This is a Chick tract, as you probably know, written by ultra-conservative Jack Chick. I am a student of theology at Nazarene Theological Seminary, Kansas City and I'd like to make it known that he is NOT typical of mainline Christianity...and he gets under the skin of anyone with more liberal tendencies.
I'm posting this (despite a statement that I will not get addicted to ILX made in the presence of one Melissa W.) because I want to distance myself from Jack Chick and his ilk. But on the other hand, some of his tracts do have a grain of gold buried under all the manure, and I don't want him to scare you away from Christianity. Please let me undo the damage caused by the theological joke known as Jack Chick.
― Heather, Friday, 17 January 2003 10:32 (twenty-three years ago)
― Pete (Pete), Friday, 17 January 2003 10:36 (twenty-three years ago)
― N. (nickdastoor), Friday, 17 January 2003 10:39 (twenty-three years ago)
― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Friday, 17 January 2003 11:05 (twenty-three years ago)
― Archel (Archel), Friday, 17 January 2003 11:07 (twenty-three years ago)
― dave q, Friday, 17 January 2003 11:11 (twenty-three years ago)
― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 17 January 2003 11:21 (twenty-three years ago)
― webber (webber), Friday, 17 January 2003 12:19 (twenty-three years ago)
Shocker? Rolf Harris has always been Satan in disguise. Actually, can that, no disguise, he's just SATAN.
― SittingPretty (sittingpretty), Friday, 17 January 2003 12:31 (twenty-three years ago)
I think some people "appreciate" Chick because they imagine that his fantasies are but the logical extension of certain aspects of Christian belief, and thus he becomes a convenient means of dismissing it outright. (I thank that's what may have happened on the other thread.)
I coincidentally had conversations about faith with several friends over the past week and all of them, unwittingly or not, implied that they don't believe in the reality of conversion. I guess that's one thing what paints them as athiests, and myself as an agnostic?
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 14:19 (twenty-three years ago)
"for god so loved the world (that's you) that he gave his only begotten son (jesus), that whoever believeth in him should not perish (in hell), but have everlasting life (in heaven)."
so glad those were there, otherwise i would have been really confused.
i don't think the likes of chick are a basis for dismissing christianity outright, but they certainly make it look pretty stoopid. many christians, i'm sure, look at this sorta stuff as total bullshit.
― JuliaA (j_bdules), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:10 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tom (Groke), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:14 (twenty-three years ago)
There's also your typical Chick-tract "the world's a baseball field and everybody plays for one of the two teams, so watch out for people who aren't actively preaching to you" bit (the William M. Gaines lookalike telling John not to worry), but as far as I can tell, the tract doesn't deviate greatly from Basic Christian Message #2, i.e. "You must accept Christ or you are lost." (#1 being "Love thy neighbor as thyself," which hasn't exactly been the focus of Christianity lo these past 2000 years.)
― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:17 (twenty-three years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:22 (twenty-three years ago)
The Chick cartoons that are most objectionable are those where Chick posits a bunch of behaviors (most of which would seem normaly or unobjectionable to us) and suggests what their appropriate punishments will be in Hell.
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:43 (twenty-three years ago)
I normally don't give a shit for this threads on a serious manner but being raised as a good little RC post VCII I was never taught #2 and I can't remeber if we ever got rid of Purgatory offically, we just don't mention it. Like exorcism, its all hush hush.
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:46 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:51 (twenty-three years ago)
better name for it: limbo
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:54 (twenty-three years ago)
Religious fanatics heart childish cartoons - what's that about?
― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:55 (twenty-three years ago)
― dave q, Friday, 17 January 2003 15:57 (twenty-three years ago)
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:58 (twenty-three years ago)
― Sam (chirombo), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:58 (twenty-three years ago)
A cult, not a cartoon ahem..
― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:59 (twenty-three years ago)
― Sam (chirombo), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ed (dali), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tom (Groke), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:00 (twenty-three years ago)
I do have a Nuclear Freeze comic book but it's fairly wry in tone, nothing like Jack Chick or the JBS.
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:03 (twenty-three years ago)
― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:05 (twenty-three years ago)
I think you're right in general. It might be a comic books = horrible mass-market consumerism equation or a comic books = for kids equation (is the right keener on going for the kids' demographic?)
― Tom (Groke), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:07 (twenty-three years ago)
i also like how john is giving the audience a thumbs-up when he is a confident twentysomething.
