Up Next
Alex Clark and Andrew Kolvet Address Every Conspiracy Theory Surrounding Charlie Kirk's Death and Legacy
47:59
Candace Owens Reveals Federal Agents Blocked Surgeon Access to Charlie Kirk's Body at Hospital
1:03:09
Dave Rubin Reveals Tucker Carlson's Woke Right Problem and the Future of American Politics
43:30
Frank Turek Reflects on Charlie Kirk's Martyrdom and Addresses Conspiracy Theories Surrounding His Death
Frank Turek opens up about the aftermath of Charlie Kirk's murder, addressing the conspiracy theories that emerged, including false accusations about himself signaling a shooter. Turek explains why evil's existence actually proves God rather than disproves Him, defends Charlie's unwavering support for Israel, debunks claims that Charlie was converting to Catholicism, and describes Charlie's legacy as a combination of Rush Limbaugh and Billy Graham. He emphasizes that Charlie was killed for his faith, not just his politics, because his political views flowed directly from his Christian worldview.
Making Sense of Evil Through the Lens of Faith
Frank Turek begins by addressing how he has processed the nearly two months since Charlie Kirk's death. His answer is rooted in classical Christian apologetics: the existence of evil actually proves God's existence rather than disproving it. Turek explains that we can only recognize evil because we know what is good, and we can only know what is good because there is a standard of good outside ourselves—God's nature. Evil, he argues, is a privation or lack in a good thing. This philosophical framework has helped Turek make sense of an event that defies easy explanation.
The conversation establishes that Turek views Charlie's death not as a random tragedy but as an evil act that ultimately points toward divine truth. This perspective becomes the foundation for everything else discussed in the interview.
Addressing the Absurd Conspiracy Theories
One of the more bizarre aspects of the aftermath involved conspiracy theories targeting Turek himself. For the first 36 hours after Charlie's death, Turek was unaware of the online chatter because he was in a bubble with the family, JD Vance, and Air Force 2. When he learned about accusations that he had signaled a shooter by adjusting his hat, Turek found the theories not just hurtful but illogical.
He points out the obvious flaws in the conspiracy: if someone is looking through a high-powered rifle from 200 yards away, they couldn't even see someone 25 feet to Charlie's right. More importantly, why would anyone need to signal a shooter about who Charlie Kirk is? He was the person under the tent with the microphone. Turek also reveals that he had just been handed that Trump 47 hat moments before—he didn't even arrive at the event with it. Someone gave it to him because he and Charlie were flipping hats into the audience, and Turek wanted some shade from the sun.
The FBI did call Turek to ask about the conspiracy theory, which he dismissed as nonsense. He explains that law enforcement must investigate such claims not because they have merit, but because defense attorneys at trial will ask whether investigators checked into every theory. The prosecution's job is to secure a conviction based on evidence, not to quell every internet rumor.
The Candace Owens Situation and the Problem with Evidence-Free Accusations
Turek addresses the painful situation with Candace Owens, who Charlie had once mentored. He notes that Charlie never spoke ill of anyone privately unless he had first tried to correct them personally. Turek draws a distinction between asking questions and making accusations. It's reasonable to suggest possibilities—maybe this happened, maybe that happened—but crossing the line to strongly suggest someone is guilty without evidence causes unnecessary pain and dissension.
He specifically addresses Owens' claim that she had a dream about Charlie telling her things, and her suggestion that TPUSA betrayed Charlie. Turek emphasizes that dreams are not evidence. He also takes issue with her analysis of people's reactions based on video footage, including her statement that Turek's was the only genuine reaction. He points out that even psychologists with patients sitting in front of them can't always diagnose people accurately. You certainly can't diagnose people from fragmentary video and determine whether their behavior was "normal" in an abnormal situation that none of them had experienced before.
Turek brought Detective J Warner Wallace onto his podcast two weeks after Charlie's death to explain how murder prosecutions actually work. The prosecution rarely tells the public anything they have, much less everything. Their job is to get a conviction at trial, not to respond to internet speculation. Revealing information prematurely could jeopardize both the case and the jury pool.
The key distinction Turek makes is between possibilities and evidence. In Christian apologetics, people often say "maybe this happened to Jesus' body" to explain away the resurrection, but those are just possibilities without first-century evidence. Similarly, anything is possible regarding Charlie's death, but accusations require evidence.
