Charlie Kirk - Martyr or Political Activist?

[mindlight]

If anyone wants to see some personal communication between Charlie Kirk and a friend this public blog posts some of their texts. It showed me that Charlie Kirk was serious about God. Before his death I had never even heard of him. Like most of us I think he was finding his way, but he had alot going for himself in God. The Inspiring Charlie Kirk: My Friendship with a Great Man - by Bill Federer

I have a thought of justice in heaven that suggests everyone's rewards in heaven are not based on just what we do in this life, but if a believers life is cut short, then God's foreknowledge might reward us on what we would have done had we completed the race fully. Otherwise, how would a baby or even the unborn share in any rewards? But no worries, God is entirely just however he does it. He is longsuffering and merciful.

Thanks for the link. I was interested in Bill Federer's comments about the motivation patterns of Kirk's original donors. It seems they also had a heart for God, and that was why they gave the money. As you say, maybe he was just a beginner working out his own response to God and the world. That potential is now lost, but sometimes the blood of the martyrs is more fertile ground than the life of a singular man. This is what sways me to regard him as a martyr, what he was killed for and that people are taking up his banner and proclaiming Christ into every nook and cranny of the darkness of a culture of lies and rebellion across the world.

 

[mindlight]

Pastors, Evangelical leaders react to the killing of Charlie Kirk: 'A Christian martyr'

Christian pastors and Evangelical leaders are joining the chorus of Americans nationwide who are mourning the loss of Christian social activist Charlie Kirk

www.christianpost.com

 

[Richard T]

Thanks for the link. I was interested in Bill Federer's comments about the motivation patterns of Kirk's original donors. It seems they also had a heart for God, and that was why they gave the money. As you say, maybe he was just a beginner working out his own response to God and the world. That potential is now lost, but sometimes the blood of the martyrs is more fertile ground than the life of a singular man. This is what sways me to regard him as a martyr, what he was killed for and that people are taking up his banner and proclaiming Christ into every nook and cranny of the darkness of a culture of lies and rebellion across the world.

I think there are two groups that intersect Christianity. One consists of people that are sincere and put God first, and then there are opportunists that basically are in the political arena for power and money. I believe Kirk was the former. Some might point out the monies he recieved but the organization is huge so I don't think it is out of line. For instance, the CEO of the Red Cross makes 694,000 a year. I think his donors were also sincere.

As to the other group especially those currently serving government, they better address the hardest issues facing America like the U.S. deficits, severe inequality, inflation, health care costs, or social security solvency. Just yesterday, they walked back the idea to raise the retirement age. It will be interesting to see what they come up with for social security, but thus far Trump giving Social Security tax breaks during covid and cutting social security taxes for seniors in this term are making things worse and not better. Kirk did his part, and addressed mostly the moral issues, but the tougher economic issues may end up derailing the MAGA movement. It sort of is like mixing leaven with the gospel, we will know soon if this applies.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Agreed, but some of his political activism contradicts his status as a martyr e.g., the Stolen Election lie and repeated lies about COVID and Global Warming.

His faith happened to align with conservative politics. So what?
Even what Jesus preached went against the politics of his day,
especially within his own religion.

Christian values like Charlie had, went against leftist ideology and that angered
them.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Cardinal Dolan hails Charlie Kirk as ‘modern-day Saint Paul’

“He was a missionary, he’s an evangelist, he’s a hero,” New York’s archbishop said of Kirk.

nypost.com

 

[mindlight]

His faith happened to align with conservative politics. So what?
Even what Jesus preached went against the politics of his day,
especially within his own religion.

Christian values like Charlie had, went against leftist ideology and that angered
them.

The three examples I gave were of clear deceits.

 

[Jerry N.]

Charlie Kirk was both a political activist and a martyr. I have nothing bad to say about him, but I would like to think he would have improved with age. I found the hero worship of George Floyd disgusting, whether the police were responsible for his death or not. The conservative Right needed a champion without much baggage. Many people see Trump as tainted, but support him for lack of a better choice. Charlie Kirk’s death, as tragic as it is, has given focus to the Conservatives. It will be interesting to see the results.

 

[bèlla]

If Donors are demonstrably warping agendas, then bad. If what Kirk was out there doing was broadly positive and magnified God's Kingdom, then the effect of the givers can be determined by the fruit of what they supported. I see more positive than negative fruit in Turning Point USA and Kirk's overall witness.

Each person must draw their own conclusions. I see a different end ahead and I’m bowing out.

~bella

 

[Yarddog]

The death of Charlie Kirk shocked Americans and also people further afield across the world. He was a devout Christian out there sharing his faith. He was killed for his view that transsexuality is mentally delusional and a symptom of very unbiblical notions of what gender is. So since he was opposed to a culture of lies and wearing the mantle of faith when he was shot, does this make him a martyr? The question has to be considered from a more global perspective than just an American one as there is much wrong with the American culture.

