Charlie Kirk Encounters NT Focused Student

[GaryK]

Here is the longer discussion from which the OP is clipped.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=11k8z2YrByk

How would your apologetic differ or what would you add to what Nick says?

I think if Nick had stuck only with issues surrounding what Jesus and the Apostles taught concerning being followers of Jesus, it would have caught Charlie off guard even more than it did. It appeared Charlie didn't quite know how to respond to a Christocentric worldview and the argument against Christians being in the military. Once an opinion is given on how an earthly government should be run, such as curbing greed through the taxation of billionaires (Nick) and legislating against abortion (Charlie) it's hard to keep the focus on the Kingdom of Jesus and how it functions in society.

[JohnH]

Here is the longer discussion from which the OP is clipped.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=11k8z2YrByk

How would your apologetic differ or what would you add to what Nick says?

I think if Nick had stuck only with issues surrounding what Jesus and the Apostles taught concerning being followers of Jesus, it would have caught Charlie off guard even more than it did. It appeared Charlie didn't quite know how to respond to a Christocentric worldview and the argument against Christians being in the military. Once an opinion is given on how an earthly government should be run, such as curbing greed through the taxation of billionaires (Nick) and legislating against abortion (Charlie) it's hard to keep the focus on the Kingdom of Jesus and how it functions in society.

And curbing greed and stopping abortion means bearing the sword.

[ken_sylvania]

Here is the longer discussion from which the OP is clipped.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=11k8z2YrByk

How would your apologetic differ or what would you add to what Nick says?

I think if Nick had stuck only with issues surrounding what Jesus and the Apostles taught concerning being followers of Jesus, it would have caught Charlie off guard even more than it did. It appeared Charlie didn't quite know how to respond to a Christocentric worldview and the argument against Christians being in the military. Once an opinion is given on how an earthly government should be run, such as curbing greed through the taxation of billionaires (Nick) and legislating against abortion (Charlie) it's hard to keep the focus on the Kingdom of Jesus and how it functions in society.

And curbing greed and stopping abortion means bearing the sword.

Not necessarily. I don't think it's possible to curb greed by force - it requires a change of heart, and "a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." I think the church has a better shot at curbing greed than the government does.

[GaryK]

I think if Nick had stuck only with issues surrounding what Jesus and the Apostles taught concerning being followers of Jesus, it would have caught Charlie off guard even more than it did. It appeared Charlie didn't quite know how to respond to a Christocentric worldview and the argument against Christians being in the military. Once an opinion is given on how an earthly government should be run, such as curbing greed through the taxation of billionaires (Nick) and legislating against abortion (Charlie) it's hard to keep the focus on the Kingdom of Jesus and how it functions in society.

And curbing greed and stopping abortion means bearing the sword.

Not necessarily. I don't think it's possible to curb greed by force - it requires a change of heart, and "a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." I think the church has a better shot at curbing greed than the government does.

I agree but Nick seemed to be advocating for government attempting to curb greed by taxation. If government attempts such things, it is backed up by threat of force.

[Ernie]

It looks like Dean Taylor commented on this.

https://www.commentshark.com/youtube-co ... allegiance

[Ernie]

I'm trying to learn more about Nick, the aerospace student, but am not getting much help from AI. Anybody else have a way to get more information?

It looks like there are dozens of other commenters who wish they could hear more theology from this man.

[Ernie]

In situations like this, many of us who do not debate for a living come away wishing we had said more than we did or less than we did or wished we had a better attitude than what we did. So I don't want to be too hard on Nick. Afterall, he is just a young adult and did very well for his age.

Having said that...
I think it would have been good for Nick to have left the race part out of it. That is a worthwhile discussion but hurt his main point, IMO. He got a bit edgy at times and that also hurt his case a bit.
I think it would have been good to state that he is against abortion (if he was) without getting sidetracked by that further.
I think it would have been good if he could have acknowledged the different genres of the O.T. I agree there are types and shadows, but I don't think Genesis 1 fits that category.
I think it would have been good to show more how the New supersedes the Old like the early Anabaptist writers did, but he didn't have much opportunity to do that.

I think it was good for this conversation to happen as Kirk is now on record and this part of Turning Point USA's history they will need to either own or walk back at some point.

A few YT commenters: "First time I see Charlie Kirk lose." and "This is one of the few times where I don’t like Charlie’s arguments." and "For the first time I saw Charlie completely lose a fight!"
So there is definitely an audience out there that is looking for something other than the common, "I am a Christian and I am a nationalist," and all that goes along with that.

