Ahh, the old Chick Tracts. "Heaven is for the obeidiant and fearful."
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
With ememies like that, who needs friends?
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
I think "fearful" is the key word... Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
These have done more to harm Christianity than anything since the Spanish Inquisition.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I don't know about that. Are they really that wide-spread? I have never seen or heard of them outside of hatrack. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:They are always on time. They ALWAYS keep their promises.
She obviously hadn't met the missionaries GradStudent and Kayla did. Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I have. Someone gave me about fifty of 'em once.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
Because if one doesn't convince you, you have no choice after reading 50.
Hobbes
[ July 30, 2004, 03:11 PM: Message edited by: Hobbes ]
Posted by Da_Goat (Member # 5529) on :
I've never seen them, either. I have heard of them outside of Hatrack, but not by anybody who wasn't making fun of them.
Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
Heh.. hehe... heh..... um...
Funny but scary.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I guess that according to these, I guess I'm double damned. Is that like a double negative? Please?
Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
Yeah, I heard Joseph Smith read the Harry Potter books, too.
*giggles furiously, rolling eyes until they get stuck that way*
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
He takes digs at everybody. And he's not even funny about it, unlike South Park.
[ July 30, 2004, 03:26 PM: Message edited by: Da_Goat ]
Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
Mormons and Masons and Aliens, Oh, MY!
Bwahahahahahahahaha-snort-hahahahahaha!
*gasping for breath*
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
Hey...I mean...are all mormons aliens or are all aliens mormons? Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
This thread makes me yearn for Ralphie.
Moreso.
<--- Yearning.
Posted by TheTick (Member # 2883) on :
I actually saw a real live paper copy of one of the tracts laying out at a pizza joint here. I was shocked that someone would actually use them for recruiting purposes!
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
Was it just me or did one of the elders have a crooked nose?
*yearns with Bob*
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Oh. My. Stars. That was...if the writer was serious, that made me think he got hit on the head with a heavy, pointy stick as a child.
The King James Bible is the only version Satan hasn't messed with? Does Jack Chick get royalties from it?
[ July 30, 2004, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Brinestone (Member # 5755) on :
Read the Harry Potter one, Katie. You'll love it.
*scours the books for instructions on how to work Ouija boards and Tarot cards and to summon spirits*
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
I must be a lousy reader...tsc, never noticed anything...
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
This guy obviously read the secret version of Harry Potter.
Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
Oh, Katie! There are SO many people I want to email that link to (The Harry Potter Condensed versions, I mean).
Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
And the Harry Potter Chick Tract is actually MUCH funnier if you note Uncle Bob's resemblance to John Cleese, and give him an outragious French Accent:
Spirit, I rebuke you!Your father smelt of elderberries!
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
Oh. My. Gosh.
The thing that really cracked me up is the box to check at the bottom of the tract. :I have acccpted Jesus Christ as my Savior;Yes No check one". That is so tacky.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Your link, katharina, contains AvenueA1 adware/spyware. And won't open if the malware is blocked.
Edit cuz I checked again and came up with the same malware warning.
[ July 30, 2004, 08:01 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Only for you, aspectre.
Posted by Mabus (Member # 6320) on :
I recently came across the Bad Bob tract and one of the "kiddie" tracts lying around in the Cracker Barrel office. I was wondering who it was that thought they were any use--then I found that someone had cut out the dude who was talking about all the drugs Bob could get them and put him up on the wall--evidently a joke about someone working there. Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
" They're MORMONS! "
Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
If I bought the Harry Potter DVDs and books does that mean I am in twice the trouble.
Well, at least I am not a Mormon and I never played D&D. I guess I am safe there. Though I did play Doom way back when it was big...and I loved Team Fortress and Quake.
I wonder if they have ever had pamphlets on the evils of judging others. My guess is no.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
Is it just me, or does there seem to be a trend of "If it's not about Jesus, burn it!"?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
People like this guy are precisely the reason organised religion should be forbidden. Alas, it's been tried. But it may be withering on the vine, at least in sensible countries like Norway. There's even talk now of getting rid of our state church - and about time, too.
quote:If you believe in evolution, you'll go to Hell!
[ July 30, 2004, 08:21 PM: Message edited by: King of Men ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Our state church? What country are you posting from?
