Please tell me you don't think Christians really think like this

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0009/0009_01.asp

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)

Chick's On Speed.

Pete (Pete), Friday, 17 January 2003 10:36 (twenty-three years ago)

Chick's With Dicks.

N. (nickdastoor), Friday, 17 January 2003 10:39 (twenty-three years ago)

I love Jack Chick! There was a thread about him, I think, quite a while ago.

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Friday, 17 January 2003 11:05 (twenty-three years ago)

Obviously a few Christians DO think like this. I'm perfectly aware that many don't, though. And many can draw better, I expect.

Archel (Archel), Friday, 17 January 2003 11:07 (twenty-three years ago)

'Many can draw better'? Like who? Chick is the greatest!

dave q, Friday, 17 January 2003 11:11 (twenty-three years ago)

Rolf Harris actually Satan in disguise shocker!

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 17 January 2003 11:21 (twenty-three years ago)

chick rulz

webber (webber), Friday, 17 January 2003 12:19 (twenty-three years ago)

Rolf Harris actually Satan in disguise shocker!

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)

Chick has his own little cult, but I wonder if any of them have been converted by his work. I doubt it. That said, some of this tracts are outlandishly inspired. There is something disturbing about the amount of talent and ingenuity that go into these tracts, which most people seem to appreciate as religious kitsch.

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)

i love his extra little explanations in the bit from john:

"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)

I appreciate Chick cos his stuff is very funny and it's no more morally simplistic than 95% of superhero comics anyway. I don't see it as having any relationship at all to mainstream or even non-mainstream Christianity - he strikes me as a sort of obsessive fan of Christianity, like if Christ had his 12 disclipes following him around you'd have people like Jack Chick stalking him and getting injunctions taken out.

Tom (Groke), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:14 (twenty-three years ago)

All right, I'm game: how does mainstream Christian belief differ from the view expressed in that tract? Summing up the tract's view as I see it: 1. God knows exactly how long you will live when you are born, because He is omniscient. 2. If you haven't yet converted to Christianity when you die, you can't go to Heaven. 3. If you don't go to Heaven, you go to Hell.

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)

That was entertainment! Poorly draw but highly entertaining.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:22 (twenty-three years ago)

Well that cartoon isn't one of Chick's more outlandish. I can see another Christian objecting to its coarseness, but the underlying message seems, as John points out, pretty consonant with mainstream Christianity.

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)

2. If you haven't yet converted to Christianity when you die, you can't go to Heaven. 3. If you don't go to Heaven, you go to Hell.

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)

Is Purgatory sorta the PTA-sponsored version of the afterlife? Non-alcoholic open bar?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:51 (twenty-three years ago)

purgatory = like at the airport when you've gone through passport control but not boarded yet

better name for it: limbo

mark s (mark s), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:54 (twenty-three years ago)

Many religious cults seem to have similar childish cartoons, that they distribute. My aunt's in one actually, called "The Family". They used to be called "The Children of God." I seem to recall some unpleasantness with the leader being a child molesting pervert. Anyways, my point is:

Religious fanatics heart childish cartoons - what's that about?

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:55 (twenty-three years ago)

'most of which would seem normaly or unobjectionable to us'

That's why yr all gonna burn

dave q, Friday, 17 January 2003 15:57 (twenty-three years ago)

Lots of fringe groups use cartoons. The John Birch Society was fond of them; I have a few anti-Communist comic books from the 1950s. It seems overall that the Right uses the comic medium more for propagandistic purposes than the Left (discounting the cartoons used as battlefield propaganda in all wars). I wonder if this is in fact true, and if so does it have to do with vestiges of cultural elitism on the Left?

Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:58 (twenty-three years ago)

I was always told that limbo and purgatory are 2 difft things. Purgatory is where you go if you haven't been to mass for a while and limbo is where you go if you've never been exposed to Christ? (I'm not RC so I've no idea)

Sam (chirombo), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:58 (twenty-three years ago)

"My aunt's in one actually,"

A cult, not a cartoon ahem..

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 17 January 2003 15:59 (twenty-three years ago)

It's more complicated, apparently

Sam (chirombo), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:00 (twenty-three years ago)

This one's anti pinko commie scum as well

Ed (dali), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I think lots of comics are broadly leftist but not in a propagandist sense - single-frame cartoons on the other hand have always been used a lot by the left so I'm not sure it's a cultural-elitism thing.

Tom (Groke), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I don't mean satirical cartoons--but rather the sort of earnest, nakedly propagandistic things that resemble comic books which have always been held in suspicion compared with editorial cartoons and even newspaper funnies.

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)

The moral of Ed's linked cartoon is - "convert to Christianity and you'll end up in a prison cell." Tempting...

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:05 (twenty-three years ago)

Tintin in Breaking Free!

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 like the way john asks "is EVERYONE on this highway doomed?" and goodnewsman replies with a big smile "ABSOLUTELY!". THAT'S typical of yr hardline xian.

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)

He's not giving us a thumbs-up, he's cockily tugging on his shirt.

Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:10 (twenty-three years ago)

You could see at 1 years old he was already on the path to destruction. Putting a bowl on his head like that! Little brat! His mother was right to scold him. "NO!"