[Ernie]

I was not aware that Evangelicals such as Kirk think that it is primarily a Catholic interpretation to believe that the Church inherits the promises of Israel or replaces it spiritually.

[Jazman]

In situations like this, many of us who do not debate for a living come away wishing we had said more than we did or less than we did or wished we had a better attitude than what we did. So I don't want to be too hard on Nick. Afterall, he is just a young adult and did very well for his age.

Having said that...
I think it would have been good for Nick to have left the race part out of it. That is a worthwhile discussion but hurt his main point, IMO. He got a bit edgy at times and that also hurt his case a bit.
I think it would have been good to state that he is against abortion (if he was) without getting sidetracked by that further.
I think it would have been good if he could have acknowledged the different genres of the O.T. I agree there are types and shadows, but I don't think Genesis 1 fits that category.
I think it would have been good to show more how the New supersedes the Old like the early Anabaptist writers did, but he didn't have much opportunity to do that.

I think it was good for this conversation to happen as Kirk is now on record and this part of Turning Point USA's history they will need to either own or walk back at some point.

A few YT commenters: "First time I see Charlie Kirk lose." and "This is one of the few times where I don’t like Charlie’s arguments." and "For the first time I saw Charlie completely lose a fight!"
So there is definitely an audience out there that is looking for something other than the common, "I am a Christian and I am a nationalist," and all that goes along with that.

From the short clip, I would advise Nick to keep coming back to the example of Jesus and the apostles and the early church... a typical christian nationalist (or in general, extremists or winning-in-the-only-point sophistry) discussion or debate strategy is to deluge the other person with multiple rapid fire claims or fallacies / distractions to the point of chaos and/or capitulation by the less aggressive, whereby the fastest/loudest talker declares 'victory' even though they never actually 'won' in any meaningful/honest way (and certainly didn't convince the other party (like Nick)...
It's really hard when you're on the receiving end of that kind of approach; it's hard to not get heated up emotionally... I don't know that I could do it, but if I were Nick, my aspiration would be to stick to a main point or line of reasoning (a Christocentric theology) and not let CK side-track me. (CK's invoking the "Catholic line of thinking" seems like another side-tracking attempt)

[Nomad]

They freely quoted from the OT and apocryphal books. There wasn’t a sharp distinction between two dispensations.

I disagree. The majority clearly articulated how the Old Testament ended and the New Testament is now in effect. They also show how the New realties supercede the old. Here is a sampling.

