributed videos where he was seen to have the upper hand.

If that is so, wouldn't you think that with all the colleges that he has visited that someone would make an 'uncut' and unedited video of the whole event? All I've seen is what I've said. Charlie pretty much making a dunghill of progressive/liberal ideology. I would be more than impressed if you can find two or three uncut videos where Charlie was taken down at one of these "Ask Me a Question" events.

Seriously. Maybe he has. I just haven't seen it. You have?

Regards,
MG

Here's one of Charlie Kirk debating, that isn't a Charlie Kirk produced video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6-NjMmr4hc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zn0_2iACV-A

I would suggest you broaden your sources to gain a more balanced view. I also recommend you follow the links in the OP. Because more information is always better, am I right?

[MG 2.0]

If that is so, wouldn't you think that with all the colleges that he has visited that someone would make an 'uncut' and unedited video of the whole event? All I've seen is what I've said. Charlie pretty much making a dunghill of progressive/liberal ideology. I would be more than impressed if you can find two or three uncut videos where Charlie was taken down at one of these "Ask Me a Question" events.

Seriously. Maybe he has. I just haven't seen it. You have?

Regards,
MG

Here's one of Charlie Kirk debating, that isn't a Charlie Kirk produced video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6-NjMmr4hc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zn0_2iACV-A

You're right. It's produced by what appears to be a progressive leftist. It is highly edited. It is the producer of this video that thinks Charlie was defeated in this debate. I watched the unedited debate not that long ago. Kirk took most of these progressives to the cleaners. I think you quickly found this video without really looking at it.

Can you point out five or six instances during this debate where Kirk is legitimately taken down by leftist ideology? I didn't. And I watch it uncut.

Put up or shut up this time around, IHQ. You don't answer questions and now you're putting up videos that honestly don't help your arguments. You will avoid making the list and find a way to do a 'work around'.

Regards,
MG