― michael wells (michael w.), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:07 (twenty-three years ago)
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:10 (twenty-three years ago)
― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:12 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:13 (twenty-three years ago)
― michael wells (michael w.), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:13 (twenty-three years ago)
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:16 (twenty-three years ago)
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:17 (twenty-three years ago)
http://www.chick.com/tractimages92391/0021/0021_05.gif
― Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:18 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ed (dali), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:20 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:20 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ed (dali), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:21 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:21 (twenty-three years ago)
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:22 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ed (dali), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:24 (twenty-three years ago)
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:29 (twenty-three years ago)
http://www.chick.com/tractimages68536/0021/0021_10.gif
― Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 19:38 (twenty-three years ago)
As for Limbo, I have no clue. Purgatory is where you burnt off your sins before entering heaven I recall but I forget where the unbaptised babies and others go offically, probably depended on the year and the order of priest/nun teaching.Its another one of those John Vs Paul FITE!and yet another horrible thread for future googlers.
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Friday, 17 January 2003 19:49 (twenty-three years ago)
http://www.chick.com/tractimages68536/0069/0069_08.gif
― Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 20:14 (twenty-three years ago)
On the other hand, this is basically the same theme as Dante's Inferno which is widely regarded as a classic of world literature.
― o. nate (onate), Friday, 17 January 2003 20:19 (twenty-three years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 17 January 2003 20:23 (twenty-three years ago)
But not necessarily a canonical Christian text....
***
"Thank God, he just made it!" (This reminds me of the lyrics to "Moonshiner": "Well it's cornbread when I'm hungry, corn likker when I'm dry / Greenbacks when I'm hard up, and religion when I die.")
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 20:50 (twenty-three years ago)
True. I think I missed the context of your original post. My point was more that even if we may not agree with Chick's theology, we can still enjoy his work. Speaking of ultra-conservative Xtian art/kitsch, has anyone else here ever seen the trilogy of rapture films: A Thief in the Night, A Distant Thunder, and Image of the Beast? They're sort of a B-horror movie depiction of conservative Xtian eschatology: the rapture, the Beast, 666, etc. They struck me as being quite creepy when I saw them as a teenager.
― o. nate (onate), Friday, 17 January 2003 21:11 (twenty-three years ago)
― g (graysonlane), Friday, 17 January 2003 21:14 (twenty-three years ago)
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 17 January 2003 22:32 (twenty-three years ago)
― Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 22:32 (twenty-three years ago)
Despite feeling this way, I feel relatively happy and get along with most people I meet. So, is my rampant cynicism and haterd of people in general a gigantic pose, a self-defense mechanism, a subtly-drawn alternate personality, or am I really pitifully lonely on the inside?
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 17 January 2003 22:40 (twenty-three years ago)
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 17 January 2003 23:04 (twenty-three years ago)
― kieran, Saturday, 18 January 2003 02:44 (twenty-three years ago)
― Curtis Stephens, Saturday, 18 January 2003 02:52 (twenty-three years ago)
never.
"i't really pulling the USA straight down the shitter"
Gaaaaaa, you've got no evidence of this. It does the opposite.
"I haven't seen a full answer to Darn1elle's question yet."
"how does mainstream Christian belief differ from the view expressed in that tract?"
It doesn't.
― A Nairn (moretap), Saturday, 18 January 2003 03:44 (twenty-three years ago)
None of the above. I think it shows that while one can despair at everybody as a collective whole -- and one easily can -- that you can approach folks as individuals and see their good qualities for what they are, and see if those qualities temper or indeed override those which you don't like in people in general. It sounds perfectly logical to me -- and what makes it not self-defense is that you make the effort to get along with others one-by-one. Like here. :-)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 18 January 2003 04:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― toraneko (toraneko), Saturday, 18 January 2003 07:49 (twenty-three years ago)
Heather: in light of this statement, what differences did you have in mind when you started the thread?
― kieran, Saturday, 18 January 2003 08:08 (twenty-three years ago)
You're welcome! :-)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 18 January 2003 15:29 (twenty-three years ago)
― Dave (Dave), Saturday, 18 January 2003 15:49 (twenty-three years ago)
When you read in the news about some things, or are removed from a person or event by other distancing effects (race, class) you recognize that people as a whole tend to spread suffering around as much as they do anything else, and this sticks in your mind. Because you are logical and 'objective' you admit that this includes the whole species and not just Christians, Muslims, Malaysians, or dog owners - even people you know.
But! Somehow you forget that one or two of your friends have fathered abortions, that you have stolen, that you once drove a Jeep Grand Cherokee, that you buy tobacco products and think that free markets are the answer - you and your fellow herd members are okay and you can get along - because otherwise you'd just shoot yourself in a spastic fit of hypocritical angst.
How hard is it for you to ditch a friend for doing something you find reprehensible in other people? I can think of a few cases where I've either accepted a person as they were or taken an extremely long time to cut myself off from people, even though I couldn't stand the thought of certain past behavior on their part.
― Tom Millar (Millar), Saturday, 18 January 2003 16:41 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tom Millar (Millar), Saturday, 18 January 2003 16:50 (twenty-three years ago)
― A Nairn (moretap), Saturday, 18 January 2003 17:25 (twenty-three years ago)