Did you know before Charlie was killed, he refused a donation? He also questioned Israel state.
1 Day Ago) Tyler Robinson , accused of the murder of Charlie Kirk, has second court hearing
- Thread starter Doll
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
He sure did. Two million dollars. Withheld because he wouldn't cancel Tucker Carlson.
That's dishonest because it doesn't tell the truth.
Charlie never stopped supporting Israel.
Before his death, Charlie Kirk told Netanyahu that Israel faced a '5-alarm fire' over PR strategy - Jewish Telegraphic Agency
In a letter, Kirk lamented that Israel was losing the “information war” in the United States.
www.jta.org
Charlie never questioned Israel state?He sure did. Two million dollars. Withheld because he wouldn't cancel Tucker Carlson.
That's dishonest because it doesn't tell the truth.
Charlie never stopped supporting Israel.
Before his death, Charlie Kirk told Netanyahu that Israel faced a '5-alarm fire' over PR strategy - Jewish Telegraphic Agency
In a letter, Kirk lamented that Israel was losing the “information war” in the United States.
"Question" meaning have a question.
I support local police, I have questions to them all the time.
Simply look at the numbers. I was there at the Memorial.
TURNING POINT USA. IT NEEDS A GROUP THAT WILL POINT YOUNG PEOPLE AWAY FROM THE PATH OF MISERY AND SIN. IT NEEDS SOMETHING THAT WILL LEAD PEOPLE AWAY FROM HELL IN THIS WORLD AND IN THE NEXT. IT NEEDS PEOPLE POINTED IN THE DIRECTION OF TRUTH AND BEAUTY. AND SO I PROMISE YOU, TODAY, EVERY PART OF OUR WORK WILL BECOME GREATER. I AM TREMENDOUSLY HONORED TO BE THE NEW CEO OF TURNING POINT USA. I DO NOT TAKE THAT LIGHTLY. CHARLIE AND I WERE UNITED IN PURPOSE. HIS PASSION WAS MY PASSION AND NOW HIS MISSION IS MY MISSION. EVERYTHING. THAT TURNING POINT USA BUILT THROUGH CHARLIE'S VISION AND HARD WORK. WE WILL MAKE TEN TIMES GREATER THROUGH THE POWER OF HIS MEMORY.
This was her words, I heard them, and so I knew "time will tell". Let's see in a year how far she has gone to accomplish making TPUSA ten times greater. That memorial was the absolute best advertisement anyone could get. But since then they have continually dropped in people interested in their ministry. Check their videos, anyone can see how many are watching them. To go from 10 million to 10 thousand in less than a year! That is the most dramatic collapse in any ministry that I have ever seen.
So was I.
I was there when Charlie was assassinated.
Granted,the campus gatherings aren't what they were. Because the TPUSA volunteers don't have the charisma not the intellect of Charlie.
Erika is CEO because Charlie told the TPUSA Board that's what he wanted if anything happened to him.
She's trying her best to make him proud and earn the trust he had on her during the most difficult time of her life. Thrown into the role right after he was assassinated!
She deserves a little grace,not criticism. And certainly not slander and defamation.
Oh, yeah, and there's the little matter of her husbands Assassin and his case occupying her attention all these months.
www.the-independent.com
I tell you what, Candace Legion Owens can crow hateful vitriol against Erika,her kids,TPUSA,etc...
all she likes.
She feeds herself on spreading lies ,hate,slander,defamation.
You are that you eat Candy!
One fact is Indelible and for all time, as pertains to Candace Owens. Say what she will,obviously,against Erika.
Candace couldn't handle working at TPUSA when Charlie was alive.
That's why he fired her!
Erika Kirk statement after judge rules Charlie’s suspected killer will face trial
Widow calls decision to advance aggravated murder case against Tyler Robinson ‘an important step’ for grieving family
www.the-independent.com
I tell you what, Candace Legion Owens can crow hateful vitriol against Erika,her kids,TPUSA,etc...
all she likes.