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:12 (twenty-three years ago)

i don't like Mr. Chick's attitude towards Catholics and Catholicism ... i'm not at all religious, and i certainly think that the Catholic Church isn't above criticism ... but he goes way too far. it's the same sort of "whore of babylon" hateful nonsense from the likes of Bob Jones University, and quite frankly it's pretty sickening to read this sort of thing at this date and time.

Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:13 (twenty-three years ago)

amateurist - look at the picture above that one. that's a full-on thumbs-up on the turn.

michael wells (michael w.), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:13 (twenty-three years ago)

Oh, yeah! He makes you want to wave back, doesn't he?

Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:16 (twenty-three years ago)

Note the Jewish caricature in that same frame. Jack Chick, a class act.

Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:17 (twenty-three years ago)

i like this one:

http://www.chick.com/tractimages92391/0021/0021_05.gif

Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:18 (twenty-three years ago)

I wanna meet Bob.

Ed (dali), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:20 (twenty-three years ago)

Bob kinda looks like Rob Zombie

Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:20 (twenty-three years ago)

He sells drugs to the old and unattractive.

Ed (dali), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:21 (twenty-three years ago)

he's an angel

Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:21 (twenty-three years ago)

The woman to Bob's right looks like an ex-nun. More Catholic-bashing?

Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:22 (twenty-three years ago)

St P@ul would win no awards for clarity of Language. What the hell does that fragment mean.

Ed (dali), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:24 (twenty-three years ago)

Bob is the hook-up for the secretary pool.

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 17 January 2003 16:29 (twenty-three years ago)

interesting how Bob's cousin looks kinda like a very seedy Pete Townshend ...

http://www.chick.com/tractimages68536/0021/0021_10.gif

Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 19:38 (twenty-three years ago)

Note the long left arm of the law.

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)

i really don't know what to think about this one:

http://www.chick.com/tractimages68536/0069/0069_08.gif

Tad (llamasfur), Friday, 17 January 2003 20:14 (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.

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)

Leroy is a touch camp. He's also learnt his mode of speech from old Luke Cage, Power Man comics. (One of our older black American members might correct me, and tell me that black men really did talk like that in the '70s.)

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 17 January 2003 20:23 (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.

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)

But not necessarily a canonical Christian text....

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)

when can we all get beyond this mass hysteria/superstition referred to as religion?

g (graysonlane), Friday, 17 January 2003 21:14 (twenty-three years ago)

i't really pulling the USA straight down the shitter

g (graysonlane), Friday, 17 January 2003 21:14 (twenty-three years ago)

The only thing pulling the USA down the shitter is human nature. I'm really fucking tired of people picking social entities as scapegoats when the real problem is that most people (everywhere, not just in the US) are loathsome, self-absorbed assholes.

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 17 January 2003 22:32 (twenty-three years ago)

What's the background against which you've decided this?

Amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 17 January 2003 22:32 (twenty-three years ago)

Perhaps my point can only be directed at first world countries, but it's something I've seen wherever I've gone; cultural differences haven't been nearly as striking as cultural similarities and, in my observations of basic human interactions and in reading what is reported in the news filtered through the cynicism given to me by my life experiences, I've drawn the conclusion that humanity in general is selfish, short-sighted and loathsome. (One reason why I despise racism and classism so much is that it presumes that the people "like you" aren't fucking horrible, which they actually are.)

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)

(Is my inability to spell indicative of subconscious self-doubt that subtly attempts to sabotage my points, or am I just a lightweight who gets tipsy and philosophical after two beers?)

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 17 January 2003 23:04 (twenty-three years ago)

I haven't seen a full answer to Darn1elle's question yet.

kieran, Saturday, 18 January 2003 02:44 (twenty-three years ago)

Dan's OTM, but Christianity is hardly the most common scapegoat (although it is one of the most publicized.)

Curtis Stephens, Saturday, 18 January 2003 02:52 (twenty-three years ago)

"when can we all get beyond this mass hysteria/superstition referred to as religion?"

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)

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?

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)

The voice of reason. Thanks Ned!

toraneko (toraneko), Saturday, 18 January 2003 07:49 (twenty-three years ago)

"how does mainstream Christian belief differ from the view expressed in that tract?"

It doesn't.


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)

The voice of reason. Thanks Ned!

You're welcome! :-)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 18 January 2003 15:29 (twenty-three years ago)

creepy people

Dave (Dave), Saturday, 18 January 2003 15:49 (twenty-three years ago)

People behave as a herd. As such they can accomplish truly terrible or truly heroic things - but amongst themselves they will generally be regarded as good people. Occasionally one might step over the line, but there are systems for dealing with this. The long and short of it is that you like the people you know and get along with them, because it helps you survive.

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)

Another thing of note is that Jack Chick's net contribution to society, rather than being a successful Anti-agnostic Anti-Catholic Anti-everybody who's not a fundamentalist Protestant propaganda campaign, is a hilarious series of comics enjoyed and collected by people who don't know a damn thing about Jesus, all over North America (and thanks to the web, beyond). Apparently sometimes people try to spread hate and fear and FAIL. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, indeed!

Tom Millar (Millar), Saturday, 18 January 2003 16:50 (twenty-three years ago)

The Jack Chick comics are fantasy comics:
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0094/0094_01.asp
They do not have accurate theology. They just try to do 1: entertain, and 2: include part of a lesson (from a verse). It is by no means totally accurate

A Nairn (moretap), Saturday, 18 January 2003 17:25 (twenty-three years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.