Jack Chick

[Tonks]

Oh, most of the things that Chick brings up do have some basis in history: ie. the Crusades did happen. That's pretty much where the facts end. Personally I think that he's morally degenerate and a rotten theologian.

And I'll happily take a warning for calling Chick a living idiot.

 

[edie19]

Temporarily closed for staff review

edie (edb19)

October 10, 2006

We're reopening this thread - but want all participants to be aware that there have been some flames throughout this thread and we're asking you to please show grace when you post.

Colossians 4:6: Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.

If we see additional violations we will close the thread permanently before it becomes a stumbling block.

Romans 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

edie

 

[JacobHall86]

Allright, its back open. I still have yet to see where someone has shown that Jack Chick is telling the truth in his tracts.

 

[arunma]

Allright, its back open. I still have yet to see where someone has shown that Jack Chick is telling the truth in his tracts.

Well, he does say that salvation is only through Jesus Christ, apart from false religions. That's an unpopular (but Biblical) belief even among most Christians these days.

Aside from that, I can't really think of much truth that you could find in Chick tracts.

 

[SumTinWong]

If you want to say something positive about him, he is really a very good cartoonist. The quality of the comic books he has drawn are up there with some of the best.

 

[JacobHall86]

Well, he does say that salvation is only through Jesus Christ, apart from false religions. That's an unpopular (but Biblical) belief even among most Christians these days.

Aside from that, I can't really think of much truth that you could find in Chick tracts.

True, but if everything else is lies, why can the people trust that one part? If he lies about small stuff, why wont he lie about other things?

 

[japhy]

uh, some blasphemous things I saw in the thread....

"so does Mary's obedience correspond to Jesus disobedience."
"The other part of her role is that of intercessor--just as in the Davidic kingdom the mother of the king interceded for people. "

From that 25 year old catholic guy, forgot his name...

It was QuantaCura. It was a typo on his part. Please re-read the sentences around it to get the context, and you'll see that he said "Jesus" where he meant "Eve":

As for Mary, we acknowledge the role of her faith and obedience in bring the Savior into the world. Just as in Adam all men die and in Christ all men live, so does Mary's obedience correspond to Jesus disobedience.

He meant "Eve", not "Jesus". Chill, please.

 

[Abbadon]

True, but if everything else is lies, why can the people trust that one part? If he lies about small stuff, why wont he lie about other things?

In all likelyhood, he believe what he is selling, so it's not necessarily a lie. But when we're saying "dang, the only thing this fellow gets right is the 'Jesus is Lord' bit," it doesn't look good for educated non-Christians who's main experiances with Christianity are going to be with Chick's work or people that cite it. "If this fellow is a Christian, and Christians believe this incorrect stuff as well as 'Jesus is Lord,' Christianity must not be terribly smart."

If you want to say something positive about him, he is really a very good cartoonist. The quality of the comic books he has drawn are up there with some of the best.

I'll take Alex Ross over Chick anyday.

 

[MikeK]

I'll take Alex Ross over Chick anyday.

I read that as "Axl Rose" at first.

Rock.

 

[MC1171611]

Ok, so what did Chick say that's so wrong? You list his statements but not his sources, nor do you present any evidence to prove him wrong. Do I think that the Vatican has a mainframe with my name in it? I don't think so, but I don't know that they don't as a fact.

What I DO know as a fact is that the Catholic church commited innumerable atrocities, one of shich is called the "Inquisition." Another is the attempted invasion of England with the FULL SUPPORT of Pope what's-his-face the six-hundredth-sixty-sixth. He "excommunicated" Queen Elizabeth, and the "Invincible Armada" was chock full of every imaginable sort of torture instrument for the Inquisition of England. Pray tell, where in the Bible do you find an "Inquisition"? MY Bible tells me to reject a heretic, NOT BURN HIM!

I fear that you people, under the guise of "eccumenicalism," have allowed yourselves to become wishy-washy in your beliefs. I can understand Episcopalians, Lutherans, Presbyterians, and all those to allow and leave room for Catholic teachings, but you claim to be BAPTISTS. Do you even believe the BIBLE?? That is the foundation of SALVATION and TRUE Christianity. If your beliefs don't line up with the Bible, then you are WRONG. (by the way, that's not an opinion)

I cannot find "good" idolatry, calling someone a "father," forbidding to marry, commanding to abstain from meats, pediatry, nuns, friars, cardinals or popes in the Bible as anything good. Sure, I can find you Scriptures on those, as well as "The Queen of Heaven," but those things are NEVER mentioned in a good light. I am part of the Bride of Christ, and Israel is (spiritually) God's estranged wife; Nuns don't "marry God." Peter died in Jerusalem, and was married, so he certainly wasn't the first pope. Praying to any image is SIN. God says that forbidding to marry (priests) and commanding to abstain from meats (Lent) are DOCTRINES OF DEVILS. (take a hint)

Do you know what Jesus said to do to a child molester? You're not going to like this....

