Biblical Scholar Puts the Final Nail in Charlie Kirk's Credibility Coffin

[Gunnar]

As is often the case with you, Jersey Girl, you managed to hit the nail on the head, in my opinion. The ultra-conservative MAGA movement is not actually designed to make America great again, but to return our nation to a state when it was less great, more bigoted, more intolerant of honest differences of opinion, less educated and more beholden to extremely wealthy, almost exclusively white male, authoritative landowners and oligarchs. Some of them (including Kirk, by the way) even go so far as to advocate curtailing hard-won liberties and equality for women and minorities and non-Christians. Kirk, for example, made no bones about advocating reversing women's suffrage and equality in the workforce and government. This is the opposite of "Make America Great Again." I am dismayed by how many people seemingly fail to see that!

You’re not wrong, Gunnar. You can clearly see that this is the overriding agenda of the current Administration. We are witnessing billionaires manipulating an egotistical, corrupt child ‘President’, and working alongside Christian Nationalists for the convenience of that group providing the distraction and divisiveness, to enact a massive grift to benefit themselves with no actual benefit to the American people.

We have a ‘government’ that runs on immaturity, has forsaken its duty to govern, has implemented multiple cash grab, crypto and corruption schemes to benefit the insiders, has turned ICE into a quasi-police-state operation with an expressed effort to instigate and terrorize, and trashed our reputation and trading partnerships, all while increasing the debt, exacerbating cost increases, and laughing about it in the faces of the American public.

MAGA - because their fragile egos was bruised in 2020 - has decided to support a Ballroom and Breadlines Administration.

Thanks, canpakes. I wish more people could see that this is what they are clearly attempting to do.

[Jersey Girl]

As is often the case with you, Jersey Girl, you managed to hit the nail on the head, in my opinion. The ultra-conservative MAGA movement is not actually designed to make America great again, but to return our nation to a state when it was less great, more bigoted, more intolerant of honest differences of opinion, less educated and more beholden to extremely wealthy, almost exclusively white male, authoritative landowners and oligarchs. Some of them (including Kirk, by the way) even go so far as to advocate curtailing hard-won liberties and equality for women and minorities and non-Christians. Kirk, for example, made no bones about advocating reversing women's suffrage and equality in the workforce and government. This is the opposite of "Make America Great Again." I am dismayed by how many people seemingly fail to see that!

Malarkey.

Are you a white male? Did you feel others were beholden to you? Maybe you’re experiencing shame or guilt.

Q: I wrote the post to which Gunnar is replying so why are you focusing on him? Whiskey trust me, you can go up against me anytime you want, challenge or criticize me. Pro tip: I match the tone of interaction as it comes to me on a thread. I can be simulatenously friendly in one thread while arguing with the very same poster in another thread...at the same time.

Feel free to challenge my comments any time you like. It's fine with me. I don't see why you're hopping all over someone who simply agreed with my comments. I receive that as an insult though you probably didn't intend it to be.

If you disagree with me...go for it.

[Jersey Girl]

As is often the case with you, Jersey Girl, you managed to hit the nail on the head, in my opinion. The ultra-conservative MAGA movement is not actually designed to make America great again, but to return our nation to a state when it was less great, more bigoted, more intolerant of honest differences of opinion, less educated and more beholden to extremely wealthy, almost exclusively white male, authoritative landowners and oligarchs. Some of them (including Kirk, by the way) even go so far as to advocate curtailing hard-won liberties and equality for women and minorities and non-Christians. Kirk, for example, made no bones about advocating reversing women's suffrage and equality in the workforce and government. This is the opposite of "Make America Great Again." I am dismayed by how many people seemingly fail to see that!

You know when I read your post I thought of something. No really, I think. Only because "some guys" online got to me years ago and totally ruined me for life. I could tell you stories!

I wonder if the so-called Christian Nationalists forgot about the ministry of Jesus (including prominent female followers as well as his approach to and defense of women that we see in scripture) and think (I'm being kind) that we should go ALL the way back to the Old Testament when women were property?

In any case, what Mak said in his take down was accurate. I've never followed his channel but as I recall he was a good and interesting read as a poster here.

[Chap]

I'm not at all familiar with Kirk's claims. Watched the video you linked to and fact checked it.