Jack Chick isn't an organized religion. He's an idiot with the a very correct right to a publisher. An absense of religion won't produce an absense of idiots. The only way to shut him up would be take away more than a few of his rights. Surely you're not suggesting that?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I'm always amazed when I run into people who haven't seen Chick tracts. Clearly, you have not lived in Indiana.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
quote:
She has massive tracts of land!
Sorry Tom, couldn't resist the Holy Grail joke.
-Trevor
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Norway has a state church, toothless though it is. And a priest for Prime Minister (us and Iran), though at least the latest polls look like he'll get chucked out. None too soon; between that and the oil, I've been waiting for the US to invade for some time now. Maybe Bush has us confused with Sweden, or something.
Absence of religion won't provide absence of idiots, true. But it will be one less thing that non-idiots can have in common with idiots. If Christianity were an illegal fringe cult, how large a market would Chick find for his propaganda? Scum like him are still subject to the laws of the marketplace; if there were no Christians, he would soon have to shut up - free speech or none.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
Being a fringe cult or not doesn't make Chick any more or less right.
And I've yet to see anyone here announce their faith in his rantings - probably because the people who do believe haven't figured out how to work a computer yet.
Or anyone believe his ranting because he claims to be a Christian - I suspect most of them are thinking, "not in any church I attend - you nut."
-Trevor
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I'm not saying Chick is mainstream in any way. I'm saying that he preys on the gullibility of people who are mainstream Christians. Sneer all you like, there are plenty of people out there who buy his tracts, in the apparent belief that they are doing good works. If Christianity were not so popular, that market would not exist.
As for not knowing how to work a computer, I would note that it doesn't take 1337 hax0r $ki11z to vote, with the possible exception of Florida.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
So you're solution to this idiot is to make Christianity a persecuted fringe religion? Setting aside the fact that that's been tried before, at least Jack Chick is just trying to change people by knocking them on the head with lies, not with laws.
If you're saying that Christianity is the province of idiots, then...that's the same problem Jack Chick has.
Idiots are fairly determined. If it's not thing, it'll be another. No one's ever been successful at legislating away human nature.
[ July 30, 2004, 09:59 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
It has been tried, but that was when Christianity was a vibrant young religion offering sanctuary from an utterly chaotic and deadly world. Also, you will note that it didn't really strike it big until the Emperor converted. These days, Christianity is big business, an old and tired organisation that offers nothing new. And the world is quite a bit more controllable and knowable than it used to be. Who knows?
As a matter of tactics, it might be better to just let religion quietly wither on the vine - why revitalise it by letting people perceive themselves as heroic fighters for the underdog? On the other hand, that didn't work real well for slavery, absolute monarchy, or the other evils of the medieval past. So I don't know. Legislation might indeed be necessary. Ask me again in twenty years.
Religion is not the province of idiots, but it does make it so much easier for idiots to prosper. Consider : It is explicitly based on non-rationality, to wit, belief without proof. How can you make it any easier on the idiots than that? No argument other than reference to the Bible / Koran / whatever is needed.
Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
Wow. Evidently there's a Bible verse were it says God made Dinosaurs and men on the same day. *giggles*
Hooo Boy!
I also have no faith in organized religion, because some people will ALWAYS come to see the details of their church's practices as more important than actually caring for each other. Note I said "some."
The last time I went to church, I broke out in hives, and that was just for a Christmas play. I think I'd have to be heavily medicated not to have serious flashbacks.
Edit: But there is a big difference between organized religion and a State Religion, which I think most of us agree is a bad idea in general.
[ July 30, 2004, 10:27 PM: Message edited by: Olivetta ]
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
KoM:
quote: It is explicitly based on non-rationality, to wit, belief without proof.
The problem isn't that believers have no proof-- obviously, they do. No sane person believes and acts on any belief without some type of rationale.
The problem is recreating the proof for another individual.
It's like cold fusion-- until I can make you see that it's been done, you can't believe it's been done. But just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it hasn't happened-- just that you haven't seen it.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
A proof that cannot be reliably reproduced for another person ain't no proof.
And cold fusion is a remarkably bad example, because it is testable in principle. Many people tried to reproduce the cold fusion results; they were very bright people, and they did their best, and they failed. That is a good way to test something, and the reason we don't believe cold fusion occurs; it could not be reproduced. But there were definite signs one could look for : Excess heat, excess neutrons.
