The first time I heard the name Charlie Kirk, it was in reference to one of the Turning Point USA gatherings being held in Phoenix. What attracted my attention was the fact that Don Trump Jr. was one of the featured speakers. I have little interest in what Don Jr. has to say, but what caught my attention to this particular statement of his was his open denial of a core principle of the teachings of Jesus Christ. I mean, these people spend an awful lot of time helping keep a good sized segment of conservative Evangelicals, most of whom know very little about biblical Christianity and can't distinguish the cultic views of Christian nationalism from biblical truth taught by Christ, in the dark.
Speaking at one of Charlie Kirk's Turning Point USA rallies in Phoenix, Arizona on December 19, 2021, Don Jr. said, "We've turned the other cheek, and I understand, sort of, the Biblical reference--I understand the mentality--but it's gotten us nothing. Ok? It's gotten us nothing while we've ceded ground in every major institution in our country."
To say that a core principle of the Christian gospel, taught and put into practice directly by Jesus, in its context, as a means of demonstrating the sincerity and veracity of one's Christian faith, has "gotten us nowhere," is blasphemy, by any Christian or biblical definition. The fact that this remark, which Don Jr. has repeated since, is included in a Turning Point rally is a demonstration of Kirk's apparent approval of it, or of his fear of directly confronting anything a Trump says. Along with the other long running themes of Turning Point USA and of Charlie Kirk, this is just one of hundreds of pieces of evidence that identify him as being part of a white supremacist, Christian nationalist cult, the result of blending the right wing political extremism of Trump with conservative Evangelicalism.
The Common Dreams article I linked above does a great job of outlining exactly who Charlie Kirk was, by his words and deeds. He was a political strategist, or a political fundraiser who made sure he took care of himself with many of the dollars Turning Point raised. He was willing to lie to make a point in a political debate, as he deceived conservative Evangelicals into an embrace of a political philosophy and perspective that is mutually incompatible with their own theology and doctrine. A prophet of right wing Trumpism, Kirk, willing to lie as openly and readily as Donald Trump, is an indruder in the church, as the Apostle Jude describes in his very short, but clear epistle in the New Testament, just before the book of Revelation.
Kirk's mostly errant and distorted doctrine and theology made him a pseudo-Christian more inclined to the heresy of Christian nationalism, with a hint of white supremacy, than any kind of defender of the Christian faith. There was some of that blended in, but mainly for the political advantage that it provides. Those kinds of fringe comments, which he makes all the time, wouldn't be there at all if his interest was actually Christian faith and practice, and not right wing politics.
Anyone like me, raised in a Southern Baptist church, with a higher education background that included Biblical studies, theology and Christian education at the undergraduate and graduate level, knows this about Charlie Kirk. Some admit they have little in common, and mostly disagree with everything Kirk says. But, pay attention and know this, that no one on the left who disagreed with Charlie Kirk would approve of his assassination.
Assassination is Not the Left's M.O. When it Comes to Political Debate and Opposition
It's hard to find someone on the political left, especially among its articulate leadership that is equipped for debate, who thinks assassination is the best way to eliminate one's enemies. That's not how the left does things. What you get from the left is exactly what we see, a genuine reaction of shock, horror and sorrow over yet another senseless death as the result of politically motivated violence. The lies being told about motives behind other recent assassinations, including of Democrats in Minnesota, are a disgrace and a black stain on Kirk's character. Justifying threats of violence, including murder, against one's political enemies is as close to pure evil as any human being ever gets.
It's been one of the most difficult lies conservatives have ever had to craft, that this assasin somehow morphed from being as far to the right in an insulated, ultra-right wing Mormon community as one could get, to becoming Charlie Kirk's assassin over basic philosophical differences because he had been radicalized by the left. There's no pathway that exists to get Tyler Robinson from the far right wing, Trump endorsing and approving white Mormon family from which he came to being far enough to the left to want to take Kirk's life because he no longer was in agreement with him.
So what that means is that Kirk's assassin, Tyler Robinson if they caught the right guy, has moved even further into the more extremist part of the far right where killing public figures with whom you no longer agree is dogma. That the theme of the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, the Groypers and other right wing extremists who see eliminating their ideological enemies as a mission from God.
Another Round of Social Media Disconnection
I'm frustrated, angry, and disappointed. I grew up in a Southern Baptist church and while I can't really explain it, I began to distance myself from the folk religion that passed for the Christian gospel and Christian practice in that congregation. I can't really point to what it was inside of me that led me to the understanding that what I was taught in that church growing up was not the truth, but was a very distorted faith practice that resented those who had an education, resisted any kind of theological or doctrinal perspective that did not line up with what they considered to be conservative Biblical orthodoxy and seemed to get some kind of satisfaction out of attacking their religious enemies, which included all of those they identified as "the lost," along with the Christians in other denominations who didn't exactly follow their interpretation of the Baptist Faith and Message.
I learned from being around intolerant people that it's not possible to even think their minds can be changed, and all that's going to come from trying is an argument that will end in being rejected and called a name because bending to their will is their only objective. When I broke with that particular church, it followed an argument that I'd had with the pastor. He got angry because I wouldn't back down, and then, because I made the first move in rejecting what he was telling me. I was dating his daughter at the time, so that meant the end of that relationship which was just as well, since she was as pig-headed, dogmatic and stubborn as he was.
Now I'm seeing others that I know, from my days in conservative Evangelicalism, and from some conservative Evangelicals I've met since, make Charlie Kirk some kind of martyr for the cause. Arguing back, like I would once have been tempted to do, is a waste of time and effort, not something that would change any minds, something I no longer feel responsible to do. I am explicitly and absolutely against any kind of political violence, including this particular assassination. I don't care how bad the ideas or impractical, or false is the doctrine and theology. He had the right to tell us who he was and what he believed, as we have the right to disagree, and I disagreed with just about everything he said publicly.
So now, I must also step away from anyone who believes that Charlie Kirk told the truth and is a worthy spokesperson for the rights of human beings. He was a white Christian nationalist, and his ideology, with its touch of racism and bigotry, was a pseudo-Christian influence, mutually exclusive of orthodox Christianity, And the sooner the world sees this, the better.
No comments:
Post a Comment