homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Hell: Inside The Mind Of Chick, vol CXVII... (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Hell: Inside The Mind Of Chick, vol CXVII...
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575

 - Posted      Profile for Xavierite         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Eleighteen,

When you have the energy, please feel free to address my post, since you are repeating claims (such as the speculation one) which I think have been rendered totally unbelievable by what I posted.

Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
J Whitgift

Pro ecclesia dei!
# 1981

 - Posted      Profile for J Whitgift   Email J Whitgift   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Surely the talking about mind of Jack Chick (like the minds of evangelical's) is an Oxymoron [Snigger] .

[no offence to evangelicals meant!]

--------------------
On the issue of homosexuality the Liberals have spent their time thinking, considering and listening (in the spirit of the Windsor process), whereas Conservative Anglicans have used the time to further dig their feet in and become more intransigent.

Posts: 2838 | From: Gone shoreside | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lux Mundi:
Surely the talking about mind of Jack Chick (like the minds of evangelical's) is an Oxymoron [Snigger] .

[no offence to evangelicals meant!]

This may be hell, but Just Don't Go There.
[Disappointed]

Tubbs

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Campbell Ritchie
Shipmate
# 730

 - Posted      Profile for Campbell Ritchie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Posted by Lux Mundi
quote:
no offence to evangelicals meant!
Just as well!

No offence taken [Cool]

[/tangent]
I thought Chick had died. Am I mistaken?

CR

--------------------
The greatest problem about Christianity is that it condemns you to eternity with me.

Posts: 396 | From: Middlesbrough | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
SteveTom
Contributing Editor
# 23

 - Posted      Profile for SteveTom   Author's homepage   Email SteveTom   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lux Mundi:
Surely the talking about mind of Jack Chick (like the minds of evangelical's) is an Oxymoron [Snigger] .

[no offence to evangelicals meant!]

Would that be the same kind of oxymoron as 'an Anglo-Catholic who doesn't have their head up their ass'?

No offence.

--------------------
I saw a naked picture of me on the internet
Wearing Jesus's new snowshoes.
Well, golly gee.
- Eels

Posts: 1363 | From: London | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
There are thousands (hundreds of thousands) of people who have found their way to the Lord with the help of Chick. Ones such testimony is on this thread. Do you think that is bad.....? Or are you just jealous because his ministry is so effective?

I'm strongly tempted to say, "What concept of God are they being converted to?" If it's one like Chick's, yes, I do believe it is very bad. I'd sooner be another religion entirely which has a healthier notion of God's sense of goodness than something which uses the word "Christian" and has some of the theology but the attitude I see in Chick's work.

I'm going to ask this: Eleighteen, are you being serious here or are you just saying these things to see what reaction you get? You're vague about what you yourself believe... do you want to engage with us and have real dialogue, or is this for some other purpose?

I've known a lot of people into, say, the Church of the SubGenius and related things, even some atheists who collect Chick tracts for the sheer shrill camp value of it, and from their point of view, Chick really is "the heart of Christianity." It goes without saying that they have a very, very low opinion of what that heart is like.

As far as I am concerned, Chick is driving people away from healthy Christianity in droves.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Campbell Ritchie
Shipmate
# 730

 - Posted      Profile for Campbell Ritchie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[Risk of turning Purgatorial]
Posted by ChastMastr:-
quote:
Chick is driving people away from healthy Christianity in droves.
Thank you, CM. I find I am in agreement with you. I first came across Chick tracts in my Undergraduate days about 1972, when they were described as "rubbish." Despite Chick's obvious wish to have people come to know Jesus, the style of writing (even 'though it causes the great amusesment Eleighteen mentioned) tends to put people off the real thing. It is rather like using small doses of religion to immunise against the real thing.*

We have to look not only at Chick's intentions, but the likely results, where I shall agree with CM again.
[/Risk of turning Purgatorial]

*Misquote from C S Lewis, not sure where from, probably Screwtape.

--------------------
The greatest problem about Christianity is that it condemns you to eternity with me.

Posts: 396 | From: Middlesbrough | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ley Druid

Ship's chemist
# 3246

 - Posted      Profile for Ley Druid   Email Ley Druid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Catholics believe that if the host accidentally falls on the floor, in order to show proper respect the body and blood of Christ, the priest must get down on his hands and knees and lick it all up.
Jack Chick or SOF?
Posts: 1188 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Campbellite

Ut unum sint
# 1202

 - Posted      Profile for Campbellite   Email Campbellite   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My tongue is bleeding. Time to wade into the waters.

quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
It is not my intention to go through Chick's supposed offences towards Roman Catholics one by one. I've tried to explain that JTC uses some historical claims, and the validity of his views (like those of his denouncers) are largely conjecture. Basically he has - and is entitled to - his sincerely held views just as much as any of you are.

Tried, perhaps, but you have not succeeded, in explaining howhis claims are "historical". Mr. Chick has no qualms whatsoever about twisting or manufacturing "facts" to suit his purposes. Those who point out his historical "inconsistencies" (read:"lies") are at least able to back up their points with evidence. Yes, Mr. Chick is entitled to his views, and no one here is denying his right to hold them. But his views are about as credible as those who claim the Royal family are actually giant lizards from outer space.

quote:
I'm supporting Chick as his tracts are, IMO, the best quality Christian literature out there.
I . am . speechless. [Eek!]

quote:
He gets across the simple message that salvation is through Christ ONLY in an effective manner. On this point one cannot argue with Chick, and the simple direct nature of his cartoons tells this fact to a secular world that by and large DOESN'T KNOW THIS. His message is especially effective with a (for want of a better word) working-class audience, who are not too concerned with pontificating about theology.
Methinks you underestimate the "working-class" audience.

quote:
The anti-Catholic publications are not to everyones taste, but make up only about one in ten of tracts. Remember Jack is human, and we all have our foibles, he only publishes them (at risk to both his livelyhood and LIFE) because he genuinly wishes to see Catholics saved, and sees their CHURCH, not individuals in it as the problem.
My inital response to this statement was "Are you out of your mind?" Not to eveyone's taste??? If the same things were said about Anglicans, or Orthodox (and I wouldn't be the least bit surprized if Mr. Chick felt that way about those groups of Christians as well) would you still think it simply a matter of "taste"?

God forbid!

