I find the Cthulhu Tracts to be the best Chick parodies.
I’ll help the OP out:
Some of his tracts are mostly or all straight from the Bible (KJV only). I might, in a rather bizarre set of circumstances, want to use them as a substitute for scripture.
I think his tracts are great. I would be leaving them all around if I didn’t have to purchase them via mail. I used to buy them at Christian book stores, but there are so few of those around here, and I couldn’t find any at the last Xn book store that I went to.
hh
Cite? In which tract does Chick have more fact than fiction about ANYTHING? The problem with using something like a Chick tract is that there’s so much incorrect information in it, if there are any facts that are actually facts, they’re tainted by the Chick propaganda. In other words, even if there’s specks of gold in all that shit, that gold is still tiny bits, and not worth digging through the shit to find. If I want to point out the errors in the prophecies of the JW or discuss Joe Smith’s outlook, I am perfectly capable of finding far more objective and reliable sources.
Chick is biased, his research is completely laughable, and he has no credibility with anyone who has any respect for the truth. What’s more, his SOURCES are also laughable and suffer a similar lack of credibility. Just look up Kent “Dr. Dino” Hovind, for instance. Chick often cites Hovind as a source. I’m delighted to report that Hovind is currently serving 10 years for tax evasion.
It’s been a while since I’ve handled those tracts IRL, but as I recall, they wouldn’t work well for origami. Maybe I could use them in paper mache (I don’t use French accent marks, because I can never remember which goes where), but I’d want to paint the thing afterwards.
Chick has done a tract about how the King James Bible is the only “real” version and how King James was so great for creating it. I think he should do a tract about how much King James loved to suck and blow on dicks and make love to other men.
Anyway - I found an excellent use for a Jack Chick tract - I removed the text from the speech balloons and made up new dialog. Behold my masterpiece, The Cocksucker. Language NSFW.
If I wanted to argue with Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons then I’m capable of doing it on my own, without the help of bigoted and poorly-drawn cartoons, but I doubt their unexpected visits become any less annoying if you start arguing with them. Anything that prolongs the visit is IMHO a bad thing, and defending the very questionable accuracy of a Chick Tract to a stranger (or to anyone) is not a way I’d choose to spend my time. If Chick said anything about JWs or Mormons that was actually correct then it can only be because even a broken clock is right twice a day. I’m sure an actual JW or Mormon would immediately recognize all the incorrect claims he makes about their denominations.
I’m also certain that neither JWs nor Mormons would suddenly renounce their faiths if presented with a Chick Tract. Converting them to Chick-style Fundamentalist Protestantism would hardly be an improvement anyway.
In my experience the fastest way to get rid of JWs is to just take the copy of The Watchtower that they’re offering you and say good day. There’s no reason to bring Jack T. Chick into the picture.
I believe that’s because of his anti-Catholic works bookstores have decided to remove them.
I like his “regular” gospel tracts ie, ones without any of the anti-Catholic/anti-Mason/anti-evolution etc. theories and just hit the message “Believe in Jesus”. Too bad such an original and brilliant idea as cartoon religious tracts was turned into an ultra-fundie and anti-Catholic hotbed.
I’m a theistic evolutionist and I think Hovind for instance is a fraud and a tax cheat. I also think a lot of Chick’s “partners” such as Alberto Riviera, Rebecca Brown, and so on are quite insane too.
Proof King James was gay?
Chick’s response to such questions. It’s interesting that he (well, actually a certain Dr. Samuel Gipp, but it’s published by Chick) seems to avoid the actual issue as much as possible, as if King James being a wise scholar and driving force behind the King James Bible means that he must be straight.
Here ya go. Although in this particular picture, historians agree he was trying to up his “street” or “pimp” cred with the fur coat and hat. He, of course, wasn’t fooling anyone.
I was going to link to that picture, but then I figured it would be too sarcastic and not directly addressing the point, which is that most scholars agree that King James’s relationship with male courtiers went far beyond what was typical even for that time; his own contemporaries referred to him as homosexual and claimed that he “fucked the Duke of Buckingham,” and homosexual courtiers like Henry Wriothesley who were imprisoned at the end of Elizabeth’s reign (for reasons unrelated to sexuality) were freed and became figures at court again as soon as James took over. He wrote letters to George Villiers calling him “my sweet child and wife”; he had a secret passageway built which linked their bedrooms together. There is very little debate today about whether King James was gay, except among Christians who are unable to reconcile his obvious homosexuality with his advances for Christianity.
Since I’m an atheist, no, I wouldn’t use those tracts. However, even if I DID believe in the Christian god/Jesus, I wouldn’t use Chick tracts. He has a reputation for being hateful and just plain WRONG about so many things that he’s simply not a credible source for anything.
Linky please.
Also since this probably fits in a thread about Jack Chick there are some Christian fundies who think Jack Chick preaches a “works” gospel for arguing that to be saved you must turn from sin. http://jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Doctrines/Lordship%20Salvation/bad_tracts.htm
I very much wish he’d abandon & denounce his anti-Catholicism & patronage of Todd, Rivera, Rebecca Brown & William Schoebelin, all various “Conspiracy” hoaxers. He parted ways with Brown but never denounced her.
His Bible-based tracts are some of the best out there, but even they are often tainted by one or two panels of anti-Catholic or other extremism. And even those that aren’t still carry “guilt by association”.
This documentary is a MUST SEE for anyone interested in Chickology!
I’m watching this as I write- OMG! It has Brown and FRED CARTER!
If I were still a Rapturist & Chick did the fore-mentioned repentance, I’d really love to see a re-issue of the original THE BEAST, in which the AntiChrist just wears a regular business suit. Alas, that was changed to Papal robes in the late 1970s.
Just got done watching the documentary. Interesting & amazingly respectful- especially from Church of the SubGenius founder Rev. Ivan Stang.
I forgot to link two entries up…
http://www.sling.com/video/show/161351/38/God's-Cartoonist:-The-Comic-Crusade
Thanks to Alistair McCello for pointing it out here…
There’s an interesting thing here.
Several of Chick’s more recent pubs take a new approach and link backsliding to loss of salvation, at least until fresh repentance. This is quite different from all of Chick’s early tracts and full-sized comics. As one of the clearest example, we see the backslider in “Sabotage” straightened out by the team of Tim and James, and told that “God doesn’t expect you to do it again.” But there is not one word about losing salvation during this time. It seems that the worst that could happen is that he would be extremely embarrassed at the Second Coming. (Which, of course, way back in the mid-70’s, was SOON!)
What I found interesting from your link is that JTC is criticized with his early tracts, for implying that you can only receive salvation by accepting Lordship, and being determined to turn away from all sin. (Although he warns against wanting to “clean yourself up first” and makes a point of stating that only God and Christ can accomplish the actual cleaning-up in your life.)
Your linked author points out that from the beginning JTC specified these requirements on the back of tracts. Interestingly enough, the author also read his Statement of Faith, and claims that Chick had it correct there, contradicting himself elsewhere.
There’s also a link there that describes these relationships more extensively. James’s own words on his feelings for the Duke of Buckingham:
He also addressed the man himself:
Judge for yourself.
There are numerous scholarly references to King James’ bisexuality – it’s no secret, it wasn’t a secret even in his own times. Guinastasia posted some good leads.
I never understood Chick’s motives. His pamphlets seem to preach the opposite of Christ’s teachings. Some of them are downright paranoid, such as his rant against Dungeons & Dragons. The tracts come across as the rantings of a sad, sick man who rails against any culture he doesn’t understand.
Propping up a wobbly kitchen table, perhaps.