4 ms·

I'm confused. How is that the opposite of what he actually said? Charlie Kirk was strongly Christian, as I understand it. If a faithful Christian argues against

I'm confused. How is that the opposite of what he actually said? Charlie Kirk was strongly Christian, as I understand it. If a faithful Christian argues against cherry-picking the Bible, doesn't that imply an endorsement of everything in it? So if the Bible says to kill gay people, which he said it does, then does that not mean that he thinks that should be done? Especially given he describes it as "God's perfect law." I don't understand how this would be "debunked" or mean anything other than what King originally said it meant, unless we're absolutely forbidden from doing even the most basic and obvious logical deduction on statements.

toomim 1y ago
Your "logical deductions" are lossy. You end up making false assumptions. In this case, your assumption is leading to rationale for political violence. No, arguing against cherry-picking does not mean you endorse everything. In the third link, it says that Christians do not follow Leviticus. Charlie was no different. He loved and supported gay people and welcomed them into his movement. There are many gays in his organization, at high levels. To assume that he wanted them stoned to death is absurd, and incredibly ignorant. Here's Charlie on Gay People: https://youtu.be/N14ywRyTWVI?si=AQzLU_6TBNwSDGEr&t=942 https://youtu.be/N14ywRyTWVI?si=AQzLU_6TBNwSDGEr&t=942
- wat10000 1y ago
  "No, arguing against cherry-picking does not mean you endorse everything." How so? Either you cherry-pick or you take it all. Those are the only two possibilities, aside from ignoring the whole thing. Pretty sure he's not ignoring the whole thing. How is it ignorant to see that he thinks that the omnipotent and omniscient creator of the universe has written down "perfect laws" for us to follow, and that we shouldn't pick and choose which ones we follow, and conclude that he thinks we should follow all of them? He may have welcomed gay people into his movement but just based on your clip he doesn't seem to love and support them. He says straight out that he doesn't approve of the lifestyle. I agree that there's a contradiction between "God says we're supposed to kill them" and him standing there chatting with that guy and not trying to rally the crowd to murder him. But I don't see why we have to resolve that in the "he actually loved gay people" direction. If he says "God's perfect law" demands killing gay people, I'm inclined to believe that's what he thinks. He'd hardly be the first religious person who believes their religion demands X and actually does Y when confronted with the situation in reality. It's great that he can stand there and engage in a dialog with someone he believes his God says should be killed, but that doesn't absolve him from that belief or from professing it.
  - toomim 1y ago
    > If he says "God's perfect law" demands killing gay people He did not say that. Again, Christians do not follow Leviticus. I'm not a Christian, but I just looked this up: > Mainstream Christian theology holds that Jesus Christ's life, death, and resurrection fulfilled the ceremonial and civil aspects of the Leviticus laws, making them no longer obligatory for believers, while the moral principles are reaffirmed and expanded in the New Testament under what is often called the "law of Christ." You seem to think Charlie wants to stone gays because he's a Christian, and you're assuming that Christianity believes in stoning gays. But that last part is false. Christ revised the old testament. Charlie's making a point that you can't just take Leviticus at face value, and interpret its passages out of context from the new testament. You're now interpreting Charlie's point to mean the opposite of what he meant. You're assuming that he actually wants to stone gays, because he's pointing out that the old testament talks about it, and because you don't understand Christianity. Full clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CceJpiUPgPU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CceJpiUPgPU Again, I'm not a Christian, and I myself appreciate gayness. But we have to stop taking clips out of context and framing people as evil to justify political violence.
