Jump to content

Jack Chick has died


Recommended Posts

To those that have had any exposure to his "Chick Tracts" Jack Chick has passed away. Has anyone ever seen or read his little comics? They were pretty interesting..... 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, boblloyd91 said:

To those that have had any exposure to his "Chick Tracts" Jack Chick has passed away. Has anyone ever seen or read his little comics? They were pretty interesting..... 

I am sorry he has passed away, his rude and hate filled tracks will make for a shocking face to face with such a loving and accepting God. I would have hoped that he would have mellowed in his advancing years. Most as they age, become more loving, more forgiving and more accepting towards those who do not think as they do. 

Link to comment

     A # of years ago I visited his headquarters [Chick Publications] here in Southern California [About 20 minutes from my home here]. Walking in you get a feeling of negativeness in the room where I entered - an empty shell feeling. One time I was there just after Jack Chicks new comic on Joseph Smith [ The Enchanter ] came out and I was reading it and he came in the front door looked at me and the comic on Joseph Smith and pointed to me and said "That was a great comic" or something to that effect, before I could respond he quickly went through a door into the back. Not many individuals saw him in his later years from my understanding. We must love and forgive his faults and shortcomings to be forgiven ourselves. 

The Atonement It Is The Central Doctrine

Washing My Garment/Robe In The Blood Of The Lamb

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

Anakin7.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, cinepro said:

For the uninitiated:

Jack Chick - The (Mormon) Visitors

dzuO1Wdl.jpg

 

 

I had had someone give me a copy of this on my mission in the early 90s.

I always thought they were more entertaining than anything else. As dumb as his LDS one was, I must say his tracts on Catholicism are a special kind of crazy....

Edited by boblloyd91
Link to comment
22 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

I am sorry he has passed away, his rude and hate filled tracks will make for a shocking face to face with such a loving and accepting God. I would have hoped that he would have mellowed in his advancing years. Most as they age, become more loving, more forgiving and more accepting towards those who do not think as they do. 

He certainly did not soften his tone at all over the years. I don't think he was full of hate, he was calling things the way he saw them.  Remember Joseph wasn't so soft on what he called "the church of the devil" either.

Here is a link to his book The Enchanter, definitely anti-Joseph Smith.

http://www.fmh-child.org/TheEnchanter/TheEnchanter_2.html

 

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, snowflake said:

He certainly did not soften his tone at all over the years. I don't think he was full of hate, he was calling things the way he saw them.  Remember Joseph wasn't so soft on what he called "the church of the devil" either.

Here is a link to his book The Enchanter, definitely anti-Joseph Smith.

http://www.fmh-child.org/TheEnchanter/TheEnchanter_2.html

 

There are "calling things as you see them" then there are bizarre conspiracy theories. Look up Alberto Rivero and other associations he has made. This guy was off his rocker....

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

So do the Westboro Baptists.  Just because someone calls things like they see them doesn't mean their message isn't hateful.  

 

Amen! Kind of reminds me of a certain presidential candidate whose stupidity people admire because he "says it like it is"

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, boblloyd91 said:

There are "calling things as you see them" then there are bizarre conspiracy theories. Look up Alberto Rivero and other associations he has made. This guy was off his rocker....

Chick provides LDS sources and other sources for his claims, Journal of Discourses, History of the Church, Michael Quinn, History of the Saints, The Holy Bible, Ezra Taft Benson.  Yes I agree, a very shocking book, but what is inaccurate about it?

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, boblloyd91 said:

Amen! Kind of reminds me of a certain presidential candidate whose stupidity people admire because he "says it like it is"

I was told at a younger age that the Tanners were liars, anti-Mormon and apostates.  Now the church releases essays saying it was all correct. 

Link to comment
Just now, snowflake said:

Chick provides LDS sources and other sources for his claims, Journal of Discourses, History of the Church, Michael Quinn, History of the Saints, The Holy Bible, Ezra Taft Benson.  Yes I agree, a very shocking book, but what is inaccurate about it?

If i said that Christians were just zealots who routinely practiced cannibalism of their god, that would be an accurate description but yet also completely inaccurate at the same time (this was literally how the Romans viewed Christians and their belief and practice concerning communion.  I'm sure the fact that the Romans weren't technically lying was a great comfort to them).

It's not that hard to say true things in a devious and untruthful way if you start out with the goal of making someone see something in the worst way possible.