Religion is not testable even in principle, because it has no external results. There are no excess neutrons, no useful energy, to be gotten from religion. The 'proof' you offer is the same as that for Communism : Many people both living and dead have believed that Communism was the answer to their troubles, have worked and died for that belief. They had no external proof either, only faith in their prophet. Do you hold them as a good example?
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
Ralphie's MST3K tracts haven't been lost to Hatrack obscurity, have they? HAVE THEY??!?!?!?
I just can't wait till JC writes a tract about a somewhat left-leaning mormon girl who likes rock music, harry potter, and RPGs. Cuz seriously, there's no way someone like that will *ever* go to heaven. Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
You can still mark that little square at the bottom. Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I wonder what they'd do if they got in a slip with the box for 'no' ticked? It must happen once in a while, people's sense of humour being what it is.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:As a matter of tactics, it might be better to just let religion quietly wither on the vine - why revitalise it by letting people perceive themselves as heroic fighters for the underdog? On the other hand, that didn't work real well for slavery, absolute monarchy, or the other evils of the medieval past. So I don't know. Legislation might indeed be necessary. Ask me again in twenty years.
Wow. Never has a poster gone from the "I don't know what to think about this guy" to "What a raving lunatic" in one short post.
Dagonee
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Now then, comrade. Lunatic, possibly, but raving? No, I am the calm, suave sort of lunatic who will smile even as the blade slides between your ribs.
Seriously, though, are you going to argue for why religion is good, or are you just going to shake your head and 'draweth aside the hem of the garment?'
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:Seriously, though, are you going to argue for why religion is good, or are you just going to shake your head and 'draweth aside the hem of the garment?
I'd be willing to argue that the idea that criminalizing religion is not only a loathesome idea in principle, but a foolish one for the purposes of reducing stupidity.
Incidentally, you are guilty of the same hubris of Jack Chick. Everyone else is stupid until they do as I do. People would be much wiser, happier, sexier, with better teeth, if only they subscribed to MY way of life.
I, personally, cannot convince you that religion is a good thing. Not only because it's such a subjective question, but because you're so obviously biased against a 'yes' answer. I can, however, point out that some of the most murderous, inhuman, loathesome policies on Earth have been carried out in the absence of religion. The USSR, PRC, Irish Republican Army, for example. If you want to count death tolls, KoM, examine that of the USSR and the PRC and remember-since I expect you already know-how much it outnumbers the Holocaust, which was not-I think-a religious matter at all, but a matter of sociologically-justified hate and bigotry.
As for the good things religion has done? The people in America who ended slavery were religious. So was Gandhi, MLK Jr., Malcolm X, Mother Teresa, the Dalai Lama.
What you're complaining about-stupidity and cruelty of people-is certainly not because they're religious (or because they disbelieve your way of thinking), but because they're human.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Since you have present no cogent theory as to why religion is evil, I don't feel a need to make a case for why it is good.
Dagonee
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
Dagonee, please! Go marry and be merry! (Hey, that's nice! My english is getting quite cool! I got to make a joke! Soon even Hobbes will applaud my funny!) Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
I gotta go, so this will have to be quick : Does Mother Theresa really justify all the priests who tell people that condoms do not protect against AIDS? And remember that the opponents of MLK were also strongly religious people.
Communism, etc, are based on exactly the same amount of proof as Christianity - indeed, many have argued that it is a religion, and with considerable justification at that. The IRA were indeed religious, though certainly nationalism got mixed in with it - an even more dangerous mix, to be sure. The people who defended slavery in the US were also religious, and frankly, had more support in the Bible than the good guys.
Dagonee, you're right, I didn't justify my position very coherently, but briefly : "Without religion, good men will do good, and evil men will do evil. Only religion can cause good men to do evil." Inquisition, crusades, Galileo, repression of all sexuality, and religious warfare. Defender of slavery, apologist for the divine right of kings, champion of the oppressive status quo : That is what religion means to a European. And in all honesty, what I'm seeing here in the US is not convincing me to change my mind.
quote:I'd be willing to argue that the idea that criminalizing religion is not only a loathesome idea in principle, but a foolish one for the purposes of reducing stupidity.
Well, why don't you, then? You are not arguing, you are asserting. Why is it 'loathesome in principle' to forbid a major cause of bigotry and stupidity? Not the only cause, by any means, but a major one. Which principle?
