Cool, I cannot believe this is still up! (Chick’s lawyers usually get it taken down for copyright violations.)
Yes! Ol’ Chicky is getting back to his roots!
True, it was a little tamer and had subtler Catholic bashing than his previous tracts, but still, it’s a lot better than the boring stuff he’s been putting out lately.
Jack gets it from The Two Babylons, an anti-“Papist” classic. I haven’t actually read it, so I don’t know the details or the historical accuracy of it (or lack thereof), but it’s worth taking a look. And actually, instead of going through the trouble of reading the book, you may just want to read the Wikipedia article on it, which I will do as soon as I get back from work.
“I want these motherfucking moneylenders outta this motherfucking temple!”
Although Moneylenders in a Temple doesn’t really have the same ring as Snakes on a Plane…
That’s the point; he seems completely oblivious to the fact that Allah is just the arab word for ‘God’; Allah is worshipped by Arab Christians; this is a simple fact of language, not theology.
Well, I’ve read Islam: A Short History, by Karen Armstrong, and there’s no mention of Khadija having been a Christian of any kind. (And this was long before the Catholic-Orthodox schism, by the way, but there were some Monophysite Christians in the East.) Mohammed did absorb some of ideas from Christians with whom he came in contact in Mecca – and he was quite surprised, late in life, to learn that Christians did not consider themselves a kind of Jew, which he had always assumed. Jews, the children of Abraham through Isaac, were regarded at the time as racial cousins by the Arabs, who traced their descent to Abraham through Ishmael.
So it’s all the Jews’ fault! 
Alberto Rivera. Quite a character in his own right.
That’s possibly the best Chick parody I’ve ever seen. The back page, where Chick normally gives his “come to Jesus” spiel, is the best part. “NOBODY CAN SAVE YOU. WE WILL ALL BE EATEN.” All I can say about that, in true Chick fashion, is:
HAW HAW HAW!!!
I love the testimonial page.
Well, Chick has tried to prove several times in his tracts that Allah was originally (therefore still is) a “Moon God.” Most notably in “Who Is Allah?” Read that if you can find it – alone of all the tracts on Chick’s “Tracts in English” page, it is listed but no longer linked. (Not deleted out of fear, I’m sure, many other tracts still accessible there give the same message.)
It’s not quite as laughable an idea as it first seems. It is true that before Mohammed the Arabs worshipped a pantheon of gods and Allah was its chief, as Jupiter (“God Father”) to the Romans. The name means simply, “The God.” (The closest Hebrew equivalent would be “Elohim,” as opposed to God’s unspeakable personal name, “Yahweh.”) I don’t know whether he ever was represented/worshipped as an idol; certainly the other gods were. Nor do I know whether pre-Islamic Allah ever was associated with the Moon. In any case, Mohammed’s revelation was that Yahweh and Allah are the same person (though all the other Arab gods were false and their idols must be smashed); and this Chick flatly rejects. Raises kind of a semantic/theological/philosophical question: If the Arabs had a god, completely unconnected from any Hebrew tradition, whom they decided to identify with the God of Israel, and to worship on that understanding – are they therefore worshipping the same God as the Jews, or are they not?
Chick’s answer, if he could be troubled to consider the question, might be: No one is worshipping God who is not worshipping Jesus! But would he apply that to the Jews in exactly the same way? Kind of a puzzler.
I wonder what Chick’s take on the diety of the Bible being addressed with a feminine form of the word? (At least that’s what I’ve heard about the expression Elohim, that the word’s in the feminine.)
It’s still linked to on the main page. I linked to it in the OP as well, as well as the tract’s original Caucasian version, “Allah Had No Son.”
I always read it was the plural form, which is even more thought-provoking. Discussed here.
I had no idea there were thatch-roof cottages in the Middle East…
Nope. -im is the male pluralization suffix; -ot is the female.
Quite simple, in the Chickoverse any religion that doesn’t worship Jesus as god, or is Catholic, and doesn’t accept the bible as literal truth will get the heave ho into the great lake of Fire TM after meeting Faceless jesus on the toilet TM
As for his view of teh Jewish people… Chick.com: Love The Jewish People
Chick.com: Holocaust
He admits they are the chosen people but have neglected to accept Jesus and so have suffered under the Catholic conspiracy TM
So after 400 years Yahweh finally got off his fat ass and actually did something. Yawn. I think I’ll go back to worshipping Bast. Meow!
Mormons too! Mormons too!
His cited evidence is pretty pathetic though; consisting of ‘some archaeologists dug up a couple of idols with crescent moons on them, thus proving…[whatever inane point he is pushing]’
Yeah, seriously. Luckily I’m out of there and am now athiest. Oh, wait.
A while back another Doper mentioned he had some Chick tracts he was going to dispose of, and he would send them to the first poster to respond.
I was the lucky recipient. I’d read parts of them online, and, as a fairly devout Christian, found some hilarious, some stupid, some hateful. Guess in Chick’s eyes I’m going to hell.
So, I’ve read these all and want to share the wealth. Anyone want some real life Chick tracts? Among some of the 19 titles are “The Accident”, “Big Daddy”, “The Warning”, and “What’s Wrong With This?” The one I found least objectionable was “The Little Princess”. Chick even had the kids going out to trick or treat, without saying it was bad! And the local Christian couple was happy to pass out candy, along with the tracts that, well, you’ll have to read to find out what happens, won’t you?
If anyone would like these tracts just let me have a snail mail address you feel comfortable sharing. My email is in my profile! I’ll mail them for free, as that’s how I got them. First come, first served.