Catholics ARE Christian. They are already saved. It seems to me that it is Mr. Chick who needs to meet Jesus.

quote:
My opinions on the Roman Church are irrelevant to this debate, my point is you damn Chick on the basis of just one part of his literature.
The hell they are irrelevant! If they were NOT relevant you would be guilty of trolling. And this is not only "one part" of Mr. Chick's so-called literature, it is part and parcel of his twisted theology.

quote:
There are thousands (hundreds of thousands) of people who have found their way to the Lord with the help of Chick. Ones such testimony is on this thread. Do you think that is bad.....? Or are you just jealous because his ministry is so effective?
Counting the one you mentioned in this thread earlier, I now know of precisely two people who have claimed to have found the Lord through a tract over the last THIRTY years. (I am not even sure the first one was a Chick tract.)

I am going to shut up now. [Flaming]

--------------------
I upped mine. Up yours.
Suffering for Jesus since 1966.
WTFWED?

Posts: 12001 | From: between keyboard and chair | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012

 - Posted      Profile for Sarkycow   Email Sarkycow   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Trip trap trip trap.

--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”

Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
da_musicman
Shipmate
# 1018

 - Posted      Profile for da_musicman     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sarkycow:
Trip trap trip trap.

Could that be the sound of a Dead Horse Lurching over the Old Wooden Bridge?
Posts: 3202 | From: The Dreaming | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Robert Armin

All licens'd fool
# 182

 - Posted      Profile for Robert Armin     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[Pedant mode on]:
quote:
Once someone really told me that IHS stood for "Isis, Horus, Seth". IIRC he was a Methodist. Most Anglicans (MOR or otherwise) seem to think it stands for "In His Service".
Isn't IHS actuallly Iota Epsilon Sigma, the first three letters of Jesus' name in Greek? [Pedant mode off]

However, I have another explanation. Iota Sigma Epsilon is the name of the fraternity that Chick belonged to at university (can't remember if he was Harvard or Yale, I'm afraid). This therefore is clear and undeniable proof, unlike so much of the speculation we have seen on this thread, that Chick is part of a vast secret conspiracy to unite all churches into a powerful army to achieve world domination. The tracts are just a smokescreen so no one will suspect anything until it's too late.

--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin

Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I still note that Eleighteen hasn't told us what his personal position is.

I think we can come to our own conclusions from that reluctance

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
I'm strongly tempted to say, "What concept of God are they being converted to?" I'd sooner be another religion entirely which has a healthier notion of God's sense of goodness
Depends on whether you believe whether salvation is through Christ or not. For most Christians I know, it's paradise/lake of fire depending on whether one accepts Jesus or not.. .."There is no way to the father except through me" or something. I take it you're either not this type of Christian, or else you'd rather see someone in hell for eternity than have a Christian understanding different to your own.

quote:
I'm going to ask this: Eleighteen, are you being serious here or are you just saying these things to see what reaction you get?
I'm serious about defending Chick, although the reaction I get is interesting too.

quote:
You're vague about what you yourself believe...
Because this is about what Jack Chick believes. FWIW, I agree with some of and disagree with what is said by: Chick Publications; Roman Catholic Cathechism; The Alpha Course; CS Lewis; Adrian Plass; Josh McDowell; Jerry Falwell; Joyce Hugget; Evelyn Waugh.....etc.

I do agree with ALL of the Bible, which is open to interpretation.

quote:
do you want to engage with us and have real dialogue, or is this for some other purpose?
Yes I'd like Christians to appreciate that, oddball as he may seem, the Lord is using JTC to do some good. And snooty liberals who don't agree with his views should at least acknowledge that.

quote:
As far as I am concerned, Chick is driving people away from healthy Christianity in droves.

I note that Campbell Ritchie quotes CS Lewis. My future mother-in-law gave me a copy of "Mere Christianity" when I started courting (fabulous old-fashioned word) my wife. In a few pages he was guilty of appalling sexism (even for pre-feminist times) and advocated the breaking of one of the ten commandments on a pedantic (and false) technicality. He also said that those who don't accept Jesus get a bath in the good old lake of fire. This was a version of Christianity I don't hold today (though those that do are certainly Christians). But I don't rant about CS Lewis, even if some of his views are repellant to me. If this (that is heaven/hell depending on repentance) is what people believe, then I prefer Chick's in-yer-face approach to a load of flowery language.

quote:
Methinks you underestimate the "working-class" audience
Stop the average sportswear-clad.. ..erm.. person in the street in England and ask them what they think Christianity is about. They may mutter something about good deeds, though I doubt most ever give it a second though EVER. In fact that would go for the average man in a suit too. A good friend at college once told me that most people are neither agnostic/deist/atheist or anything, their religion is "don't know, don't care". A Chick tract might get across a basic message and cause someone to do some thinking.. ..whether they ultimately agree with all of Chick's views or not.

quote:
(JTC's views on Catholics) Not to eveyone's taste??? If the same things were said about Anglicans, would you still think it simply a matter of "taste"?
I'd simply laugh it off with a hearty "HawHawHaw!" It's strange how Chick's... ..erm.. fantastic claims rile Catholics so much.. ...you know they really touch a nerve... ..odd for things that are all total fabrications.

quote:
Catholics ARE Christian. They are already saved.
I certainly hope so. Chick would as well (he doesn't want to see anyone in the lake of fire), but his sincere interpretation of scripture believes them not to be. That's why he risks life and limb to "save" them.

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I notice that eleighteen still hasn't responded to my question.

Are you a 'lone wolf, or do you belong to a worshipping congregatin which would broadly share your perspective?

The point is that Chick presents a view which, irrespective of style, bears no resemblance to any sort of Christianity that I would want to believe in.

That is undoubtedly the reaction of most others too.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:

Yes I'd like Christians to appreciate that, oddball as he may seem, the Lord is using JTC to do some good.

There's a passage in Philippians 1:15-18 that has been a tremendous help to me in doing just that, not specifically for Chick, but I think it applies:

"It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defence of the gospel. The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains. But what does it matter? [italics mine] The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice."

I think this is a wonderful passage which enables us to rejoice wherever the gospel is announced enabling some to be saved, whatever the format... without feeling we personally have to identify with the exponent or cooperate with them.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15

 - Posted      Profile for dyfrig   Email dyfrig   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Merseymike,

for a clue as to Mr e's tendencies, I suggest you look here.