Those Final Moments at the Event
When asked about what went through his heart and mind during those moments, Turek recalls that he was FaceTiming with his son and daughter-in-law. His daughter-in-law told him later that the first thing he said was "No, no, no." He took a step toward Charlie, but Charlie's team was already there. Then he ducked because he thought more shots might be coming.
Within seconds, they were carrying Charlie out. Turek ran with them to the car. He had always feared that someone might take a shot at Charlie, and he had decided beforehand that he would do everything possible to save him if that happened, because he couldn't live with himself if he didn't try. Turek notes that any father would do the same—no father stays back while someone carries away a person who was like a son to him.
If this tragedy had to happen, Turek says, he's grateful he was there because now he knows with certainty that there was nothing he could have done. Charlie was gone when they got him in the car. That knowledge, however painful, provides a measure of peace.
How This Has Challenged and Strengthened His Faith
Rather than challenging Turek's faith, Charlie's death has further cemented his belief that evil exists and therefore God exists. He knows God can bring good from evil—He does it constantly. They've already seen it since Charlie's death in the revival and spiritual outpouring that has followed. Turek is quick to clarify that if he could go back and change things, he would. But he believes Charlie is looking down thinking "that was worth it" because Charlie's life was about leading people to faith.
If given the choice to become a martyr so that 100 people would come to faith, Charlie would have signed up immediately. Of course he wouldn't want to leave Erika and the kids, but he understood that God works everything together for good for those who love God and are called according to His purpose. Charlie kept his eyes on the eternal, as Paul instructs in 2 Corinthians 4.
Answering the Toughest Question: How Could a Loving God Allow This?
On Megyn Kelly's show, Turek was asked how a loving God could allow the devil to take this angel from us. His answer cuts to the heart of Christian theology: How would a loving God allow Jesus to be killed? Jesus was the only truly innocent person in history, yet He was brutally murdered. Yet the most good came out of that evil than any other evil in history—the salvation of billions of people.
Turek explains that an infinitely just God cannot allow sin to go unpunished. If He did, He wouldn't be infinitely just. But He also doesn't want to punish us because He's infinitely loving. To remain just, He must punish an innocent substitute in our place. Where can He find an innocent substitute? Not in any of us—we're all sinners. The only place He can find an innocent substitute is in Himself. So He adds humanity to His deity, comes to earth, and allows the creatures who rebelled against Him to torture and kill Him so He could take our punishment upon Himself.
By trusting in Jesus, we are not only forgiven but given His righteousness. As Paul says in Romans 3:26, God remains just and is the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. That's why Turek said at Charlie's memorial that there are only two things you can get in the afterlife: justice or grace. He doesn't want justice—that would mean damnation. He wants grace, and that's what Jesus offers.
God allows evil because He allows free will, and free will is the only way love can exist. We're not robots. We live in a world where our choices make a real difference, whether for good or for evil.
Debunking Misconceptions About Charlie's Beliefs
Since Charlie's death, various misconceptions have circulated about his beliefs, particularly regarding Israel and Catholicism. Turek addresses both directly.
Regarding Israel, Charlie was absolutely not changing his views. The day before he was murdered, they had a Zoom meeting with two people in Israel and another person to discuss how Charlie could better answer college students' questions about the Israel-Hamas situation. Charlie was frustrated that some people thought disagreeing with any Israeli government policy made him anti-Semitic. Turek agrees this is a false standard. Blessing someone doesn't mean approving everything they do. If you want to bless your child, you tell them the truth and correct them when necessary. Love doesn't mean approval—it means seeking what's best for the other person according to God's will, which requires correction.
Charlie was also frustrated by the argument that because Israel's current government is apostate, Christians shouldn't support Israel. Turek points out that the entire government of Israel in the Bible was apostate. Every single king from the northern kingdom was evil, and only a handful from Judah followed Yahweh. God judged them repeatedly. The idea that we can't support Israel because the government is apostate would mean we couldn't support any government of Israel throughout history. But supporting Israel doesn't mean agreeing with everything any Israeli government does. God didn't agree with the governments of Israel even though He appointed them.