How Should Pastors Respond to Charlie Kirk’s Assassination? - Christianity Today

After the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk, how do pastors lead well in a fractured, reactive age? Here are five pastoral questions for this moment.

www.christianitytoday.com

The case for him being a martyr is that much of what he said reflects the deepest Christian teaching:

1. Jesus Christ is His Lord and Savior
2. A woman is what God made her; killing one's babies contradicts motherhood.
3. It is wrong to assert one's sexuality over one's relationship with God
4. Transsexuality is a symptom of a culture of lies and delusions about gender and identity.
5. The seven mountain vision of bringing Christianity into the center of society was a good and healthy one.
6. He spoke about a restoration of masculinity in an age that would prefer to emasculate men
7. What he said about the triumph of excellence and merit over quotas to remedy inequality
8. His bible based support of Israel alongside his opposition to the anti-Christian agenda of cultural Marxism

More controversial viewpoints:
1. He put a religious filter on immigration, saying people of false religions should not be allowed into the country. But he inconsistently applied this to Hispanic catholics, even though married to a catholic.
2. His views on COVID were unscientific and false
3. His view on the Ukraine war lacked geopolitical awareness of its significance to US national interest.
4. His view on global warming (that it was mainly not manmade) was scientifically false.
5. He and his family made considerable amounts of money out of his activism which provides questions about his actual motives.
6. He repeated the Big Lie that Trump peddled about the stolen election:

Charlie Kirk Denounces Man Asking About Killing People Ov...

The audience member at the Turning Points USA founder's tour openly called for people to be shot over false election voter fraud claims.

www.newsweek.com

He had his beliefs but they are not what all Christian Churches teach.

 

[Freth]

He had his beliefs but they are not what all Christian Churches teach.

Jesus had something to say about that.

Matthew 7:13-14 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

 

[stevevw]

From my point of view being an Aussie and not an American. from afar I mostly seen Kirk from a Christian perspective. That he dared or was able to more or less go into the lions den and explicitly speak about the Christ and the gospel.

As for the political aspect I think its a fine line to walk. Its easy to spill into politicising Christianity. I don't think there should be a theocracy and I think Kirk even stated this.

I think Kirk tried to link important political issues which were really cultural issues that became politicised. But tried to look at these issues in society and speak about them from a Christian perspective and how this is better for society. People could disagree and they would argue their case. He never said people must be Christians.

In fact from most of what I heard it was common sense.

But the problem is I think that in recent years the political climate has heated up. Nothing new is being said. We have always disagreed on issues. But now its more polarised and disagreement is seen as a threat or the enermy.

Thats why I think what Kirk was doing was amazing in a way despite what has been said. The fact he was able to be more or less a minority voice in an opposing environment and even hostile and yet have civil discussions that I think allowed people to come together despite differences was itself revolutionary in such culture wars.

On preaching the gospel in public I do think Kirks death has raised the possibility that for Christians speaking their belief may be seen as a threat. I think there is an underlying spiritual battle emerging that is specifically against Christ. Kirks death was partly a reminder of what may be coming.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Agreed, but some of his political activism contradicts his status as a martyr e.g., the Stolen Election lie and repeated lies about COVID and Global Warming.

Not lies, but apparently being proven true today.

 

[mindlight]

Watching the funeral now on Fox News because the BBC is not sharing with any audio - editing out all the Christian stuff.

Watch Fox News Channel Online | Stream Fox News

Watch live news and updates that are happening right now with Fox News. Stay up-to-date with the latest and most trending news going on in real-time.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Michie]

It’s a very touching memorial. I’m sorry they are censoring it where you cannot hear all the wonderful things said.

 

[Freth]

This one is directly from the Charlie Kirk YouTube channel.

 

[iarwain]

He is a martyr. I think he was mainly shot for his religious beliefs (refusing to back down on the Biblical stance that LGBTQ ideology is sinful).

He was also a political activist. His political beliefs aren't particularly relevant, IMO. He could have been a martyr and a pharmacist, but he was also a political activist. It's a hard time to be a political activist, I imagine, because there is so much hate and toxicity in US politics. Probably all that toxicity is being spurred on in part by foreign interlopers. And probably some demonic activity as well. Which is not to say we ourselves are blameless, because we're not.

 

[FireDragon76]

Yes, a definition is usefu,l but it is better to focus more on the Christian aspect of that. What needs to be demonstrated is that he was serving God's will, and then he was murdered for that rather than for the dross that was also a part of his message and witness.