{elaborated URL}

[ 24. October 2002, 16:33: Message edited by: tomb ]

--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt

Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
eh ? he sure isn't an anglo-catholic!!

Mike

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Merseymike:
I notice that eleighteen still hasn't responded to my question.

Are you a 'lone wolf, or do you belong to a worshipping congregatin which would broadly share your perspective?

The point is that Chick presents a view which, irrespective of style, bears no resemblance to any sort of Christianity that I would want to believe in.

That is undoubtedly the reaction of most others too.

Well, it's irrelevent to the thread, but I have so little to do at work...

I semi-regularly attend church(es) where (I guess that) the congregation shares the belief that salvation is through the grace of God, through the sacrifice of his Son as outlined in Holy Scripture. All else is nit-picking, and I'm not sure I like the sound of a church where all "must broadly agree" on issues extra to this.

I've given none of my views on this thread (appart from my occasional annoyance with evangelicals). If you follow Dyfrig's link to the bottom of page four you are left with the revelatory information that I have a preference for Cranmer liturgy and traditional hymns, and am curious about Anglo-Catholic worship. Draw from that what you will.

Now can we please return to Jack Chick.

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Found it - at the end of page 4.

Quite what the BCP has to do with Chick is another matter.
It worries me more that he is in Liverpool and I may have met him if he visited our A/C church! I know a church just like the one he is looking for, but I wouldn't want to inflict him upon them.....

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by da_musicman:
quote:
Originally posted by sarkycow:
Trip trap trip trap.

Could that be the sound of a Dead Horse Lurching over the Old Wooden Bridge?
Into the mouth of a waiting Alligator who's feeling a bit peckish [Big Grin]

Tubbs

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Just spotted this ...

quote:
I'd simply laugh it off with a hearty "HawHawHaw!" It's strange how Chick's... ..erm.. fantastic claims rile Catholics so much.. ...you know they really touch a nerve... ..odd for things that are all total fabrications.
Maybe if you had someone who invested that much time and energy into discrediting something you hold dear you'd get really "riled" too. Catholics who accept Jesus as their Saviour and Lord ARE Christians. They don't need saving as they are already are saved.

Tubbs

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[Roll Eyes] Mike (and others), for the last time.

You don't know what my views are. This thread is about whether Jack Chick - in the grand scheme of things - does some good in the world at large. Not whether you agree with his views or not. I happen to think Chick does some good but that doesn't mean I share all of his views.

You can't even read what I've posted on the "AC for beginners" thread. I've never attended an Anglo-Catholic sevice, so don't worry, you've never met me (I can assure you I am charming in the flesh). I attend a church close to my home (there are about six of various denominations within five minutes walk - I'm not one of those people who drives halfway across town to find the right "fellowship").

Unfortunately there are no ACs, and as someone relatively new to Christianity I'd like to sample what they are about. So I may see you if you go to Tuebrook and I visit there sometime. I look forward to a nice Christian welcome. [Big Grin]

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575

 - Posted      Profile for Xavierite         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
I'd simply laugh it off with a hearty "HawHawHaw!" It's strange how Chick's... ..erm.. fantastic claims rile Catholics so much.. ...you know they really touch a nerve... ..odd for things that are all total fabrications.

Ok, well, you're clearly either a troll or not very bright. If someone accuses my mother of being an adulterer, or my father of being a paedophile, I will be riled because I know the accusations to be false and malicious, not because "I must have something to hide."

I'm not wasting any more time on this thread.

Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
Just spotted this ...

quote:
I'd simply laugh it off with a hearty "HawHawHaw!" It's strange how Chick's... ..erm.. fantastic claims rile Catholics so much.. ...you know they really touch a nerve... ..odd for things that are all total fabrications.
Maybe if you had someone who invested that much time and energy into discrediting something you hold dear you'd get really "riled" too.
Tubbs

Actually I think I'd be flattered

quote:
Catholics who accept Jesus as their Saviour and Lord ARE Christians. They don't need saving as they are already are saved.

Like I said, I hope so for their sake. Jack Chick dosen't believe so, and doesn't want to take any chances that their souls might perish in the lake of fire. Ask yourself this, wouldn't it be a lot easier for Chick to let this happen - a lot less trouble in his life.

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
LatinMan
Shipmate
# 1892

 - Posted      Profile for LatinMan   Email LatinMan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
My opinions on the Roman Church are irrelevant to this debate, my point is you damn Chick on the basis of just one part of his literature.
Anyone who has followed Chick's work over time will note that anti-Catholicism has been a growing theme. In fact, several older tracts have apparently been revised to give them an anti-Catholic spin.

quote:
I'd simply laugh it off with a hearty "HawHawHaw!" It's strange how Chick's... ..erm.. fantastic claims rile Catholics so much.. ...you know they really touch a nerve... ..odd for things that are all total fabrications.
If Chick's attacks on Catholicism were simply theological, we would probably not be discussing him here. But when he moves into the realms of (weird) conspiracy theories blaming the Pope and the Jesuits for every evil that has occured in the history of Western Civilization, including the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy, the rise of Islam, Communism, and National Socialism, and claiming that large parts of Catholic ritual and practice derives from pre-Christian paganism, then it should be no surprise that Catholics get riled.

And the fact that Chick really and sincerely believes in all this clap-trap is tragic. And frustrating, because there can be no dialogue.

(Note to self: get new avatar...)

--------------------
* * * + * * *
_ _ _ [o]_ _ _

Posts: 603 | From: The Marches of the Archdiocese of Chicago | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And it's not merely Roman Catholicism -- it's everything.

He does not hold dialogue with his opponents; he makes absurd claims about their histories and about history in general. And it's not that he believes that some or many or even most will be damned -- he treats the commitment to Christ purely in terms of whether someone has technically heard the words and said the prayer. "But Bob, you were told on June 25, 1974 that Jesus was the only way to salvation, and you laughed!" Chick treats God as legalistic and unloving -- one can believe that many are damned without believing that God could care less, but the tone of the bloody tracts is always God as light-bulb-headed-judge, faceless, and exclusively concerned with "did person A say the prayer? Right, he's in Heaven, or he's in The Lake Of Fire." It's entirely a matter of whether you've checked off the right box on the "did you pray the prayer?" form.