As for the claim that Charlie was becoming Catholic—absolutely not. Charlie had great respect for the Catholic Church, as does Turek, because much of what the Catholic Church has done is good. They have a great intellectual history, and evangelicals agree with Catholics on many essentials, though there are serious disagreements. What Charlie appreciated about Catholic churches was that nobody would bother him there. At Protestant churches, everyone wanted selfies all the time. He enjoyed the beauty and reverence of Catholic churches. Turek, who came out of the Catholic faith himself, admits Catholics know how to build churches, unlike Protestants who build boxes that look like warehouses with fog machines and pastors in skinny jeans who look like they just came from cleaning the garage. But appreciating Catholic aesthetics and liturgy doesn't mean Charlie was theologically Catholic. He was not.
Continuing the Mission: Campus Events in Charlie's Honor
Despite the tragedy, Turek and the team are not backing down. They didn't cancel any events. A week after the murder, they held their scheduled event. Since then, they've done five campus events with more coming: Ohio State on November 3rd, Berkeley on November 10th (where Charlie and Turek were supposed to go together—now Turek is going with Rob Schneider for a TPUSA event), Alabama on November 13th, and Boise State on November 20th. That's just this semester; a whole slate is planned for next semester.
Turek has been doing these campus events for almost 20 years. Normally they present "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist," based on the book he co-wrote with Dr. Norman Geisler. Now they're doing "If God, Why Evil?" and mostly Q&A in honor of Charlie Kirk. They're dealing with the question of why God would allow evil and then taking questions from students.
Hearts and minds are open right now. Hearts are tender. There's a window of opportunity where people are receptive to hearing about Christianity. The Charlie effect is strong, and they're going to do everything they can to reach people during this time.
Charlie Kirk's Lasting Legacy: Rush Limbaugh Meets Billy Graham
When asked about Charlie's legacy, Turek describes him as a combination of Rush Limbaugh and Billy Graham. He knew his politics and he knew his faith well. But what motivated his politics was his faith. He wasn't a conservative because he was conservative first—he was a conservative because he was a Christian first. Conservative means to conserve what we know is true and beautiful, and that's what Charlie fought for in the public square. But his first love was Jesus. That's what motivated everything.
A month before he died, Charlie said in an interview that "politics is peanuts compared to the gospel." Politics is important because it helps us take care of people—we're supposed to love people—and it helps us maintain religious freedom so we can preach the gospel. When people say they just preach the gospel and don't get involved in politics, Turek responds that they must not think the gospel is very important because politics affects your ability to preach and live the gospel. If you don't believe that, try preaching the gospel in North Korea. There's no First Baptist Church of Riyadh. There's no Calvary Chapel of Tehran. Why? Because politically they don't allow it.
Charlie understood this. Politics isn't our first priority, but it helps us do our first priority. That's why he knew it was important to be politically engaged.
Turek believes Charlie's legacy is already cemented as a martyr because he was killed for his faith. Some might say he was killed for his political views, but why did he have those political views? Because of his faith. Because he knew what the truth was. He was trying to reach people with that truth in an open forum because he wanted them to know Jesus. And he knew that to do that, he had to put himself in harm's way to some extent because you can't reach people while protecting yourself with 100% security. On the morning of the event, Turek told Charlie he didn't like the location because there were too many buildings. Charlie just shrugged it off because people were there who wanted to hear what he had to say, and he wanted to try to convince them of the truth. That's what a loving person does.
The Irony of Calling Charlie Kirk a Fascist
It infuriates Turek when people call Charlie a fascist. It's exactly the opposite. How many fascists offer their opponents the microphone and say, "Go ahead, make your case. Let me hear what you have to say"? None. That doesn't happen. The person who murdered Charlie is the fascist.
Many on the left talk about inclusion, tolerance, and diversity, which means exactly the opposite of what you think. It means if you don't agree with them, they won't include you. They won't tolerate you for holding diverse views. In fact, they may even murder you. Of course, not all leftists are like this—thankfully, most won't murder you. But the oppressor-oppressed worldview that has emerged in recent years, this critical theory worldview that says regardless of your personal behavior, if you're in a certain category you're an oppressor, is motivating people toward violence. If you're an evil oppressor, you need to die. That's what many people think.
That's not Christianity. Christianity teaches that people are judged by their own personal behavior, not by what identity group some leftist professor has stamped them with.
Where to Learn More
Those interested in Frank Turek's work can visit crossexamined.org. His podcast, "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist," is available on YouTube (CrossExamined channel) and wherever podcasts are found. More information is also available on Instagram and other platforms, all accessible through the main website.