Conrad Grebel — “Neither do they use worldly sword or war, since all killing has ceased with them—unless, indeed, we would still be of the old law.”
Conrad Grebel — “They must reach the Fatherland of eternal rest, not by slaying their bodily enemies but by mortifying their spiritual enemies.”
Conrad Grebel — “The gospel and its adherents are not to be protected by the sword, nor are they thus to protect themselves.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “The sword is ordained of God outside the perfection of Christ.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “In the Law the sword was ordained for the punishment of the wicked and for their death.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “In the perfection of Christ, however, only the ban is used for a warning and for the excommunication of the one who has sinned, without putting the flesh to death.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “Christ says to the heathen woman who was taken in adultery, not that one should stone her according to the Law of his Father…but in mercy and forgiveness and warning, to sin no more.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “Christ teaches and commands us to learn of him, for He is meek and lowly in heart.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “The government magistracy is according to the flesh, but the Christian’s is according to the Spirit.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “Their citizenship is in this world, but the Christian’s citizenship is in heaven.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “The weapons of their conflict and war are carnal and against the flesh only, but the Christian’s weapons are spiritual.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “The worldlings are armed with steel and iron, but the Christians are armed with the armor of God.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “In the Law it is commanded to be performed in God’s Name, but only in truth, not falsely.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “Christ, who teaches the perfection of the Law, prohibits all swearing to His followers, whether true or false.”
Michael Sattler / Swiss Brethren — “So you see it is for this reason that all swearing is forbidden.”
Bern Anabaptist Conference (1538) — “We grant the Old Testament validity wherever Christ has not suspended it and wherever it agrees with the New.”
Pilgram Marpeck — “In the Old Testament nearly everything was done in a figurative way and experienced in that way.”
Pilgram Marpeck — “For Christians, however, it is quite a different matter.”
Pilgram Marpeck — “A great difference exists between Christians and Abraham’s promise.”
Pilgram Marpeck — “A difference everyone, who can clearly understand the difference between the Old and New Testaments, can easily perceive.”
Pilgram Marpeck — “Like most other things in the Old Testament, circumcision is a figure and image.”
Pilgram Marpeck — “One cannot extrapolate from this promise to Abraham that children are to be baptized.”
Pilgram Marpeck — “The old covenant is merely a covenant of promise.”
Dirk Philips — “Christ Jesus is the spirit and the substance of all the types and figures that have passed away.”
Dirk Philips — Christ is “the end and fulfillment of the law of types, figures and shadows.”
Dirk Philips — Christ is “the beginning of the true substance and completeness.”
Dirk Philips — “All shadows and figures are fulfilled in him.”
Dirk Philips — “All things are changed in Christ and are transfigured and made new by him.”
Dirk Philips — They are “changed from the letter to the Spirit.”
Dirk Philips — They are changed “from the carnal to the real.”
Dirk Philips — They are changed “from the old to the new.”
Dirk Philips — They are changed “from the figure into the true abiding substance.”
Dirk Philips — They are changed “from the transitory to the eternal and heavenly.”
Dirk Philips — “The figures of the old testament must be carefully examined and be understood, not according to human opinion.”
Dirk Philips — “Christ before his death called his disciples—his beloved friends—to him, revealed his words, and declared his will to them.”
Dirk Philips — “Christ Jesus dedicated or established the new testament with his innocent death and precious blood.”
Menno Simons — “All the promises to the fathers, the waiting of the patriarchs, the whole figurative law, and all the predictions of the prophets, are fulfilled in Christ, with Christ, and through Christ.”
Menno Simons — “Moses and his successors, with their iron sword, have served their day, and…Christ has now given us a new command and another sword.”
Menno Simons — “We know and use no other sword than that which Christ himself brought down from heaven.”
Menno Simons — “We shall…leave the armor of David to the carnal Israelites.”
Menno Simons — “The sword of Zerubbabel [we leave] to those who build the temple of Zerubbabel in Jerusalem, which was a figure of them and a shadow of things coming.”
Menno Simons — “We should not understand that the figure of the Old Testament is so applied to the truth of the New Testament, that flesh is understood as referring to flesh.”
Menno Simons — “The figure must answer the truth; the image, the being, and the letter, the Spirit.”
Menno Simons — “A letter of the law of Moses could not be changed till the new Moses, Christ Jesus, came.”
Menno Simons — “If then the letter of the law was so strong, effective and firm…how much more powerful, effectual, firm, and unchangeable is the free law of the Spirit.”
Menno Simons — The law of the Spirit “was given through the Son himself, and confirmed by the blood of the eternal covenant.”
Menno Simons — “If you would appeal to the literal understanding and transactions of Moses and the prophets, then must you also become Jews.”
Menno Simons — Christ “has changed the literal and figurative ceremonies into new, spiritual and abiding substances.”
Menno Simons — “The figures and shadows were…changed into the new and abiding reality.”
Menno Simons — “After it had all been accomplished according to the Scriptures, and all things made new in Christ, he did not then send out the Scribes and Pharisees with Moses’ law, but his disciples with his own doctrine.”
Menno Simons — “Since then all things are new in and through Christ…in the new Testament, are we…directed to those preachers who sit in Christ’s seat.”
Menno Simons — “To swear truly was allowed to the Jews under the law; but the gospel forbids this to Christians.”
Menno Simons — “Moses commanded not to forswear thyself, but I say unto you, Thou shalt not swear at all.”
Menno Simons — “The literal law of Moses…had to remain unchanged until the coming of Christ.”
Menno Simons — “Not a tittle could be changed in all the law of Moses until the new Lawgiver came who was promised by Moses and the prophets, Jesus Christ.”
Menno Simons — “How much more authoritative and unchangeable is the law of Jesus Christ which is free, spiritual, eternal, given through the Son and sealed by His blood!”
Peter Riedemann — “Therefore it is ended, stopped and broken in Christ.”
Peter Riedemann — “He also hath now begun a new regime that is not like the old one and is not supported by the temporal sword.”
Peter Riedemann — “The regime of the Jews, who until then were God’s people, came to an end in Christ, ceased and was taken from them.”
Peter Riedemann — “It is his desire to rule over Christians with his spiritual sword alone.”
Peter Riedemann — “From henceforth the people of God ought no longer to use the temporal sword and rule therewith.”
Peter Riedemann — “[The people of God] ought to be ruled and led by the one Spirit of Christ alone.”

I think there are some major assumptions being made with some of these quotes. The entire OT is not a "shadow"...nor is it all the OT equate to "the Law/ Sinai/ Mosaic Covenant". "The Law" is specific to parts of Exodus to Deuteronomy. Some OT prophecies by the prophets are still relevant to us today and Acts 3:18-21 speaks to that fact.