As for reducing stupidity, it seems I haven't been clear, for which I apologise. Certainly, if you removed religion, the idiots would find something else to be stupid about - Communism, perhaps, or in the US they're more likely to join the KKK. But belief in a God is a point of congruence between idiots and quite bright people. The idiots can justify themselves by pointing to a common God, and good and smart people will nod approvingly, for the idiots are clearly doing Good Work.
I do not accuse anyone here of this. But ask yourselves again : If there were no churches, how much of a market would comrade Chick have for his interesting brand of poison? A much reduced one, certainly. I do not believe that the percentage of stupid people is large enough or rich enough to support him, even in the US; it follows that some of his customers must be average Joes who really think he is doing the right thing. Those are the people I want to reach, not the lunatic fringe.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:I gotta go, so this will have to be quick : Does Mother Theresa really justify all the priests who tell people that condoms do not protect against AIDS? And remember that the opponents of MLK were also strongly religious people.
Those priests are liars, KoM. Are you asserting they wouldn't be lying if they weren't religious? No, you're arguing the unknowable-that if they were not religious, they would not lie OR their lies would be less harmful.
As for Mother Teresa, I did not bring her up to go tit for tat. I brought her up as part of an example of how many of the best and brightest human beings have been devoutly religious. I challenge you to come up with a similar list of atheists.
quote:The IRA were indeed religious, though certainly nationalism got mixed in with it - an even more dangerous mix, to be sure.
Some of them were, yes. But the worsts ones were atheists.
quote:The people who defended slavery in the US were also religious, and frankly, had more support in the Bible than the good guys.[/quotes]
Says you. Since you've made the assertion that the Bible supports slavery more than it condemns it, care to back it up? My point in bringing up slavery, though, was again not to go tit for tat, but to point out that the people who worked hardest to end one of the greatest cruelties in American history were religious. Can you look through history and find a similar effort by atheists? I'll give you the entire course of human history to find one, since I admit atheists are a tiny minority and less likely to be found at all.
[quote]"Without religion, good men will do good, and evil men will do evil. Only religion can cause good men to do evil." Inquisition, crusades, Galileo, repression of all sexuality, and religious warfare. Defender of slavery, apologist for the divine right of kings, champion of the oppressive status quo : That is what religion means to a European. And in all honesty, what I'm seeing here in the US is not convincing me to change my mind.
So religion really is the opiate of the people. That's essentially what your thesis is, you know. The Crusades would not have happened without religion? Two resource-strapped, populous, expanding sets of empires would not have had a war without differences in religion? People would not have defended the right of Kings to rule without religion? How, then, do you justify atheistic 'kings' such as Stalin and Mao? Right, they're really religious, too. I forgot.
That's what religion means to you, perhaps. But certainly not what it 'means to a European'. While I confess you're vastly more wise than suckers like myself, even in my limited wisdom I do not believe you speak for Europeans in general.
quote:Why is it 'loathesome in principle' to forbid a major cause of bigotry and stupidity? Not the only cause, by any means, but a major one. Which principle?
Now I get a chance to return your tit-for-tat favor. It's not just a major cause of bigotry and stupidity. It's also a major cause of tolerance, charity, and wisdom. As to which principle, that would be the freedom to worship as we choose, based ultimately on a respect for individual rights. Your entire thesis is based on the idea that you are intelligent enough to choose which ideas and which rights the people really need. I think that kind of arrogance, bigotry, and willingness to forbid something so precious to people is loathesome.
quote:But belief in a God is a point of congruence between idiots and quite bright people. The idiots can justify themselves by pointing to a common God, and good and smart people will nod approvingly, for the idiots are clearly doing Good Work.
Then the quite bright people aren't quite bright, are they? Or good, if they let simple similarity in belief justify something. Christians in general do not justify or condone the actions of, say, the KKK-who are often 'Christian', btw-or abortion-doctor murderers. On the contrary: they frequently serve as their juries, their prosecuting (and defending) attornies, and their judges, and their prison guards.
quote:I do not accuse anyone here of this.
No, you accuse religious people in general of this. Since there are (many) religious people here, you are accusing people here of this.
quote:But ask yourselves again : If there were no churches, how much of a market would comrade Chick have for his interesting brand of poison?
He would find some other commonly-held belief and exploit it. You and Jack Chick have something substantial in common, you know: certainty that you each have a lock on the truth, and that the masses need you to teach them.
Ahh, well. I'll bow out of this discussion, now: I've said my piece and you can have the last word. Incidentally, although I am LDS now, it is a recent thing for me. And I have made the same arguments and assertions against beliefs like yours when I had no religion. Feel free to again assert that communism is really a religion. When you change all the definitions, it's easy to win an argument.