Video Transcript
Frank, appreciate your time today. I
know it has been really weeks now,
almost a couple of months of a lot of
intensity, a lot of conversation, a lot
of mourning, a lot of difficulty. You
know, you have spent so much of your
career and your time answering difficult
faith questions. And you know, I thought
and prayed a lot for you and about you
during this time. And and I guess I'll
start with this. How have you made sense
of the past almost two months?
Well, I made sense of it by knowing that
what happened was evil. And the only way
I know that that was evil was because I
know what is good. And the only reason I
know what was good is because there's a
standard of good outside myself. And
that's God's nature.
>> So, as soon as we see something evil, we
know it's evil. But the only way we
would know that is if we knew what the
standard of good was. Because evil is a
lack in a good thing. It's a privation
in a good thing. So, an evil event like
this doesn't disprove God. It may prove
there's a devil out there, but it
doesn't disprove God because you
wouldn't you wouldn't even know what
evil was unless there was a standard of
good. And you wouldn't know what good
was unless God existed. So, it's
actually an argument for God, not an
argument against God.
>> Yeah, that's that's interesting. You
know, because a lot of people, they go
through difficult moments and they and
you know this, I mean, they struggle.
That's why people come to you with so
many of the questions that that they
have. And you know, being there at that
event with Charlie Kirk that day, you
also had to deal with a lot of other
things. You know, the the insane
conspiracy theories about and of course
it turned out to be you, you know, that
you were there and you're there, you
know, supporting your friend Charlie as
he's speaking. What was that part of
this like? Because just watching that,
it was so horrifying to think that
somebody just gets an idea from a clip
and they run with it and it becomes a
narrative. Well, first of all, I didn't
even know about it for the first 36
hours because we were in our own little
bubble with the family and, you know, at
the hotel and with JD Vance and Air
Force 2 and all that. We weren't even
aware of all of that chatter going on.
Um, I just find it incredibly stupid
that anyone would think anyone would
need to signal a shooter about anything.
Uh if you're looking through a
high-powered rifle from 200 yd, you
couldn't even see somebody 25 ft to his
to his to Charlie's right and why would
you need a signal? You you know who
Charlie Kirk is? He's the one under the
tent with the microphone. I mean,
>> yeah.
>> Where have people come up with these
inane ideas and as if there's some
insight into a crime?
>> Yeah.
>> Uh they don't think it through. There's
there's no reason to signal anyone. And
not only that, I had just gotten that
hat. Somebody had given me that hat. It
was a Trump 47 hat. I didn't go there
with a hat. Someone just handed it to
me, you know, cuz Charlie and I were
flipping hats into the audience and
somebody said, "Hey, you want a hat?" I
said, "Yeah, it's kind of sunny. Why
don't I take a hat?" So, I was just
adjusting the hat as if as if I'm I'm
signaling somebody to steal second base.
You know, people think what what what
kind of sense does any of this make?
>> It makes no sense at all. Well, it's
about it's about people, I think, having
some sort of ability or power in their
own mind to solve something, you know,
or and I think honestly, if you look at
the culture, the true crime obsession,
the social media obsession, it's
actually really troubling that this is
the place that we're at now, right? that
everybody has to be an expert and solve
every single thing when real people are
are dealing with real emotional issues
um and horrific events that they've had
to watch in process. So I was curious
about that just because watching that
was very difficult from the outside. I
can't imagine what it's been like to I
mean even broader than that. I mean, how
do you how do you make sense as a
Christian watching other Christians
spread conspiracy theories and and idea
like what you were saying, but other
things. I'm not even going to get into
the specifics of it. What has that been
like for you to watch and experience?
>> Well, you're probably talking about
Candace Owens and uh you know, I have
not followed Candace Owens closely. I
know she was a good friend of Charlie
years ago. In fact, when I first met
Charlie, I I said, you know, tell me a
little bit about your ministry, you
know, like your your what you do and you
know, who who who have you mentored. He
he mentioned Candace Owens. Um and
Charlie would never speak ill of anybody
um privately
uh unless he spoke to that person first
and tried to correct them. So, Charlie
never said anything bad about Candace or
anything, but I just find um this idea
that she's making all these suggestions
without evidence
very painful for people. It's okay to
suggest, well, maybe this, maybe that,
but as soon as you start launching
accusations, TPUSA betrayed so you know
him betrayed Charlie, you know, I had a
dream that that Charlie told me this,
that's not evidence.
I mean,
maybe she's maybe she's right. You know,
it could be. Anything's possible.