She feeds herself on spreading lies ,hate,slander,defamation.
You are that you eat Candy!
One fact is Indelible and for all time, as pertains to Candace Owens. Say what she will,obviously,against Erika.
Candace couldn't handle working at TPUSA when Charlie was alive.
That's why he fired her!
She is the CEO, she is accountable. "She deserves a little grace", how much is a little? 99%? She has already gotten that.
Jesus does judge me by that same rubric.
Luke 16:1 And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.
For example, suppose you were the CEO of a hypothetical ministry that 100 million people globally were interested in. But that was when you became CEO, a year later less than 100,000 people are interested in your ministry, and only because of the guy who had been CEO prior to you. Not only so but there are a lot of people accusing you of having driven this ministry into the ground. Best case scenario they are saying you are incompetent, worst case scenario they are saying it was intentional.
2 And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.
The way to respond to this charge is not to whine about how you need a little "grace". Every person has annual reviews, this is your annual review. At the beginning of the year when you took over as CEO you had to give a vision of where you were planning to take this ministry. Hypothetically speaking, suppose you said you were going to make the ministry ten times greater than it was. Now when you appear before the Lord you have to give account, here is what you said, and here is the actual result.
3 Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed. 4 I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses.
This is the right attitude. You see if you were intentionally trying to destroy the ministry you would not have any interest in being received into their houses once you get fired. If it was intentional to destroy the ministry the person would be complaining about being held accountable.
5 So he called every one of his lord's debtors unto him, and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord? 6 And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty. 7 Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore.
Salesmen get a commission. That commission can be as much as 50%, or it might be 20%, but the ones selling a product will get a hefty percentage of the retail price. This salesman is saying it is time to sacrifice my commission. In our hypothetical example with the ministry the commission is the person's ego and pride. They are willing to be nothing. You will never see this if the person's actual intent was to destroy the ministry. If that was the goal they were successful. They got rid of 99% of your customers. They are expecting a bonus from whoever hired them for this job, not a pay cut.
8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.
In the final analysis we are unjust. We were not saved because of anything we did. This hypothetical CEO needs to realize they are not standing on how great they are, they are standing on the Lord's righteousness. You are simply a conduit to take God's goods and deliver them to those who need them.
9 And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.
There are many ways to interpret this, but only one way that aligns with everything the Lord has said about the mammon of unrighteousness. We are to put our treasure in heaven and the way we do that is by giving that money to the Lord for His kingdom.
10 He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.
To an unbeliever the money is not "the least", it is their prime motivation. But to someone who is focused on eternity the money which is vanity and will go up in a puff of smoke one day, that is the least. What is much in the eyes of eternity are the souls you are reaching. In this hypothetical ministry the proper attitude of a true born again believer is that they are unjust and have nothing in themselves to boast of, they are standing on the Lord's righteousness. Not only so but their mission is not to amass a whole lot of vain wealth, and hob nob with the rich and powerful people of this dark age. No, their mission is to save souls by bringing the bread and oil to the hungry souls.
11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?
Do you see how brilliant the Lord is. Putting this person in charge as CEO of this hypothetical ministry revealed their heart. I don't want to be sexist, many Christians are accused of being paternalistic and sexist. Let's assume our hypothetical CEO is a woman. Her tenure as CEO will reveal her heart. Is she proud and arrogant? Is she trusting in her own strength? Is the motivated by greed? Or is she focused on feeding hungry souls, feeding the Lord's sheep? Is she willing to be nothing in order to accomplish this goal?
12 And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man's, who shall give you that which is your own?
This is somewhat unrealistic. Apparently in our hypothetical ministry this woman takes over a ministry that belonged to another without having done anything. It was handed to her. This reminds me of Paul who didn't want anything handed to him but said he only wanted to minister where others had not labored so that there would be no dispute. This is actually a big problem in Christianity. A church is raised up through the gospel by the labor of others. But eventually they hire a pastor who had nothing to do with raising up that church. What have we seen, exactly the same thing, attendance at many of these churches driven into the ground. Is it because the pastors they hire are incompetent? Or is it because FreeMasons are on the board of directors and they want the churches to be destroyed?