Chick makes a host of wild allegations about pretty much everything in his tracts. They're all there at his web site. "Chick Tracts get read," yes, and mocked heartily. If it wasn't for them turning people away from Jesus I'd laugh more at them.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012

 - Posted      Profile for Sarkycow   Email Sarkycow   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Basic hostly reminder:

This thread is about Chick's views and beliefs, no one elses'. Whether a shipmate is a christian or not, or what particular brand they are is not a matter to speculate upon out loud.

Goddit?

Viki, hellhost

PS And eleighteen - no, you don't have to be a christian to register and post on these boards, ok?

--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”

Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
RooK

1 of 6
# 1852

 - Posted      Profile for RooK   Author's homepage   Email RooK   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[CONTINUE TANGENT]
quote:
Originally posted by Rat:
Anyone who looks at my profile will notice that I put 'none' in the 'Religion or Denomination' section. I put this because I was not brought up in any religious tradition, do not currently attend any church, and, even if I did, am not sure that I would wish to define myself in this way.

Welcome to Agnostic Zen Nihilism. Here is your required copy of "The Complete Calvin & Hobbes", here's a key to the lavatory round back of Dirk Gentley's Detective Agency, and your platypus will be sent via courier swallow (African, naturally).

[/DISCONTINUE TANGENT]

Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
FCB

Hillbilly Thomist
# 1495

 - Posted      Profile for FCB   Author's homepage   Email FCB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If I understand Eleighteen's view correctly, no historical claims beyond the dates of events are provable, and therefore one is entitled to make any historical claim whatsoever. I think this is obviously nonsense. I also think it is pretty obvious that (at minimum) 75% of what Jack Chick says about the Roman Catholic Church is false. Yet he persists in claiming these things. To my mind, this presents three possibilities:

1) He is extremely stupid and can't tell truth from falsehood.
2) He is mentally ill and can't tell truth from falsehood.
3) He is telling lies to achieve some purpose

Of there three possibilities, I think the third is the only interesting one. So, for the sake of argument, let's say that Mr. Chick is deliberately telling falsehoods about Roman Catholics in order to achieve some goal. And let's say that goal is (as eleighteen claims) the laudable one of saving Roman Catholics from the fires of hell. Is Mr. Chick still justified in telling lies? Is saying that the Catholic Eucharist is descended from Egyptian rites justified by the desire to prevent Catholics from engaging in idolatrous worship of the Eucharist? Is it sort of like telling your son that if he masturbates he'll go blind -- i.e. you are convinced that masturbation is wrong, so you tell your child something untrue to prevent him (or her) from doing it?

My own bias is that the God of truth is never served by untruth. But I'd be interested in knowing what other folks think.

FCB

--------------------
Agent of the Inquisition since 1982.

Posts: 2928 | From: that city in "The Wire" | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
FCB

Hillbilly Thomist
# 1495

 - Posted      Profile for FCB   Author's homepage   Email FCB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry, the last post wasn't vary hellish.

How about this:

Jack Chick is an asshole who likes the idea that most of the world will spend eternity in a lake of fire.

FCB

--------------------
Agent of the Inquisition since 1982.

Posts: 2928 | From: that city in "The Wire" | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
. If someone accuses my father of being a paedophile, I will be riled because I know the accusations to be false and malicious, not because "I must have something to hide."
An unfortunate analogy for a Catholic to draw, in more ways than one. (Actually, Priestly sexual hypocrisy is one thing Chick hasn't attacked Rome on, probably because he is a fair man and realises it is a problem across all denominations.)

In today's ridiculously child-centred world, mere accusations of paedophilia can bring forth terrible consequences for the accused: loss of job, threats of physical violence, even long terms in prison remand (remember the - completely innocent - Newcastle nursery nurses a few years back?)

The worst a Chick tract can do is make a Roman Catholic examine his faith, and as they are apparently such rubbish this can only be strengthened by such an encounter. (Although a reading of a Catholic apologetics website attacking Chick tracts, actually hardened my previously neutral views of the RCC.)

Chick doesn't call for violence against Catholics, or for them to lose their jobs, or freedom of worship. He just thinks they are misguided. It's not as if the Roman church doesn't try to recruit prots, or describe itself as the only true path to salvation.

You know, I really don't get why you people have it in for Jack? As if a small independent publishing house from southern California can take on the might of the Vatican and a church which has one sixth of the globe as adherents? Talk about David and Goliath! The more Papists splutter and rage, the more I suspect that amongst the outlandish claims Jack is onto something big.

quote:
I'm not wasting any more time on this thread.
Goodbye. Try not to choke on your death cookies. I wouldn't want you to play a premature visit to the lake of fire. HAWHAWHAW!

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Anyone who has followed Chick's work over time will note that anti-Catholicism has been a growing theme. In fact, several older tracts have apparently been revised to give them an anti-Catholic spin.

AFAIK, Chick published little on Catholicism until meeting Alberto Rivera (a former Jesuit who had the job of infiltrating the protestant church etc. etc. etc.) in the late 1970's. The controversial nature of Rivera's revelations put Chick in a difficult position, as they could potentially alientate him from the Christian mainstream (Chick tracts and books were very popular in Christian bookstores). As it happens Chick lost two thirds of his business after publishing Alberto, and I dare say some of those who post on Ship-of-Fools may be handing Chicklets out today if he hadn't.

The fact he went through with it, after much prayer, points to the sincerity of the man. If he didn't believe Rivera, why would he put his effective ministry in such danger. The continous success of Chick publishing despite being shunned by the many Christians can only confirm JTC's sense of being right - I guess this is why he re-writes old tracts to get a few digs in at the RCC.

quote:
And it's not that he believes that some or many or even most will be damned -- he treats the commitment to Christ purely in terms of whether someone has technically heard the words and said the prayer. "But Bob, you were told on June 25, 1974 that Jesus was the only way to salvation, and you laughed!" Chick treats God as legalistic and unloving -- one can believe that many are damned without believing that God could care less, but the tone of the bloody tracts is always God as light-bulb-headed-judge, faceless, and exclusively concerned with "did person A say the prayer? Right, he's in Heaven, or he's in The Lake Of Fire."
Again, apart from his style of delivery, how does this differ from (say) CS Lewis, or other regular Christians. I remember from my Durham University days, DICCU running talks such as "Hell, is that fair?" (That would make a great Chick tract title now I think of it).