But not everything has evidence behind
them. And what people don't seem to
understand,
and this is why I had my friend
Detective Jay Warner Wallace on my
podcast two weeks after Charlie's
martyrdom, people don't understand how
prosecution works, how murder cases
work. The prosecution rarely tells you
anything they have, much less everything
they have. As as Detective Wallace
pointed out, the prosecution's job is to
get a conviction at trial. The
prosecution's job is not to quell every
internet rumor.
They can't do that. They'd be
jeopardizing their case and they'd be
jeopardizing
uh a jury if they jumped in on every
possible
um rumor that was going around. They
base their prosecution on evidence
and the conspiracy theory about me.
Okay, they they looked at it because
they asked me a question. The FBI called
me up and asked me the question. I said
it's nonsense. That was it. And the
reason they have to do that in a trial
is because a defense attorney is going
to say, "Well, did you check into this
and did you check into that?" And so
then the prosecution could say, "Yeah,
we checked into it. It went nowhere.
That's not that's not what happened."
Now, it's fine for Candace to say,
"Well, look at this and look at that and
and this could be true and that could be
true." But as soon as you cross the line
and start saying so and so is guilty or
suggesting strongly so and so is guilty
when you don't have the evidence that's
causing dissension among the brothers.
And that's something the Lord hates.
There's people who have enough pain in
their lives. You don't need to add pain
when people are going through this. And
apparently she said that I was the only
one who was genuine in history. Look, I
haven't watched everything. I've just
been told about it. Um, who has the time
to watch everything? Nobody does.
>> Right. Exactly.
>> But, um, she said, "I was the only
genuine my was the only genuine
reaction."
[snorts]
Billy, you know this. Reasonable people
know this
that a psychologist even with somebody
on the couch in front of them can't
um completely diagnose people accurately
all the time. You don't diagnose people
from video
uh very fragmentaryary video and tell
them or make a judgment and say oh this
person didn't act normally there is no
normal behavior
>> in a situation like that in a situation
like that of course I mean how there
absolutely there's no normal
>> there is no normal behavior it's it's
when you have an abnormal event like
that that none of us have experienced
Nobody knows how they're going to react.
Candace Owens is well within her rights
to suggest certain things and all this
and she has the right to free speech and
all that. That that's fine. She's right
right to ask questions. I just think it
is hurtful and not helpful when you
cross a line to strongly suggest
somebody's guilty of something for which
you have no evidence.
Yeah,
>> there's a difference between a
possibility and evidence. And I see this
all the time in Christian apologetics.
People will say, "Well, maybe this
happened to Jesus' body or that happened
to Jesus' body." And that's how you
explain what the resurrection is. It
really wasn't a resurrection. Those are
all possible, but give me first century
evidence for those possibilities. Oh, we
don't have any. Okay. Well, it's just a
possibility then. Possibilities are not
evidence. You need evidence. And that's
what the prosecution is working on. Who
knows? When the prosecution goes through
everything, maybe some of the things
Candace said are right. I have no idea.
I can tell you for certain, as far as I
know, there was no shot that came from
behind me. If there was a shot that came
from behind me, I would have known it
cuz I was really close. It's 25 ft from
Charlie off his right elbow. If a shot
came from that side, I would have heard
it
>> a lot louder than I did. You know, let
me ask you this, and I know it's painful
to ponder, but I do want to go back to
it because you've beautifully spoken
about so many things that are difficult
to talk about in in the last few weeks
even. What was going through your heart
and your mind as you were there at that
event in those moments when you realized
what was happening?
>> Well, I was facetiming my son and
daughter-in-law, and my daughter-in-law
said, "The first thing you said was,
"No, no, no." And you know I cuz I had
the phone on and I I took a step toward
Charlie but his team was already there.
And then I duck because I thought well
maybe there's more shots coming and
within a second they were two sec. I
don't know how long it was very short. I
mean they were carrying him out of
there. So I ran with them to the car and
just as I said I I was afraid somebody
at some point would take a shot at
Charlie. And so my thought was what what
would I do? I would do everything
everything I could to try and save him,
whatever that was, because I couldn't
live with myself if I didn't. And you'd
have done the same thing if you were
there, Billy. He was a friend of yours.
You know, he was like a son to me. You
know what father's going to say, I'll
just stay back here while you go get in
the car and take him to the hospital?