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, snowflake said:

I was told at a younger age that the Tanners were liars, anti-Mormon and apostates.  Now the church releases essays saying it was all correct. 

Not true.  The Tanners did have good intentions (Sandra is still busy), and they published a lot of early LDS documents.  Unfortunately they had no training in history and did not fully understand the nature of the documents they published.  One can see that so clearly in their commentary on those early documents.  They use every logical fallacy ever applied in a slapdash and slipshod manner, making a complete hash of accurate historiography.  In doing so, they followed the lead of other anti-Mormons such as Fawn Brodie and Wesley Walters.  Of course they were anti-Mormons and apostates.  Whoever told you that was quite correct.  That does not mean that they did not do some good:  In fact several scholars (including a non-Mormon historian) believe that they strengthened the LDS Church through their publication of early docs.  I agree, and I have found many anti-Mormons (including Sandra) to be charming and nice people, even if they are grievously mistaken in their obsessive-compulsive need to attack the LDS faith.  As long as they cite their sources and don't bear false witness against others, I have no problem with their opposition.  After all, it is a point of Mormon doctrine that there must be opposition in all things.

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, snowflake said:

Chick provides LDS sources and other sources for his claims, Journal of Discourses, History of the Church, Michael Quinn, History of the Saints, The Holy Bible, Ezra Taft Benson.  Yes I agree, a very shocking book, but what is inaccurate about it?

Well, let's see.  

His tract shows about various practices of witchcraft, such as blood sacrifices, but does not show that JS practiced or believed this stuff.  It's called "guilt by association".
JS "always" wore the talisman "for protection" but gives no proof.  As I kid, someone gave me a rabbit's foot, but had nothing to with witchcraft.  He may have carried it because of the person who gave it to him as a something "really cool", a curiosity.  Both the talisman and the knife are meaningless without showing what meaning they held for Joseph Smith.

Yes, he does indeed use "other sources", but, as a comic book, does not examine the credibility of the source.  Joseph Smith may have been visited by BOTH Moroni and Lehi as well as other visitors.  This is the "either or" fallacy. 

The Holy Bible as a source?  "If you disagree with my interpretation of the Bible, you are a false religion".  This is the Pharasee fallacy, who declared that Christians were heretics.

Yes, JS was a glass looker,  and Saul/Paul persecuted Christians and threw them into prison.  He approved the stoning of Stephen as he died a horrible death by stoning, and held their coats.  Peter denied Christ THREE times.  Moses killed an Egyptian.  WHY DOESN'T CHICK MENTION THIS??????????

"Shocking book" does not describe this comic book.

Edited by cdowis
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Well, let's see.  

His tract shows about various practices of witchcraft but does not show that JS practiced or believed this stuff.  It's called "guilt by association".
JS "always" wore the talisman "for protection" but gives no proof.  As I kid, someone gave me a rabbit's foot, but had nothing to with witchcraft.  He may have carried it because of the person who gave it to him as a something "really cool", a curiosity.

Yes, he does indeed use "other sources", but, as a comic book, does not examine the credibility of the source.  Joseph Smith may have been visited by BOTH Moroni and Lehi as well as other visitors.  This is the "either or" fallacy. 

The Holy Bible as a source?  "If you disagree with my interpretation of the Bible, you are a false religion".  This is the Pharasee fallacy, who declared that Christians were heretics.

"Shocking book" does not describe this comic book.

Joseph was tried for glass looking....fact. Occult practice

Joseph had a Jupiter talisman and multiple seer stones.....fact. Occult practice.

You should check out Quinn's book Early Mormonism and the Magic worldview.

 

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, snowflake said:

Joseph was tried for glass looking....fact. Occult practice

Joseph had a Jupiter talisman and multiple seer stones.....fact. Occult practice.

You should check out Quinn's book Early Mormonism and the Magic worldview.

 

Joseph of Egypt used a silver divination cup, something that today would probably be considered to be an occult practice.  Does that automatically mean he was a fraud?

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, snowflake said:

Joseph was tried for glass looking....fact. Occult practice

Joseph had a Jupiter talisman and multiple seer stones.....fact. Occult practice.

You should check out Quinn's book Early Mormonism and the Magic worldview.

 

The original Apostles cast lots(dice) to see who would be the next Apostle.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

The original Apostles cast lots(dice) to see who would be the next Apostle.

They cast lots to see who would be the next high priest as well.  Casting lots (equivalent of drawing straws) and the occult are very different things.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...