If University CUs are a bit strong for you, how about conversations I had with the vicar prior to my baptism in an MOR C-of-E church. "Well what about those who don't here the gospel"?
"Everyone has a chance to hear the gospel, it's just the individual has to choose Jesus, otherwise God wouldn't be loving"
"What about someone whose brought up a Muslim, or lived before Christ?"
"It's a difficult one for a Christian's conscience, but it says in the Bible the only way to God is through Jesus?"
"What about my relatives, are they heading for hell?"
"Difficult again, that is why we must pray every day for those we love to Come-to-Christ" [Projectile]

In the end I went home, read the Bible and - with the help of the Holy Spirit - made my own mind up.

Either you reject all the views described above or you are hypocritical in attacking Chick's view of God. Which is it?

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Anyone who has followed Chick's work over time will note that anti-Catholicism has been a growing theme. In fact, several older tracts have apparently been revised to give them an anti-Catholic spin.

AFAIK, Chick published little on Catholicism until meeting Alberto Rivera (a former Jesuit who had the job of infiltrating the protestant church etc. etc. etc.) in the late 1970's. The controversial nature of Rivera's revelations put Chick in a difficult position, as they could potentially alientate him from the Christian mainstream (Chick tracts and books were very popular in Christian bookstores). As it happens Chick lost two thirds of his business after publishing Alberto, and I dare say some of those who post on Ship-of-Fools may be handing Chicklets out today if he hadn't.

The fact he went through with it, after much prayer, points to the sincerity of the man. If he didn't believe Rivera, why would he put his effective ministry in such danger. The continous success of Chick publishing despite being shunned by the many Christians can only confirm JTC's sense of being right - I guess this is why he re-writes old tracts to get a few digs in at the RCC.

quote:
And it's not that he believes that some or many or even most will be damned -- he treats the commitment to Christ purely in terms of whether someone has technically heard the words and said the prayer. "But Bob, you were told on June 25, 1974 that Jesus was the only way to salvation, and you laughed!" Chick treats God as legalistic and unloving -- one can believe that many are damned without believing that God could care less, but the tone of the bloody tracts is always God as light-bulb-headed-judge, faceless, and exclusively concerned with "did person A say the prayer? Right, he's in Heaven, or he's in The Lake Of Fire."
Again, apart from his style of delivery, how does this differ from (say) CS Lewis, or other regular Christians. I remember from my Durham University days, DICCU running talks such as "Hell, is that fair?" (That would make a great Chick tract title now I think of it).

If University CUs are a bit strong for you, how about conversations I had with the vicar prior to my baptism in an MOR C-of-E church. "Well what about those who don't here the gospel"?
"Everyone has a chance to hear the gospel, it's just the individual has to choose Jesus, otherwise God wouldn't be loving"
"What about someone whose brought up a Muslim, or lived before Christ?"
"It's a difficult one for a Christian's conscience, but it says in the Bible the only way to God is through Jesus?"
"What about my relatives, are they heading for hell?"
"Difficult again, that is why we must pray every day for those we love to Come-to-Christ" [Projectile]

In the end I went home, read the Bible and - with the help of the Holy Spirit - made my own mind up.

Either you reject all the views described above or you are hypocritical in attacking Chick's view of God. Which is it?

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rev per Minute
Shipmate
# 69

 - Posted      Profile for Rev per Minute   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
An unfortunate analogy for a Catholic to draw, in more ways than one. (Actually, Priestly sexual hypocrisy is one thing Chick hasn't attacked Rome on, probably because he is a fair man and realises it is a problem across all denominations.)

As comments go, that is as below the belt as they come. The vast majority of sexual abuse occurs within the family, so by definition unmarried priests are rather less likely to commit such abuse. Or are you positing the theory that celibate=homosexual=paedophile - in which case, I suggest you go and get the traditional asbestos underwear pretty quickly.

quote:
The worst a Chick tract can do is make a Roman Catholic examine his faith, and as they are apparently such rubbish this can only be strengthened by such an encounter. (Although a reading of a Catholic apologetics website attacking Chick tracts, actually hardened my previously neutral views of the RCC.)
Really? Anything that encourages people to believe that fellow-Christians are damned, rather than treat them as travellers on the same journey to God, has a pretty bad effect. And as you are apparently in Liverpool, look to your Irish and Scottish neighbours to see what can happen by encouraging one group of Christians to believe that another is damned - or is the history of Ireland, transported to Glasgow and Liverpool, not one that you consider authentic?

quote:
You know, I really don't get why you people have it in for Jack? As if a small independent publishing house from southern California can take on the might of the Vatican and a church which has one sixth of the globe as adherents? Talk about David and Goliath! The more Papists splutter and rage, the more I suspect that amongst the outlandish claims Jack is onto something big.
So I presume you have no trouble believing that the US government is in regular contact with aliens, that the moon landings were faked, and that the Royal Family (as evidenced earlier on this thread) are in fact giant lizards? The fact that someone denies allegations, no matter how outrageous, must mean that there is something in them? Give me strength...

--------------------
"Allons-y!" "Geronimo!" "Oh, for God's sake!" The Day of the Doctor

At the end of the day, we face our Maker alongside Jesus. RIP ken

Posts: 2696 | From: my desk (if I can find the keyboard under this mess) | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
An unfortunate analogy for a Catholic to draw, in more ways than one. (Actually, Priestly sexual hypocrisy is one thing Chick hasn't attacked Rome on, probably because he is a fair man and realises it is a problem across all denominations.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As comments go, that is as below the belt as they come. The vast majority of sexual abuse occurs within the family, so by definition unmarried priests are rather less likely to commit such abuse. Or are you positing the theory that celibate=homosexual=paedophile

You directly quote me yet still mis-read my post. After a vaguely topical and feeble bit of wit, I was pointing out that the "anti-Catholic bigot" Chick avoids taking cheap shots at the RCC by avoiding references to allegations of priestly child-abuse and bastard legacies.