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
(Matthew 18:6)

Oh, by the way, I have broken no rules, so you're going to have to do some real stretching to get me in trouble for this one. I stated FACTS and Scripture. Like Karl Marx said, "Facts are stubborn things."

 

[JacobHall86]

Man, you really dont know what hte RCC teaches, dont get all your history from Jack Chick.

 

[ttreg]

Sadly I useto believe whatever I read from Jack Chick those were also the days I didnt read my Bible.

 

[MC1171611]

Yes, I'm so wrong; I'm sure both of you have read the Council of Trent and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. So sorry that I didn't ask your OPINION on the matter.

My mom grew up Catholic, my grandparents are Catholic, and almost all of my mom's family is Catholic. Don't you tell me that I don't know what that church teaches. I can assure you that you can't find about 75% of it in a King James Bible. Not like you all give a rip about the King James anyhow. So what if It's God's Word, eh? Who really cares any more?

Oh and ttreg, your signature is repulsive. You're pro "gay" rights? Where in a BIBLE do you find that? Actually, I can find a whole lot of Scripture against that. What do you have to show?

 

[JacobHall86]

oh, your one of those. "King James Only, ITS WHAT JESUS USED, IM GONNA USE IT TO." 'CATHOLICS MURDER BABIES" "THE POPE WORKS FOR THE GERMAN NATIONALIST CONSPIRACY AND IS THE harlot OF BABYLON".

Give it a rest, noone respects teh KJO, noone Respects landmarkism and noone respects the Anti-RCC stance. Your family being catholic doesnt mean you know anything about the RCC, and just because its no in the Bible doesnt mean its bad. Say indoor plumbing, or that computer thing you are on. Keep tryin to show your works, but We arent impressed.

 

[MC1171611]

oh, your one of those. "King James Only, ITS WHAT JESUS USED, IM GONNA USE IT TO." 'CATHOLICS MURDER BABIES" "THE POPE WORKS FOR THE GERMAN NATIONALIST CONSPIRACY AND IS THE harlot OF BABYLON".

Give it a rest, noone respects teh KJO, noone Respects landmarkism and noone respects the Anti-RCC stance. Your family being catholic doesnt mean you know anything about the RCC, and just because its no in the Bible doesnt mean its bad. Say indoor plumbing, or that computer thing you are on. Keep tryin to show your works, but We arent impressed.

See, if you would spell correctly, maybe people would listen to you. It's spelled "no one," not "noone." That's like a terrible misspelling of the word "noon."

Another thing, I don't give a flip about your respect. You apparently don't respect God too much, so why would I expcect you to respect me? God chose the FOOLISH things of this world to confound those that profess to be wise. I will gladly be a fool for Christ and the TRUTH.

Like I said, find me the Roman Catholic doctrines of Nicolatinism (clergy vs. laity), idolatry, NUNS (??), WORKS for Salvation, BAPTISM for Salvation, SACRAMENTS (??), POPES and the rest of their nonsense. Not only is it NOT in the Bible, I can show you where it's AGAINST the Bible. Like I said, you don't care about God's Word in the first place, so I'm basically wasting my time.

The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the defender. Jack Chick documents and footnotes all of his material. You and your gaggle of mud slinging attackers, on the other hand, have simply slandered a man without ANY PROOF. Bring some concrete EVIDENCE of Chick's falsehood to the table and THEN we'll talk. But you can huff and puff and fart wooden nickels, but it's not going to get you ANYWHERE until you start submitting to the TRUTH of God's Word. (oh, but you don't have God's Word, do ya'? too bad for you.)

 

[JacobHall86]

wow, is it easy to walk around with your head stuck in your backside?

And I can garuntee I read More of Gods word than you, since I attempt to read the actual languages, not some translation from the 1600's. When you go live in the real world and see how ineffective and anti-truth Jack Chick truely is you will understand what it means to preach the Gospel, not this Chick nonsense.

You can footnote whatever you want. doesnt mean its true.

 

[MC1171611]

wow, is it easy to walk around with your head stuck in your backside?

And I can garuntee I read More of Gods word than you, since I attempt to read the actual languages, not some translation from the 1600's. When you go live in the real world and see how ineffective and anti-truth Jack Chick truely is you will understand what it means to preach the Gospel, not this Chick nonsense.

You can footnote whatever you want. doesnt mean its true.