13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Wow, the Lord has presented another possibility. You could think that you were serving the Lord but also wanted to make a lot of money as well. The old "have your cake and eat it" situation. He says you can't have it both, either you are 100% for the Lord, willing to sacrifice everything else for Him, or you will despise His authority. Suppose for example the Lord wants you to speak about hell, but you think, no, that could drive away some of our members. This means you have two masters, one is saying the ultimate goal is to fill the seats of the church and the other is saying you need to speak words of salt and light, you need to be faithful to share the full counsel of God.
There is absolutely nothing in what I wrote that could cause any logical person to conclude that either Erika or Charlie are not Christian.
You continue to spew lies. You were warned about your lies concerning Tyler Robinson being a "confessed assassin", that has been proven to be a lie now that he has pled not guilty. As for this distortion, I applied Luke 16 to myself as well as to anyone, man or woman, who might have a ministry. Billy Graham had a ministry, no one would claim he wasn't a Christian and yet he too would be judged by this same rubric.
I asked AI if the text implied Erika Kirk is not a Christian:
No, the provided text does not explicitly state or imply that Erika Kirk is not a Christian. Instead, it uses a hypothetical scenario about a ministry CEO to explain the biblical narrative of the Unjust Steward from Luke 16.
Based on the text's breakdown of Luke 16:1–13, here is how the author connects the parable's "rubric" to an individual's spiritual standing:
1. The Core Rubric: Attitude vs. Actions
The text argues that falling short, making mistakes, or experiencing a failure in a ministry (such as dropping from 100 million interested people to 100,000) does not automatically define someone's salvation. Instead, God evaluates the heart posture and response to accountability.
2. Evidence of a True Believer
According to the provided logic, a true born-again believer facing failure will demonstrate:
- Humility and Self-Sacrifice: They are willing to cast aside ego, pride, and personal "commission" to serve others (visualized by the steward lowering the debts).
- Reliance on Grace: They recognize they have nothing to boast of in themselves and stand strictly on the "Lord's righteousness."
- A Focus on Eternal Riches: They view material wealth or worldly status as "the least" and prioritize saving souls ("much") over money or fame.
3. Signs of a Divided Heart
Conversely, the text warns that a person—hypothetically a female CEO in this illustration—reveals an unfaithful heart if they respond to failure with pride, greed, or an obsession with worldly approval. Verse 13 emphasizes that one cannot serve two masters; trying to protect an income or organizational growth at the expense of preaching the "full counsel of God" indicates they are serving Mammon rather than God.
Ultimately, the passage frames this scenario as an annual review that reveals a person's underlying motivations, rather than a definitive declaration about a specific person's faith.
You're utilizing that same accusatory condescension tactic again.
You fail to realize when you resort to such tactics,you're proving you are graceless and passive aggressive in your vitriol.
I was warned? By someone who doesn't understand when Tyler wrote down that he was premeditating Charlie's Assassination,and then repeatedly stated he murdered him ,that those are CONFESSIONS!
Here's what you ignore,besides the entire preliminary hearing. You really should watch it.
Those were confessions!
So,don't ever again tell me I was warned about anything. When you behave as you do here,you have no right.
I used AI,since you used it to avoid responsibility for implying Erika is not Godly in her actions as TPUSA CEO.
Question,DuckDuckHo AI:"are tyler robinsons texts and letters confessing he killed charlie kirk considered confessions by a court"
Response:
Yes—likely as an admission/confession evidence, but the court usually wouldn’t label the texts and letters themselves as a formal “confession” unless the prosecution proves they were his, voluntary, and reliable. In practice, a judge or jury can treat them as a confession-like admission if they clearly say he did it.