I then qualify this by saying this is not an problem exclusive to the RCC (or the Church in general). My wife has told me some stories about evangelical youth group leaders(again, not meaning to taint that group)... Still, Rome's response to recent paedophile allegations leaves something to be desired - I think even JesuitLad would agree on that one.

quote:
Really? Anything that encourages people to believe that fellow-Christians are damned, rather than treat them as travellers on the same journey to God, has a pretty bad effect.
I know it's heavily qualified, but to this heretic it appears the RCC cathechism do something similar? And (with huge apologies if I've got this completely wrong) doesn't one of the articles of the CofE state that the Pope is the AntiChrist?

quote:
And as you are apparently in Liverpool, look to your Irish and Scottish neighbours to see what can happen by encouraging one group of Christians to believe that another is damned
The slightest knowledge of British history will tell you this is slightly more than differences in doctrine between denominations. (I am currently reading through the second book in Simon Schama's excellent "History of Britain", maybe you could do the same)

quote:
So I presume you have no trouble believing that the US government is in regular contact with aliens, that the moon landings were faked, and that the Royal Family (as evidenced earlier on this thread) are in fact giant lizards? The fact that someone denies allegations, no matter how outrageous, must mean that there is something in them?
No, but if (otherwise apparently sane) royals and monarchists devoted huge amounts of time and resources denouncing the man who made the lizard allegations.... and had to proof every last allegation made was wrong.. ..made frequent ad hominen attacks.. ..and tried to prevent him having a voice, and even attempted assisination.. ...then.. ..I would look at the nutty man who cried lizard and think.. .."well there might be something there"

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rev per Minute
Shipmate
# 69

 - Posted      Profile for Rev per Minute   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
quote:
And as you are apparently in Liverpool, look to your Irish and Scottish neighbours to see what can happen by encouraging one group of Christians to believe that another is damned
The slightest knowledge of British history will tell you this is slightly more than differences in doctrine between denominations. (I am currently reading through the second book in Simon Schama's excellent "History of Britain", maybe you could do the same)
Known in this part of the British Isles as 'History of England', given that it has a pretty poor grasp of events or issues that impacted on the other nations of the UK. I watched the entire series, sunshine. As ever, please don't presume that a shipmate is not, in fact, fully versed in whatever it is you are trying to 'teach' them. And don't tell a Welshman of Irish heritage that he has misunderstood the past five hundred years or the importance of religion to the tragedy of Irish history. [Mad]

[Must be annoyed, started a sentence with 'and']

--------------------
"Allons-y!" "Geronimo!" "Oh, for God's sake!" The Day of the Doctor

At the end of the day, we face our Maker alongside Jesus. RIP ken

Posts: 2696 | From: my desk (if I can find the keyboard under this mess) | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Irish heritage? Good grief! I thought only Americans came out with such guff. As for religion, that was often an excuse for the politics, and JC sure as heck should be kept out of that...

OK. I'm a bit bored with defending Jack Chick's outlandish claims about the papacy. I'm away for the weekend. If anyone is still reading this thread, please could you address my assertion that the basic teachings of Chick differ little from CS Lewis (satanic influenced ecumism apart) or the Alpha course; they're merely presented in a more forthright style.

Please convice me you are not hypocrites by explaining the difference between your views on the sinner choosing/rejecting Jesus and going to heaven/hell, and Jack Chick's.

And please acknowledge that presenting the gospel in these little, high-quality, cartoons is (regardless of their content) ruddy brilliant.

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
tomb
Shipmate
# 174

 - Posted      Profile for tomb   Author's homepage   Email tomb   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It is bad manners, Eleighteen, to insult large groups of people on the Ship (including "Americans who come up with such guff") then announce that you will be "away for the weekend."

Might I suggest that you exert yourself to repair your reputation on the Ship? else you might find yourself pretty much a pariah by the time you return from your weekend away....

tomb
hellhost

Posts: 5039 | From: Denver, Colorado | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lou Poulain
Shipmate
# 1587

 - Posted      Profile for Lou Poulain   Email Lou Poulain   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
And please acknowledge that presenting the gospel in these little, high-quality, cartoons is (regardless of their content) ruddy brilliant.

Sorry elieghteen, but I see little Good News in those trashy throw away tracts. If that were the sum and substance of the Gospel of Jesus, I would be running hard the other direction! We have other examples of rigid narrow thinking to contend with here in America as well.

[tangential rant]
There's an asshole preacher from Topeka Kansas named Phelps who is flying out to California with some of his toadies this weekend with the avowed intention of "disrupting" the funeral of a transgendered youth who was beaten and strangled by three young men a week ago. His proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus, emblazened on their picket signs, reads "God Hates Fags." At the funeral of Matthew Shephard, they toted signs that read "Matthew is in Hell." They have invaded numerous funerals in San Francisco, of AIDS victims with their "preaching" of God's eternally punitive disfavor towards gays. Their little dog and pony show will be back in the bay area to "disrupt" two high school theatre productions of "The Laramie Project" in November. What a powerful powerful anti-evangelistic force they have made themselves!

[rant ended]

... and so has Jack Chick, spouting his offensive conspiratorial nonsensical crap.

Yeah, sure, he's winning lots of souls for Christ (not)!

Lou

Posts: 526 | From: Sunnyvale CA USA | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
Again, apart from his style of delivery, how does this differ from (say) CS Lewis, or other regular Christians

Because Lewis (who I make no secret of being my main teacher, via his books) doesn't subscribe to ... well, most of Chick's stuff. He even suggests that while all who saved are saved via Christ, it does not therefore follow that only those who have heard of Him are saved by Him. (Chick lists Lewis (along with Tolkien) as an "occultist" in one tract, which is amusingly bizarre, by the way.)

Once again, it's not really just "Chick picks on Roman Catholics" -- he says a lot of fairly outlandish things about a lot of people.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Amanuensis

Idler
# 1555

 - Posted      Profile for Amanuensis     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
No, but if (otherwise apparently sane) royals and monarchists devoted huge amounts of time and resources denouncing the man who made the lizard allegations.... and had to proof every last allegation made was wrong.. ..made frequent ad hominen attacks.. ..and tried to prevent him having a voice, and even attempted assisination.. ...then.. ..I would look at the nutty man who cried lizard and think.. .."well there might be something there"

Has the Pope tried to assassinate Chick?
or does that read "assinisation"? (a little known alternative to canonization).

--------------------
What's new?

Posts: 547 | From: Cornwall | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by eleighteen:
If anyone is still reading this thread, please could you address my assertion that the basic teachings of Chick differ little from CS Lewis (satanic influenced ecumism apart) or the Alpha course; they're merely presented in a more forthright style.

