[Order Michael Finch’s new book, A Time to Stand: HERE. Prof. Jason Hill calls it “an aesthetic and political tour de force.”]
“When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth.” (Acts 7: 54) These words were transcribed and written by Luke, a follower of Jesus, who recounted in the New Testament Book of Acts the accusations against Stephen, and the stoning of Stephen. The “things” they heard were words sharply critical of the listeners who had heard Jesus preach but had rejected both Jesus’ preaching and Jesus himself.
David Guzik in his commentary on the Holy Bible tells the readers, “Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and signs among the people: God did great wonders and signs through the apostles; but also through others like Stephen, one of the servants chosen to help the widows. God used Stephen because he was full of faith and power.”
Similarly, Charlie Kirk was not an ordained minister of the Gospel, nor was he an elected official holding a national or even local office. Nevertheless, Kirk was able to challenge and put to shame voices in opposition to the conservative, Christian worldview in a unique, forceful, uncompromising, informed, logical, and good-humored way.
The key element in Charlie’s success is that he introduced a crucial spiritual dimension to the political discussion. The differences of opinion in the political arena were not only differences between Democrats and Republicans, between the “woke” and the “unwoke,” between the Left and the Right, between illegals and citizens, between the law abiding and the non-law abiding, between those who believed in the traditional family and those who advocated for alternative forms of “family” or for shacking up, between those who valued college education and those who believed it was over-rated and too expensive, and even between those who believed in God and those who did not.
Charlie added a crucial dimension to his take on political and social policy. He repeatedly affirmed and stated that Jesus Christ was the foundation and basis for his views on political and social policies. He affirmed the Trinity. He affirmed being born again and living under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit and the Holy Word of God. He affirmed the Holy Bible as the source of wisdom and truth about Almighty God and the social policies for which he advocated.
He emphasized that Almighty God created man from the earth and then created woman from the side of man. God did not create a variety of gender options. He emphasized that marriage was ordained by God to be only between a man and a woman.
He emphasized that many if not all the problems in the African-American community were caused not by whites but by the fact that about 80% of African-American children are raised in homes without a father.
Over the years, this collapse of the two-parent black family has been attributed by some, beginning with the work Losing Ground by Charles Murray, who have “argued that the social programs of the 1960s had the unintended consequence of reversing social progress by creating dependency on government aid….” Kirk promoted this point, and argued that the welfare system makes it more profitable for women to have children supported by the welfare system than they would be if they had only one husband.
However, over the years, many civil rights leaders have rejected this view. “Family instability is a ‘peripheral issue,’ warned Whitney Young, executive director of the National Urban League. ‘The problem is discrimination’.”
Charlie also frequently noted that African-American males though only about 6.5% of the population commit approximately 50% of the murders. While the individual is responsible for the crimes he or she commits, he blamed this high murder rate on the collapse of the African-American family.
He insisted that moral responsibility in the areas of marriage and procreation must be acknowledged and changed, and the only way this can and will happen is by an evangelical Christian commitment to Christ who requires a responsible family life for those who follow Him.
A church-going African-American co-worker told me years ago how bothered she was when she was in church and two or three unmarried sisters in the Lord were singing in the choir with their pregnant bellies clearly visible to the congregation. She made that observation long before Charlie appeared on the public stage.
Stephen, a deacon and a mighty man of God, as he was being accused by an outraged population for preaching and teaching the Truth spoke about the Israelites who were following Moses saying that they created a golden calf to worship while Moses was up on Mt. Sinai receiving the Ten Commandments directly from the hand of Almighty God, “And they made a calf in those days, offered sacrifices to the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their own hands.” (Acts 7:41)
Charlie Kirk, like Moses and like Stephen, consistently challenged the calf worshipers. Not everyone on the conservative side of politics is an evangelical Christian, but a very large number are. Further, Charlie brought many to that correct understanding that underlies the value of more conservative political issues. Conservative political views are rooted in faith in the Word of God, and that is true for living voters, and for deceased martyrs like Charlie.