In criminal cases:
Texts and letters can be used as admissions by a party opponent
If they explicitly say “I did it,” they may be treated as a confession
The prosecution still has to authenticate them and show they’re admissible
So the short answer is: they can be considered confession evidence in court, but the exact legal label depends on the judge and the rules of evidence.
Wow! You know absolutely nothing about the American Criminal Courts System.
Not even close. But,you accuse and then slide out of responsibility.
You're one of those who think they can say,no way is Erika Kirk righteous and in the graces of God given how she behaved!
By couching those thoughts using dog whistling and gas lighting .
I see now why Candace refers to you as one with her in Legion.
We're done. You aren't qualified to participate in a civil Christian Discussion Community.
Where do you get this garbage, it is not up to me to decide who is and who isn't a Christian.
Dead man's switch
There is a misconception that anyone is trying to get Tyler Robinson off. On the contrary the trial is very important. People can change their story, they can claim they forgot, etc. That is not a crime. But once you have their testimony at trial if they lied there that is a crime. I think it is much more likely that Charlie had a dead man's switch than it is that he didn't. In other words in the event of his death someone very close to him but not part of TPUSA would get a file of everything Charlie knew and suspected. But if Charlie sent a file to someone close to him that he trusted to get the truth out you have to proceed in such a way that you catch them in a lie, not just a lie, but in perjury, a crime. Also you want to warn them, maybe they are mistaken, their response will prove if they are doubling down on the lie or not. So if, for example, Candace was the one who received the file it would explain her approach to the investigation. She knows more than she is revealing and even though she claims she has sources on the inside of TPUSA she hasn't revealed who they are. If Charlie is one of her sources she has told the truth while protecting her sources so that their slander and lies can be caught. But again, that strategy does not include preventing a trial. Of course she should bring up evidence that prosecutors and defense attorneys should check out. Think of this as poker, if you show you have four of a kind immediately everyone will simply fold and you what do you win? No you want to wait until someone calls (that is the trial) and everyone has played their cards (testified under oath) before you lay down your cards.
There is a misconception that anyone is trying to get Tyler Robinson off. On the contrary the trial is very important. People can change their story, they can claim they forgot, etc. That is not a crime. But once you have their testimony at trial if they lied there that is a crime. I think it is much more likely that Charlie had a dead man's switch than it is that he didn't. In other words in the event of his death someone very close to him but not part of TPUSA would get a file of everything Charlie knew and suspected. But if Charlie sent a file to someone close to him that he trusted to get the truth out you have to proceed in such a way that you catch them in a lie, not just a lie, but in perjury, a crime. Also you want to warn them, maybe they are mistaken, their response will prove if they are doubling down on the lie or not. So if, for example, Candace was the one who received the file it would explain her approach to the investigation. She knows more than she is revealing and even though she claims she has sources on the inside of TPUSA she hasn't revealed who they are. If Charlie is one of her sources she has told the truth while protecting her sources so that their slander and lies can be caught. But again, that strategy does not include preventing a trial. Of course she should bring up evidence that prosecutors and defense attorneys should check out. Think of this as poker, if you show you have four of a kind immediately everyone will simply fold and you what do you win? No you want to wait until someone calls (that is the trial) and everyone has played their cards (testified under oath) before you lay down your cards.
This will maybe come in handy if any here run into those who insist America was not founded on a Christian principles.
What a mind he had.
I haven't yet checked but,it wouldn't surprise me if he had a photographic memory.
What a mind he had.
I haven't yet checked but,it wouldn't surprise me if he had a photographic memory.
Let us remember a Christian,a Conservative,a husband,a father.And the legacy he left in the minds of those who are the future because he dared to lead them to think beyond what they thought they knew.
Lord knows,Liberal campuses today are in desperate need of that.
RIP Charlie. You were one of a kind.
Lord knows,Liberal campuses today are in desperate need of that.
RIP Charlie. You were one of a kind.