Along with my post above, Lewis also did not teach that one should be, once one accepts Christ, absolutely certain of going to Heaven. He even believed in (or was open to) a kind of Purgatory -- a sort of in-between period, not of paying for one's sins, but of being cleansed of them and their effects, rather like having one's mouth rinsed out after going to the dentist (when the tooth of this life has been pulled, as it were). He gave examples both in fiction (in one of the Narnia books) and in his theology works of people who might be led by Christ to come as close to Him as their culture allowed them to understand, and to be saved in the end by Him -- certainly not something Chick would approve of.

quote:
Please convice me you are not hypocrites by explaining the difference between your views on the sinner choosing/rejecting Jesus and going to heaven/hell, and Jack Chick's.

Chick depicts God more as a legalistic judge -- for example, in this one, "Hi There!" and also in this one, "This Was Your Life!" -- than as loving. Mind you -- I do believe in Hell -- even that in the end, many more will be there than redeemed. I don't think Chick is more forthright about it at all; I think he depicts God in a way which leaves out His love. The whole approach makes Heaven out to be more or less a kind of bureacracy ("NEXT!" cries the voice from off-camera; Lewis depicted Hell as a bureaucracy (in the Screwtape Letters), interestingly enough). In the world of the Chick tract, God seems mainly concerned with results -- will the person say the magic words and push the "faith" button, or not? rather than with developing a real relationship with us.

One view of Lewis' which makes sense to me, though it is not an absolute tenet of mine, is that the fires of Hell are the same thing as the firey love of God -- but those in Hell are shut against His love rather than open to it, so it burns, and burns them eternally, because now that all illusions and false appearances are off, they cannot stop perceiving Him, they cannot escape it, yet they don't want His love, or to trust Him, or to have faith, living in a state of permanent, painful rejection of Him. This is the best theory I have yet heard of how it works. And I have since heard that it is the standard doctrine on the matter in Eastern Orthodoxy, which lends quite a lot of credence to it for me; it also explains how God can be loving and also allow people to be in Hell, because the door to Hell is locked on the inside, by the damned themselves -- it is not a matter of them, after death, begging God to forgive them and Him refusing, saying, "you had your chance, off with you into perdition" -- it is that they choose, eternally, to say "no" to Him, and if once they would open the door and say yes, even if it took millions of years, He would joyfully take them into His loving care, but they do not, and, from His point of view outside Time, He knows that they (freely, always) will not.

I don't see that as the same as Chick at all.

quote:
And please acknowledge that presenting the gospel in these little, high-quality, cartoons is (regardless of their content) ruddy brilliant.
  • "presenting the gospel " -- well, see above.
  • "little" -- well, I must grant that, yes.
  • "high-quality" -- at last I can use this smiley: [Killing me] -- sorry, no. Heck, half the time he rips off other people's artwork, including, ironically, Durer and TSR's own copyrighted material.
  • "cartoons" -- I like comics. A lot. Religious-themed ones, if done well, would be great. But this guy isn't exactly Alan Moore, is he?
There.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Robert Armin

All licens'd fool
# 182

 - Posted      Profile for Robert Armin     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm with CM on this. The important thing here is not where Chick agrees or disagrees with Lewis, or any one else you chose to pick. Since they are workin within a Christian context there are bound to be similarities at times (carefully phrased to avoid saying that antone is, or is not, a Christain). What matters here is the tone, IMHO. You can believe in Hell , and weep for those going there, you can believe in Hell and gloat because those who disagree with you will suffer for eternity. Chick seems to fall into the latter category. He is not the only one - many Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox down through the centuries have done the same - but I find it unedifying wherever it occurs.

And since I'm typing, I found this arguemnt extraordinary:
quote:
if (otherwise apparently sane) royals and monarchists devoted huge amounts of time and resources denouncing the man who made the lizard allegations.... and had to proof every last allegation made was wrong.. ..made frequent ad hominen attacks.. ..and tried to prevent him having a voice, and even attempted assisination.. ...then.. ..I would look at the nutty man who cried lizard and think.. .."well there might be something there"
Most RCs would not know that Chick existed. I hadn't seen one of his tracts since the mid 70s, and had assumed they had died out years ago until meeting them again on the Ship. I don't think that the huge apperatus of the Magesterium wastes much time worrying about Chick, and that would be because his claims are so absurd. (Most of those posting on this thread are not RCs, just Christians concerned when other Christians are defamed.) But I would like to know more about the assasination attempt - this sounds fascinating.

--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin

Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Moschops
Ship's dinosaur
# 3034

 - Posted      Profile for Moschops   Email Moschops   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:

Orignally posted by Eleighteen
Please convice me you are not hypocrites by explaining the difference between your views on the sinner choosing/rejecting Jesus and going to heaven/hell, and Jack Chick's.

Choose Jesus? Fine, got no problem with that. Unfortunately Jack Chick's take on this seems to be "choose Jesus (or you'll burn in hell, forever, heretic!)". There doesn't seem to be anything there about counting the cost, and I can find precious little about God's love for us, except as a kind of emotional blackmail ("God loved you so much that he sent his Son to die for you so that you don't have to go to hell!" - there's nothing wrong per se with this sentiment, but the view that Jesus died solely to stop us going to hell seems to me to be a recurring theme in Chick tracts, and also seems to be a massive understatement of the purpose of the Incarnation and Crucifixion).

There's rarely anything there about a relationship; you pray the prayer, you press the magic button, hey presto, you're saved and that's it. If you haven't prayed the prayer, whoops, sorry, you're damned. Won't you feel bad because you've rejected God's Son? (Well of course you'll feel bad, after all, you'll be swimming in sulphur at this point).

Note that the emphasis in the tracts always seems to be on hell, on the threat of judgement, never on the positive love of God. We're not told what we will get if we do accept Christ; just how we'll be punished if we don't.

How do my views on salvation differ from Chick's is, I believe, the question I'm supposed to be answering. The major disagreement is with his emphasis. The story as told by a Chick tract seems to be get born, get saved, die, go to heaven. Or get born, don't get saved, die, go to hell. As far as Chick is concerned, the wonder and mystery of the Incarnation are somebody else's problem; the indications of the love God has for us inherent in the sacrifice made by Jesus are irrelevant, because all that matters is that you accept it so that you don't go to hell. Life is just there as a sort of prelude; how you live doesn't matter, as long as you've accepted Christ.