No, you're going to get in that car and
do whatever you can. Now, as I I said in
this video that we just recorded last
night was it was just a someone asked me
a question about Candace, so I answered
it. But,
um,
you know, I if if this thing had to
happen in the sense it was going to
happen, I wanted to be there because at
least I know now that there's nothing I
could have done,
>> right?
>> I mean, he was gone when we got him in
the car. And you describe seeing that
and knowing that. And
>> has it I mean in what ways, if any, has
this challenged you spiritually.
>> Um it just further cements my belief
that evil exists and therefore God
exists.
Um I know God can bring good from evil.
He does it all the time. We've seen it
even since Charlie's death. Not not that
if I couldn't go back and change things
I would. Um,
>> but the revival you're talking the
revival, the outpouring, the what we've
seen spiritually since then.
>> Yeah. Charlie's looking down going,
"Well, that was worth it."
>> I mean, you know, if if we were to say,
um, Charlie, you know, 100 people would
come to faith if you gave yourself as a
martyr. He'd go, "Sign me up. That's
what my life was about anyway." Right?
But it's been a lot more than that. Now,
of course, he wouldn't want to leave
Eric and the kids, but um he knows that
in the long run that good things can
come from evil things and that God can
work everything together for good to
those that love God and are called
according to his purpose. And that the
eternal is what we need to keep our eyes
on as Paul said in 2 Corinthians 4, you
know.
>> Yeah. Well, and I mean, you've answered
some tough questions on this too, of
course. You know, you were on Megan
Kelly's show and she asked how a loving
God could allow the devil to take this
angel from us, referring to to Charlie.
And you gave, you know, a beautiful
answer to that, but that is the question
people will always ask. You know, why?
Why did this have to happen? And you,
what you just said before is very
interesting because the existence of
evil always points back to to good,
points back to God. But people don't
always make that connection. They stop
at the existence of evil, right? It
pauses them. It freezes them in a fear
or an anger or whatever their emotion
they're feeling. Um, can you talk a
little bit more about that that answer
that you gave Megan Kelly because other
people are going to watch us right now
and they maybe they didn't hear that
response you gave and they are
struggling with the same thing. How
would a loving God allow this to happen?
>> How [clears throat] would a loving God
allow Jesus to be killed? He's the only
truly innocent person in history and yet
he was brutally murdered. Yet the most
good came out of that evil than any
other evil, the salvation of billions of
people. Because an infinitely just God
can't allow sin to go unpunished. If he
allows sin to go unpunished, he's not
infinitely just.
Uh but he doesn't want to punish us
because he's also infinitely loving. So
in order for him to remain just, he has
to punish an innocent substitute in our
place. And where can he find an innocent
substitute? Not in any one of us. We're
all sinners. The only place he can find
an innocent substitute is in himself. So
he adds humanity to his deity, comes to
earth and allows the creatures that
rebelled against him to torture and kill
him so he could take our punishment upon
himself. And therefore by trusting in
him, we not only are forgiven, we are
given his righteousness. And this that's
why Paul says in in in Romans 3:26, God
remains just and is the justifier of the
one who has faith in Jesus. That's why I
said at the memorial, do you want
justice from an infinitely just God?
Because there's only two things you can
get in the afterlife. You can get
justice or you can get grace.
I don't want justice. If I got justice,
I'd be toast. I want grace. And that's
what Jesus gives us. He gives us grace.
So evil does not disprove God. It may
prove there's a devil out there, but it
doesn't disprove God. It shows God does
exist and he can bring good from evil.
And of course, God allows evil because
he allows free will. And he allows free
will because that's the only way you can
allow love to take place. We're not a
robot world. We're a world where our
choices make a real difference whether
for good or for evil.
What do you think? I mean, there's also
been so much conversation about Charlie,
right? You he was like a son to you. You
were incredibly close. And watching
people say different things about what
Charlie believed. Was he changing his
opinion on Israel? There's all of these
things that are out there. What do you
think are the biggest misconceptions
about Charlie in general?
>> Uh well, he certainly wasn't changing
his view on Israel. Uh because we had a
meeting the day before he was murdered
with two people in Israel and a guy
living here via Zoom. And the whole
premise of the meeting was how Charlie
wanted to know how could I better answer
questions from college kids
uh on the Israel Hamas situation. I
mean, Charlie was frustrated that some
people thought that he had to agree with
everything the Israeli government did,
otherwise he was somehow anti-Semitic. I
agree that that's a frustration because
when even if you agree that the Bible
says you ought to bless, you know, the
descendants of Abraham, you ought to
bless Israel, bless doesn't mean you
agree with people on everything. Right?