    - wat10000 1y ago
      >> If he says "God's perfect law" demands killing gay people >He did not say that. Is this some parallel universe thing where you and I experience completely different versions of Charlie Kirk? Because in my universe, the YouTube link you posted has him saying exactly that: "In a lesser referenced part of the same part of scripture is in Leviticus 18 is that thou shalt lay with another man shall be stoned to death. Just saying. So, Miss Rachel, you quote Leviticus 19, 'Love your neighbor as yourself,' the chapter before affirms God's perfect law when it comes to sexual matters." I seriously have to wonder if you are actually watching the stuff you're telling me to watch, or you're just parroting something you've read somewhere. What exactly do you think he meant here? I can't come up with any "opposite" that even remotely fits with what he said. My interpretation: God says gay people should be killed. You can't love God and deny any part of God's law. "So you love God. So, you must love his law." How else can that possibly be interpreted? I was raised Christian and I was Christian for a long time. "Christians do not follow Leviticus" not correct. Some do not. Many do, or at least follow parts of it. Pretty much all of Christianity is an exercise in deciding which parts of the Bible are meant to be followed and which are meant to be interesting stories or history. And there is no universal agreement about which parts are which. The idea that homosexuality is a sin is extremely mainstream Christian belief, and Jesus said exactly zero on that subject. In that clip, Kirk makes it very clear that he thinks Christians must love God and must love their neighbor, by way of Deuteronomy and Leviticus. He says that you love people by telling them the truth, and he says the truth is that the Bible says gay people must be killed, in the chapter right before where it says that you must love your neighbor. If he doesn't follow Leviticus, why is he taking "Love your neighbor" from it? Why is he describing it as "God's perfect law"? Is that meant to be sarcastic?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
whackernews 1y ago
> How is that the opposite of what he actually said? > If a faithful Christian argues against cherry-picking the Bible Talks about what Charlie “actually said”, proceeds to strawman him. Mate. You literally got given evidence that debunks an idea you’d like to believe and you still continue to believe and argue for the idea you’d want to be true. Let it go. You’re egos too big and you’re acting like an idiot. Do you consider yourself an idiot?
- wat10000 1y ago
  I literally got given evidence that confirms exactly what I said. You understand that making a claim and linking to a video doesn't automatically mean the claim is correct, right? Sometimes the video doesn't prove what it's said to prove. In this case, Kirk very clearly said that Leviticus, including the "kill gay people" part, is "God's perfect law." He says that you can't take "Love your neighbor" from it without also taking "Kill gay people." He describes the commandment to kill gay people as part of "the truth." To be very clear: I'm not parroting anyone else's interpretation of Kirk's statements. I'm taking the above directly from the video of Kirk talking.