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
CyberDan - You know I made "Bad Bob!" in your honor, don't you?
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
quote: The idiots can justify themselves by pointing to a common God, and good and smart people will nod approvingly, for the idiots are clearly doing Good Work.
I think the Jack Chick tracts are a pretty good examle of how this is not true. The only people nodding their heads approvingly are other idiots, IMO. If they are taken in by these tracts, what makes you think they wouldn't be taken in by other equally damaging non-religious ideas?
As for his publications only being able to be supported if "bright" people are being suckered in, I often wonder about all the telemarketing calls, junk mail, and spam email that's out there. Who is buying into it? Someone must be or they wouldn't be doing it, right?
You say that religion makes good men evil. I think in most cases, they would have been evil anyway. From how I look at things, religion can help evil men become good. It would be a shame to lose that. I would argue that a religion that makes good people evil is not a very good religion. But I tend to place the blame on the shoulders of the individuals rather than the institution. It seems to me that most religions teach good.
KoM, it is probably a good thing for me to be reminded that there are people out there who feel as you do. I must admit, I do not come in contact with many.
I personally do not understand the belief that the world would be better off without religion. Seems to me that anything that religion is to blame for can be explained by the less noble parts of human nature. Eradicating religion will not get rid of that.
Your definition of religion is so incredibly broad, it includes anything that people believe in passionately, passionately enough to die for. How, exactly, do you propose to rid the world of passionate human beings? As you already pointed out, they would turn to something else if religion were not an option.
It seems that you wish to reduce humans to automatons, in essence, they must all join your religion. I find this very disturbing.
*is reminded of the movie "Equillibrium*
[ July 31, 2004, 09:42 PM: Message edited by: beverly ]
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
I know they aren't supposed to be, but these Jack Chick tracts are hilarious! I wonder if people buy them for the entertainment value?
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
Exactly! I found them very funny!
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
*goes to read more*
I especially love how the faces of "angry" or "evil" people are distorted. Good stuff.
[ July 31, 2004, 11:38 PM: Message edited by: beverly ]
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
Wow! These are @!!!**! great!!
I love these!
quote:"Samantha... you'll need a Bible to read every day... a King James Bible. It's the only English version that Satan hasn't messed with."
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
You bet I do, Toni. That's the beautiful thing, in yearning for you I also yearn for myself. It's win/win.
quote:"the Vatican used the Gestapo wearing Nazi uniforms... It is a documented fact that the Gestapo was run by the Jesuits."
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
So these guys seem to be against everybody. Who are they actually *for*?
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
This guy *really* has something against the Vatican.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
Hell hath no fury like an altar boy scorned.
-Trevor
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
dear you,
I luv u! do u luv me? check yes or no plzokithx.
luv, Jesus
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
It's amazing that some people can actually believe in a Jesus that rules only by anger and fear. If Jack Chick's Christ works that way, what in the world is his Satan like?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
His Satan is featured prominently in many strips, Geoff. He's a whiny, petulant, hedonist type with a nasty persecution complex.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
We see the world as we ourselves are. What do these tracts say about Jack Chick?
In his tracts, if you are not Saved it is a) Because you have never heard of Christ at all or b) You are evil. I mean, *really* evil. Petty evil.
Edit: Maybe he is so obnoxious in his "converting" efforts that even the nicest of people have to shut him down, and in his mind they are all acting like the "evil" people in his tracts. I find the idea more than a little disturbing.
Also here sure seem to be an amazing number people in his stories who know nothing whatsoever about Christ.
[ August 01, 2004, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: beverly ]
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
The the one about Apes and Mrs. Henn is particularly amusing. Apparently, the rich white girl knows a whole lot about Jesus and black kid has never heard of him. In what alternate universe?
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
According to Jack Chick, if you're a nice person and do lots of great works... but you never accept Jesus as your saviour... then you will suffer in the lake of eternal fire
Because if you *ever* heard about Jesus, but refused to believe... then you're damned. (See the one about the virtuous Moslem whose plane crashes on the way back from Mecca.)
Has anyone found what Jack Chick's take is on nice people who die without having EVER heard about Jesus? Do they go to hell, too?
Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
I would assume so.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
She obviously hadn't met the missionaries GradStudent and Kayla did. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)