If you want to bless your kid, you don't
agree with your kid on everything. You
tell them the truth and correct them. In
fact, um that's what love is. Love
doesn't mean approval. Love means
seeking what's best for the other person
according to the will of God. And that
requires correction quite a bit. So
Charlie was frustrated that some people
were were saying he's an anti-semite if
he doesn't agree with Israel on
everything. The other thing that we
talked about quite a bit is the fact
that
um some people will say, well, you know,
the current government of Israel is
apostate. Why would you support them?
Hey, news flash for you Bible scholars
who don't tend to look at the Bible.
>> The entire government of Israel in the
Bible was apostate. Every single king
from the from the northern kingdom was
evil and only a few a handful from Judah
>> were following Yahweh. And what did God
do? He judged them over and over again.
So this idea that, you know, we can't
support the current government of Israel
because they're apostate would mean we
couldn't support any government of
Israel because they're apostate. But
again, to caveat that, it doesn't mean
that we have to agree with everything
any government does. God didn't agree
with the governments of Israel, even
though he appointed them because of
their bad behavior. So
this this idea that he was getting away
from Israel is not true. He knew they
were a great friend in the region. He
knew that they were the only democracy
there. He knew that Islam is a great
threat uh in terms of religious freedom
and freedom of of uh speech. Um also the
idea was he was becoming Catholic is
nonsense.
>> I was I was going to ask you about that.
This has been a huge thing
[clears throat] that he was becoming a
Catholic that he was
>> No, you say no.
>> No, no, no, no. But he had great respect
for the Catholic Church as I do because
a lot of what the Catholic Church has
done is good. There's of course plenty
they've done that's bad. They do have a
great intellectual history and we agree
on many of the essentials although we do
have some serious disagreements.
And what Charlie did like was when he
went to a Catholic church, nobody would
bother him. You know, you go to a
Protestant church, everybody wants
selfies with him all the time, right? So
he did enjoy the the first of all the
beauty of a Catholic church. Look, I
came out of the Catholic faith. Let me
admit the Catholics know how to build a
church. Protestants building these boxes
that look like uh warehouses with
concert like a concert hall. It's not
very it's not very um what's the word
I'm looking for here? It's not very
reverent. Okay. Meanwhile, you got some
Protestant pastor up there with skinny
jeans and a and a fog machine. It looks
like he just he just um came from
cleaning his garage. There's not a lot
of reverence there. So, I understand the
frustration that me and Charlie have
with some of the Protestant uh
practices, but that doesn't mean
theologically he was a Catholic. He was
not.
>> Yeah. I mean, those are the two big
ones, right, that that have come up in
all of this. And it's frustrating when
that happens because the person is not
there to defend themselves. So you have
to do it, other people have to do it and
explain it because people are making
again definitive claims without
evidence. Um and you know when you look
at all of this,
one of the things that has been very
interesting to watch is that you guys
are not backing down. You're showing up
to as many college campuses as you
possibly can. Talk a little bit about
that. Why are you so resolute to
continue this? And what are you hoping
to accomplish through that?
>> Well, Jesus would want us to do it. He
does want us to do it. And so so did
Charlie. So we didn't cancel any of our
events. We had an event on a week after
the the murder. We've done uh since then
five campus events. We've got uh several
coming up. We've got Ohio State November
3rd. We've got Berkeley November 10th.
Charlie and I were supposed to go to
that together. He'll remain in glory.
I'm going there with Rob Schneider.
That's a TPUSA event. Then we've got
Alabama November 13th and Boise State on
November 20th. Uh that's just this
semester. We got a whole bunch next
semester. The reason we want to do it,
well, I've been doing this for almost 20
years. And and uh we normally go and do
I don't have enough faith to be an
atheist, a presentation based on the
book I co-wrote with Dr. Norman Gistler.
Now we're doing if God, why evil, and
we're doing mostly Q&A in honor of
Charlie Kirk. So we're giving we're
dealing with the issue, why would we God
allow this? Why would we God allow evil?
And then we're taking questions. So
there's a a period now where hearts and
minds are open, hearts are tender, and
so we want to try and reach out to
people who are now open to hearing about
Christianity. You know, the Charlie
effect is pretty strong right now, and
we're going to do everything we can to
reach people during this window of
opportunity.