toomim 1y ago

Your "logical deductions" are lossy. You end up making false assumptions. In this case, your assumption is leading to rationale for political violence. No, arguing against cherry-picking does not mean you endorse everything. In the third link, it says that Christians do not follow Leviticus. Charlie was no different. He loved and supported gay people and welcomed them into his movement. There are many gays in his organization, at high levels. To assume that he wanted them stoned to death is absurd, and incredibly ignorant. Here's Charlie on Gay People: https://youtu.be/N14ywRyTWVI?si=AQzLU_6TBNwSDGEr&t=942 https://youtu.be/N14ywRyTWVI?si=AQzLU_6TBNwSDGEr&t=942

wat10000 1y ago
"No, arguing against cherry-picking does not mean you endorse everything." How so? Either you cherry-pick or you take it all. Those are the only two possibilities, aside from ignoring the whole thing. Pretty sure he's not ignoring the whole thing. How is it ignorant to see that he thinks that the omnipotent and omniscient creator of the universe has written down "perfect laws" for us to follow, and that we shouldn't pick and choose which ones we follow, and conclude that he thinks we should follow all of them? He may have welcomed gay people into his movement but just based on your clip he doesn't seem to love and support them. He says straight out that he doesn't approve of the lifestyle. I agree that there's a contradiction between "God says we're supposed to kill them" and him standing there chatting with that guy and not trying to rally the crowd to murder him. But I don't see why we have to resolve that in the "he actually loved gay people" direction. If he says "God's perfect law" demands killing gay people, I'm inclined to believe that's what he thinks. He'd hardly be the first religious person who believes their religion demands X and actually does Y when confronted with the situation in reality. It's great that he can stand there and engage in a dialog with someone he believes his God says should be killed, but that doesn't absolve him from that belief or from professing it.
- toomim 1y ago
  > If he says "God's perfect law" demands killing gay people He did not say that. Again, Christians do not follow Leviticus. I'm not a Christian, but I just looked this up: > Mainstream Christian theology holds that Jesus Christ's life, death, and resurrection fulfilled the ceremonial and civil aspects of the Leviticus laws, making them no longer obligatory for believers, while the moral principles are reaffirmed and expanded in the New Testament under what is often called the "law of Christ." You seem to think Charlie wants to stone gays because he's a Christian, and you're assuming that Christianity believes in stoning gays. But that last part is false. Christ revised the old testament. Charlie's making a point that you can't just take Leviticus at face value, and interpret its passages out of context from the new testament. You're now interpreting Charlie's point to mean the opposite of what he meant. You're assuming that he actually wants to stone gays, because he's pointing out that the old testament talks about it, and because you don't understand Christianity. Full clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CceJpiUPgPU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CceJpiUPgPU Again, I'm not a Christian, and I myself appreciate gayness. But we have to stop taking clips out of context and framing people as evil to justify political violence.
  - wat10000 1y ago
    >> If he says "God's perfect law" demands killing gay people >He did not say that. Is this some parallel universe thing where you and I experience completely different versions of Charlie Kirk? Because in my universe, the YouTube link you posted has him saying exactly that: "In a lesser referenced part of the same part of scripture is in Leviticus 18 is that thou shalt lay with another man shall be stoned to death. Just saying. So, Miss Rachel, you quote Leviticus 19, 'Love your neighbor as yourself,' the chapter before affirms God's perfect law when it comes to sexual matters." I seriously have to wonder if you are actually watching the stuff you're telling me to watch, or you're just parroting something you've read somewhere. What exactly do you think he meant here? I can't come up with any "opposite" that even remotely fits with what he said. My interpretation: God says gay people should be killed. You can't love God and deny any part of God's law. "So you love God. So, you must love his law." How else can that possibly be interpreted? I was raised Christian and I was Christian for a long time. "Christians do not follow Leviticus" not correct. Some do not. Many do, or at least follow parts of it. Pretty much all of Christianity is an exercise in deciding which parts of the Bible are meant to be followed and which are meant to be interesting stories or history. And there is no universal agreement about which parts are which. The idea that homosexuality is a sin is extremely mainstream Christian belief, and Jesus said exactly zero on that subject. In that clip, Kirk makes it very clear that he thinks Christians must love God and must love their neighbor, by way of Deuteronomy and Leviticus. He says that you love people by telling them the truth, and he says the truth is that the Bible says gay people must be killed, in the chapter right before where it says that you must love your neighbor. If he doesn't follow Leviticus, why is he taking "Love your neighbor" from it? Why is he describing it as "God's perfect law"? Is that meant to be sarcastic?
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

whackernews 1y ago

> How is that the opposite of what he actually said? > If a faithful Christian argues against cherry-picking the Bible Talks about what Charlie “actually said”, proceeds to strawman him. Mate. You literally got given evidence that debunks an idea you’d like to believe and you still continue to believe and argue for the idea you’d want to be true. Let it go. You’re egos too big and you’re acting like an idiot. Do you consider yourself an idiot?

wat10000 1y ago
I literally got given evidence that confirms exactly what I said. You understand that making a claim and linking to a video doesn't automatically mean the claim is correct, right? Sometimes the video doesn't prove what it's said to prove. In this case, Kirk very clearly said that Leviticus, including the "kill gay people" part, is "God's perfect law." He says that you can't take "Love your neighbor" from it without also taking "Kill gay people." He describes the commandment to kill gay people as part of "the truth." To be very clear: I'm not parroting anyone else's interpretation of Kirk's statements. I'm taking the above directly from the video of Kirk talking.