Mak got it right.

The problem I think is that many Christians want to hear what reinforces their faith traditions and are content to take it at face value without ever checking on the content. I think the same way about preachers who preach from the pulpit without opening their Bible, asking the congregation to "turn to" whatever scripture it is, and congregation members who don't open their Bible during Worship Service.

It's a mistake made by many. In the case of Mak debunking Kirk, the appropriate thing for Christians to do would be to fact check in light of history.

By and large, I think many Christians are lazy and again, they're okay hearing what reinforces their religious thinking and faith or personally held social beliefs.

Wolf in sheep's clothing and all that jazz.

The Bible tells us to test the scriptures. I think it wise for believers to test claims made by religious type leaders be it scripture or historical matter.

Confirmation bias is strong these days.

My bold. I think that the killing of Mr Kirk was a crime and a tragedy. But it is clear to me that Kirk, who knew very well that he had millions of scholars who placed total confidence in his words, did not fulfil his Christian duty to be make sure that what he said to his followers was true. He had eagerly taken on the role of being the shepherd of a huge flock of sheep, and it was his duty to make sure that they did not fall off cliffs or eat poisonous weeds.

Yet he seems to have had the habit of speaking with absolute confidence without checking whether his claims were true, well knowing that his followers would say "Wow! I never knew that! But if a well educated good Christian guy like him says it, guess it must be true!". So he fed his followers nonsense and untruths, such as "the word 'foetus' means 'a little human being' ", or "The Founding Fathers were mostly Bible believing Christians, not Enlightenment deists", knowing that they would swallow it all whole. When I was myself a believing Christian I would have expected that after his death Kirk would have risked at least some pretty sad head-shaking from Jesus, though one hopes he did not get the full "Depart from me - I never knew you!" routine.

[Whiskey]

it is clear to me that Kirk, who knew very well that he had millions of scholars who placed total confidence in his words,

It’s comments like this that help the entirety of your anti-christian rant find the sewer drain where it belongs.

Clear to you what Kirk knew very well? And an impossible statistic? And no evidence of these so-called scholars? Go ahead chapless ass, give is the names of just the first million of these scholars. I dare ya.

Chapless Ass, if you want to be an anti-Christian bigot, be one. No need to make crap up and blame Kirk. Just own it.

[Gadianton]

In UK "scholar" means "student". If you want to know all those names then get a contract with your buddy Peter Theil over at Palantir. Than have a drink with Bill. I think he's feeling neglected.

[Whiskey]

Malarkey.

Are you a white male? Did you feel others were beholden to you? Maybe you’re experiencing shame or guilt.

Q: I wrote the post to which Gunnar is replying so why are you focusing on him? Whiskey trust me, you can go up against me anytime you want, challenge or criticize me. Pro tip: I match the tone of interaction as it comes to me on a thread. I can be simulatenously friendly in one thread while arguing with the very same poster in another thread...at the same time.

Feel free to challenge my comments any time you like. It's fine with me. I don't see why you're hopping all over someone who simply agreed with my comments. I receive that as an insult though you probably didn't intend it to be.

If you disagree with me...go for it.

I wasn’t jumping your comment.

I was referencing gunner’s comments about white males and making the point that maybe he is entitled, as a white male, to all the benefits he is assigning to white males. And that experience may be the source of his shame.

[Whiskey]

In UK "scholar" means "student". If you want to know all those names then get a contract with your buddy Peter Theil over at Palantir. Than have a drink with Bill. I think he's feeling neglected.

If you want to believe Chapless Ass’s made up stats are real, you may have already drank too much with Theil.

[Gadianton]

I assume you thought he meant "scholars" as in people with Phds and real educations. Well then yeah, it would be a total made up stat. If there are 10 of those from non-sham theology schools it would be a miracle. You were right, in that case, to be skeptical.

[Whiskey]

I assume you thought he meant "scholars" as in people with Phds and real educations. Well then yeah, it would be a total made up stat. If there are 10 of those from non-sham theology schools it would be a miracle. You were right, in that case, to be skeptical.

First read, yes, I applied scholars as we know it in this forum.

When your grace definition is used, it is still horse crap from Chapless.