{chose to fix your UBB code}

[ 26. October 2002, 19:41: Message edited by: tomb ]

--------------------
"A salesperson's first job is to make you miserable, because happy people don't want anything." - Scott Adams.

Posts: 559 | From: The Permian Period | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
eleighteen
Shipmate
# 2736

 - Posted      Profile for eleighteen         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thankyou all for your replies.

LouPoulain It is very unfair to compare Jack Chick to "GodHateFags". Chick sees homosexuals as dead in their sins, in need of help from their self-destructive ways. There is no hate for them and, AFAIK gays in the tracts all find Jesus and not one has the pleasure of a pitchfork up his jacksie in the LOF (Matt 25.41). And Chick tract's might not offer the sum of the gospel, but the tiniest amount of it would be welcome to the vast secular majority in the UK (at least until some non churchgoers attend an Alpha course [Wink] )

ChastMastr If Lewis says that not only those that have heard of Christ are saved by him I apologise. That is not the impression I got reading "Mere Christianity" (I must admit the blasted book did bounce off the wall several times during reading but perhaps that says more about me). Maybe he used the oft-repeated "any exposure to the gospel at all is knowing of then rejecting Christ argument". A universalist he was not however.

Chick's depiction of heaven/hell versus Lewis' probably reflects the fact the former has to get his message over in a short cartoon, aimed at a less educated audience; rather than write hundreds of pages of turgid prose. Unless one takes a universalist view of salvation, there will come a point where one will face the consequences of your lack of repentence. And if you read scripture, God will be judging all those personally. The faceless Christ is a wonderfully powerful piece of artistic expression, I'm sure you will all agree.

Lewis' belief in the deeply Biblical doctrine of purgatory stretches his credibility in my eyes; though maybe only to be expected from a writer of inferior children's fantasy and closet Roman Catholic.

As for your other points. Fred Carter is one of the best comic artists out there, anywhere. As for Chick's own art, at his cartoony best (e.g. "The Death Cookie" ) it has an amusing style that, reminds me a bit of Chris and Simon Donald at Viz. Who are Durer and TSR? Can you tell me of any other decent religious comics? (All the non-Chick ones I have seen were dire.)

TheWanderer Nowhere in Chick's publications does he gloat at people going to hell (if he wished to gloat he wouldn't publish his tracts would he?). I don't think any Christian would, and I would appreciate a retraction of this comment.

Showing the consequences of a failure to repent, knowing some people may take offence, seems more loving than simply not making the effort. Perhaps this is what you would rather he do?

--------------------
The disbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife (I Cor 7.14)........(thinks)..... woo-hooo!

Posts: 52 | From: overboard | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Are you trolling by any chance, Eleighteen?

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Robert Armin

All licens'd fool
# 182

 - Posted      Profile for Robert Armin     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh dear. In my last post I tried so hard to be kind and tactful to everyone, so that I couldn't give offence to anyone, and it seems I failed:
quote:
TheWanderer Nowhere in Chick's publications does he gloat at people going to hell (if he wished to gloat he wouldn't publish his tracts would he?). I don't think any Christian would, and I would appreciate a retraction of this comment.
Well, I've tried politeness, so let me use a more hellish tone:

Jack Chick's tract are arrogant, selfrighteous, badly designed and executed, complete and utter shite! And they display a hatred of the vast majority of the world's Christians, which is deeply repulsive.

Sorry, need some practise to be more cutting - Rook or Tomb, if you could give me some pointers, I would appreciate it. And I still want to know about the assasination attempt . . .

--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin

Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
FatMac

Ship's Macintosh
# 2914

 - Posted      Profile for FatMac   Author's homepage   Email FatMac   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Gosh, the last Chick thread I started got turfed off to Dead Horses quick smart. Let me throw in my two cents worth. (And in case I need to show my bona-fides, I have been collecting Chick comics since I was 12 and agreed with them, right till the present [39 if you must know], when I disagree with them violently but still find them addictively disturbing).

Re: quality. Chick comics are what they are. Their particular quality is part of the package - small format, line drawn (mostly), quirkish. To claim that they are poor quality is incorrect and missing the point. To claim they are great art is grounds for insanity.

Re: gloating. Of course it's true that we never see the faceless God laughing at those who he sends to the LOF - even JTC wouldn't be that crass. But there is clearly an element of smugness which comes out either in the angel's reply to the poor sucker who says "Are we on our way to see Mary now?", or in the poor sucker's gulp and "I think I'm in trouble now", or in the devil prodding the poor sucker with a pitchfork and saying "You blew it".

ISTM that the issue with Chicklets is not whether his theology is unique (clearly it isn't), but whether the extremely abbreviated form in which it is displayed, along with the pointedness of his targets (lets face it, gays, Catholics and witches get a lot more stick from JTC than corporate bigwigs, selfish schoolmoms, gouging small businessmen etc etc) makes it so much of a charicature that it does more harm than good.

Further, re:the specifically Catholic comics, the use of dodgy facts and unprovable, laughable allegations simply portrays Christians as being thick, intellectually dishonest bigots.

My two cents worth.

--------------------
Do not beware the slippery slope - it is where faith resides.
Do not avoid the grey areas - they are where God works.

Posts: 1706 | From: Sydney | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
JimT

Ship'th Mythtic
# 142

 - Posted      Profile for JimT     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The worst Christian publications show at least some lip service to reason and scholarship. Very few descend to the most primitive and base forms of propaganda put out by totalitarian regimes. Here, the only purpose is to take control of the mind of the reader by appeals to the basest human emotions. These despicable propagandists justify their techniques on the basis that they are the most efficient means of eliciting the desired behavior from the target audience. Truth is not the point, but control.

“One day, Bob Hammond, missionary broadcaster of The Voice of China and Asia, told Jack that multitudes of Chinese people had been won to Communism through mass distribution of cartoon booklets. Jack felt that God was leading him to use the same technique to win multitudes to the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Indeed. By his own admission, Jack Chick does not emulate Christian writers like C.S. Lewis. He emulates Chinese Communist propaganda from World War II and he does it admirably well. I am a humanist and no particular knee-jerk defender of Christianity. I looked at several of Chick’s cartoons and am comfortable in pronouncing them swill.

Posts: 2619 | From: Now On | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools