The Trouble With Chick Tracts...

[Bible Highlighter]

I don't know if this represents some kind of generational divide or just the fact that I'm not an Evangelical Protestant whereas I presume a lot of people who take to his message and style probably are (or else they presumably wouldn't find it as effective or trustworthy as they apparently do/did), but I've honestly never found them worth taking seriously. The errors about forms of Christianity he did not personally belong to are perhaps understandable to a degree (after all, no one can be expected to know everything about every church on the planet), but that he presented wild speculation and conspiracy theories as fact (like in his tracts on Roman Catholicism) goes a bit beyond more generalized ignorance to a kind of weaponized, fact-resistant ignorance that it is hard to have much sympathy for, whether it is wielded toward supposedly good aims or not.

If I was in his shoes: I would have taken a different approach. Less focus on supposed history (Unless they are direct quotes from Catholics themselves) and more focus on the violations they make in God’s Word and a strong balance of how God loves and seeks one to have a proper change. The focus on the love of God in that He died for our sins in our place and the suffering He went through to set us free (if we call upon the name of the Lord Jesus - seeking forgiveness with Him).

 

[Diamond7]

If true, what Bible(s) does that leave us with?

That leaves us with Moses and the Red letters from Jesus. Which is really all we need. The rest is commentary. Or the exact word the Bible uses is "Riddles". Numbers 12:8 " I speak with him face to face, clearly and not in riddles; he sees the form of the LORD."

 

[LW97Nils]

I think they drawn many people to the LORD.