>> I love that. I love that. And you know,
last question for you, but when when you
think about Charlie's legacy long term,
uh, you know, a lot of people knew him
for politics, they didn't understand
fully that what what faith meant to him.
Many people did, but some people didn't,
right? They associated him with politics
only. And yet in his death and I and I
noticed this a couple of years before
really how much he had pivoted in it
felt and really it was amazing to watch
some of those events he would do in
Arizona. Um you know the faith events he
would do once a month. Really incredible
to see that. What do you think his
legacy is? Because it feels I mean from
a revival standpoint pretty incredible
right now.
>> Yes. I think Charlie was someone who was
sort of a combination of Rush Limbbo and
Billy Graham.
and uh he knew his politics and he knew
his faith well. But what motivated his
politics was his faith. He wasn't a
conservative because he was a
conservative first. He was a
conservative because he was a Christian
first. And conservative means we can
serve what we know is true, right, and
beautiful. And that's what he was
fighting for in the public square. Uh
but his first love of course is Jesus.
That's what that what that's what was
motivating him. In fact, a month before
he died in an interview, he said,
"Politics is peanuts compared to the
gospel." It's important because it it
helps us uh take care of people. We're
supposed to love people. And uh it also
helps us have religious freedom so we
can preach the gospel. I mean, when
people say, "I just preach the gospel. I
don't get involved in politics." I say,
"I guess you don't think the gospel is
very important then because politics
affects your ability to preach and live
the gospel. If you don't think so, go to
North Korea and try and preach the
gospel. There's no First Baptist Church
of Riad. There's no Calvary Chapel of
Tehran. Why? Because politically they
don't allow it. So Charlie knew that. He
said politics is not our first priority,
but it helps us do our first priority.
And so he knew it was important to be
politically engaged. So I think his
legacy is already cemented as he's a
martyr because he was killed for his
faith. Uh and you say, well no, he was
killed because he had certain political
view. Why did he have those political
views? Because of his faith. Because he
knew what the truth was. And he was out
there
uh trying to reach people with that in
an open forum because he wanted people
to know the truth and he wanted people
to know Jesus. And he knew that in order
to do that, he had to put himself in
harm's way to a certain extent because
you can't reach out to people protecting
yourself with 100% security. In fact,
when we we got there on our way there
that morning, that morning, I said to
him, Charlie, I don't like this place.
There's too many buildings. You know, he
just shrugged it off because he knew
>> that people were there and they wanted
they wanted to hear
>> what he had to say and they they wanted
he wanted to try and convince them of
the truth.
>> And that's what a loving person does. It
just frosts me to no end that people
call him a fascist. I mean, it's exactly
the opposite. How many fascists, Billy,
do you know who offer their opponents
the microphone and say, "Go ahead, make
your case. Let me hear what you have to
say."
>> None. That would be none. Yeah, that
doesn't happen.
>> Yeah. It's It's the guy that murdered
him that's the fascist. And many people
on the left are like this. They're all
about inclusion, tolerance, and
diversity, which means exactly the
opposite of what you think it means. It
means if you don't agree with us, we
won't include you. We won't tolerate you
for holding diverse views. In fact, we
may even murder you.
>> Yeah.
>> Now, of course, we can't say that of all
leftists. Thankfully, most of them are
not going to murder you. But this whole
oppressor oppressed worldview that has
has has come up in recent years, this
critical theory worldview which says
regardless of your personal behavior, if
you're in this certain category, you're
an oppressor.
That is motivating people to move to
violence because if you're an evil
oppressor, you not you need to die.
That's what many people think. That's
not Christianity. Christianity is people
are judged by their own personal
behavior, not what identity group, some
leftist professor has stamped you with.
>> Wow. I mean, there there's so much more.
We could do an hour and and I'll
probably beg you to come back again
soon, but there's a lot here. I
appreciate you taking the time. You
know, you do such incredible work. Where
can people go to get more information on
you and and the great gospel work that
you do?
>> Yes, it's crossexamine.org.
Cross-examined with a D on the end of
it. We have a podcast called I don't
have enough faith to be an atheist. It's
on YouTube. Our YouTube channel is
cross-examine two words or wherever you
get podcasts. Of course, we have
Instagram and all that. Just go to
cross-examine.org. It'll be up there.
>> Frank, I appreciate you taking the time
today.
>> Thank you, Billy. Appreciate it.