A Christian martyr is a person who has been killed for their unwavering faith and testimony in Jesus Christ, rather than deny their beliefs.

He was killed because he was a divisive figure in the US, especially among young people, and somebody appears to have killed him because they were motivated by a mixture of personal grievance, meme culture irony, the individual also seemed to have been motivated by an amount of mildly delusional thinking (subclinical), and not particularly good at considering long term consequences. Christianity had nothing to do with it in any serious form. People that are trying to make the link are doing so mostly for political reasons that can't be sanctified.

 

[stevevw]

He is a martyr. I think he was mainly shot for his religious beliefs (refusing to back down on the Biblical stance that LGBTQ ideology is sinful).

He was also a political activist. His political beliefs aren't particularly relevant, IMO. He could have been a martyr and a pharmacist, but he was also a political activist. It's a hard time to be a political activist, I imagine, because there is so much hate and toxicity in US politics. Probably all that toxicity is being spurred on in part by foreign interlopers. And probably some demonic activity as well. Which is not to say we ourselves are blameless, because we're not.

I think theres a fair bit of demonic spirts at play. One thing I notice is that some people get so angry and upset that they are virtually throthing at the mouth. Their face is red, their eyes glazed and their expressions are distorted, always condesending, spewing bile out.

Whereas it use to be that people could get a bit heated and then either agree or agree to diagree and apologise if they got out of hand.

Something has changed where it now beyond emotions and rationality and is into some sort of spiritual battle. Like the demons are coming out. It has been brewing towards this all along and the inevitable consequence. We have let the genie, I mean devil out of the bottle even more so now.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think a better point for number five is where the money came from. This was mentioned at the memorial in Arlington Heights. He was given a large sum from someone he met at an event. But the gentleman who spoke didn’t say they were previously acquainted. He suggested the company should become a non profit and wrote a $10,000 check for him because he couldn’t afford the attorney. When the paperwork was approved he was given a second check for $1,000,000 the next time they met. Bear in mind his age at the time. He was a senior in high school.

Patronage at that level comes with expectations. You don’t get a check like that because they believe in you. I dated someone who experienced the same. He had an idea for a non profit and met with potential donors. They asked for a stake (%) and a board seat. I advised him to turn it down because he wouldn’t own it and would be more like the face of the organization. I know that game and you see the same with venture capitalists.

~bella

Kirk was manufactured and promoted, like a rock band or an act. The monied donors of the political Right in the US are very strategic in how they have developed influence networks and campaigns. Somebody like Kirk was a golden opportunity for them to sell their message to an audience where it mostly was coldly received, dispassionately. The conservative influencer on university campuses in the past was usually somebody like William F. Buckley, who mostly traded in the appearance of pleasant sounding rhetoric and lofty principles, and mostly came across as obtuse, nerdy, and boring, appealing to a minority of students motivated primarily by quiet grievance, mixed with a desire for intellectual respectability and Ivy-League rebel mystique. On the other hand, Kirk was energetic and charismatic, in ways that somebody like Buckley never could have been, and didn't play to the same kind of elitism that Buckley did.

Kirk's money was mostly coming from wealthy backers from a variety of causes: rich industrialists opposed to action on Climate Change, Zionists, etc. So despite the anti-establishment rhetoric, the money wasn't that different than the kind of money that used to go to establishment politics.

 

[mindlight]

He was killed because he was a divisive figure in the US, especially among young people, and somebody appears to have killed him because they were motivated by a mixture of personal grievance, meme culture irony, the individual also seemed to have been motivated by an amount of mildly delusional thinking (subclinical), and not particularly good at considering long term consequences. Christianity had nothing to do with it in any serious form. People that are trying to make the link are doing so mostly for political reasons that can't be sanctified.

He was murdered by Tyler Robinson for leftist and delusional reasons. This was an act of evil.

The gospel is divisive and if you watch his YouTube's you will seeing him sharing it in friendly dialog, most often shaking hands with his fiercest opponents. It was not his goal to divide but the truth will always separate the deceived from the honest. The truth about transgenderism is that biologically and biblically there are only two genders, though in a fallen world in 1 in 50000 cases it is impossible to establish a preponderance for one gender over another.

Kirk's voice promoted God, family and nation. My biggest disagreements with him relate to the way his sponsors warped the simple simplicity of an honest man in the marketplace of ideas. Global warming, Trumps stolen election lie and his appraisal of COVID are three areas where his message was warped. But most of the rest was a healthy corrective to a woke culture whose overthrow is long overdue.

Kirk's death has woken the church. Good men will no longer tolerate the promotion of lies, that is a good but dangerous thing. We may be witnessing the birth pangs of revival or failing that the last gasp of a Christian USA before years of civil strife and the end of unity.