Wow, where did you get your journalism degree from? If the Catholic Church WROTE a book that says that I'm going to Hell because I don't eat Jesus every week, and I say that the RCC says that I'm going to Hell, and I give you the page number that says that, is that the truth? It's footnoted, but that doesn't seem to bother you. You'll just go on living in your fairy tale world.

Basically, by saying that you read "the actual languages," you're saying that your opinion of what God MEANT to say is the highest authority in the world. You bow to no "translation from the 1600s," so you have set yourself up as the authority as to what God MEANT to say. Well, isn't that basically what you're saying?

The problem that you have is that you dont believe that God preserved His actual Word. You have scattered manuscripts or some dude's OPINION of what the "Originals" said. See, I have God's Word, 100% perfect, inerrant, given by Inspiration of God. I believe that just as much as I believe that I have two hands. Your "actual languages" stuff doesn't impress me one iota, namely because God's Word isn't in the dumb "actual languages." If you can read simple 6th grade ENGLISH, then you can read God's Word. But no, you people like to make it hard, so you'll say that the "Scriptures" are only in the "actual languages" so now we have to bow to your "private interpretation" of the Scriptures. See that? If you're the guy everyone comes to, then you're the authority. You or whoever claims that God's Word can only be found in the "actual languages." Give me a break.

If you want to read some antiquated, scattered, doubtful manuscript in a defunct language, then that's fine by me. Just don't act all pious because you "read more of God's word" than I do. If I was to pin you down on it, you don't even believe that you have all of God's Word.

 

[JacobHall86]

Wow, where did you get your journalism degree from? If the Catholic Church WROTE a book that says that I'm going to Hell because I don't eat Jesus every week, and I say that the RCC says that I'm going to Hell, and I give you the page number that says that, is that the truth? It's footnoted, but that doesn't seem to bother you. You'll just go on living in your fairy tale world.

Basically, by saying that you read "the actual languages," you're saying that your opinion of what God MEANT to say is the highest authority in the world. You bow to no "translation from the 1600s," so you have set yourself up as the authority as to what God MEANT to say. Well, isn't that basically what you're saying?

The problem that you have is that you dont believe that God preserved His actual Word. You have scattered manuscripts or some dude's OPINION of what the "Originals" said. See, I have God's Word, 100% perfect, inerrant, given by Inspiration of God. I believe that just as much as I believe that I have two hands. Your "actual languages" stuff doesn't impress me one iota, namely because God's Word isn't in the dumb "actual languages." If you can read simple 6th grade ENGLISH, then you can read God's Word. But no, you people like to make it hard, so you'll say that the "Scriptures" are only in the "actual languages" so now we have to bow to your "private interpretation" of the Scriptures. See that? If you're the guy everyone comes to, then you're the authority. You or whoever claims that God's Word can only be found in the "actual languages." Give me a break.

If you want to read some antiquated, scattered, doubtful manuscript in a defunct language, then that's fine by me. Just don't act all pious becaues you "read more of God's word" than I do. If I was to pin you down on it, you don't even believe that you have all of God's Word.

Dumbest thing I have ever read.

You dont need some dumb original manuscripts because you have the KJV?

Wow, you KJO kids are a bunch of stinkin prodigies, better watch out world, KJO is gonna make us "educated people" look dumb cuz they can read at a 6th grade level.

 

[MC1171611]

Dumbest thing I have ever read.

You dont need some dumb original manuscripts because you have the KJV?

Wow, you KJO kids are a bunch of stinkin prodigies, better watch out world, KJO is gonna make us "educated people" look dumb cuz they can read at a 6th grade level.

See that? He didn't respond to my questions, accusations or queries: he simply attacked me and people who KNOW what they believe. Par for the "Scholarship Only" course.

Either you have God's Word or you don't. The only "version" of the Bible that has NEVER been proven false by science, history, geography or archeology is the King James Bible. Either you BELIEVE It or you don't. You appear to NOT believe It, so you do not have God's Word. If you want a copy of God's Word, they are readily available. Actually, It's the ONLY Bible that is Public Domain. All the other ones have copyrights on them, so you have to PAY to use them. Sounds fishy to me...

I pointed out the fact that the KJB is simple to read because you people always love to make it hard. God uses the SIMPLE things of the world to confound the WISE. Don't act like you're all smart and I'm dumb because I don't waste my time with some rotting manuscript to get "deeper meaning." Get a life (and a spell checker).

 

[JacobHall86]

Dude you just told someone to get a life over the internet. Irony? and you didnt make any accusations, just comments about how you dont need manuscripts because a pedophile had a Bible named after him in the 1600's.