Chick Publications

posted by Jim Ward:
"I apologize if I wasn't clear. I wasn't trying to imply that natters is catholic, as I don't know what his beleifs are, but the sources he posted the links for, if I read is post right, were to catholic web pages."

That right they are, all the stuff quoted, in a failed attemp to discredit Jack Chick is.

 

The problem though Staci, is Jack is an honest to God soul-winner, and the stuff people are trying to use to discredit him is not information that is creditable.

 

Rooster said "Jack Chick is not lieing or giving false witness"

Yes he is. I gave many examples from a single tract in my long post on page 4 of this thread.

Jim Ward said "What are the falsehoods?"

I gave many examples from a single tract in my long post on page 4 of this thread.

Jim Ward said "I wasn't trying to imply that natters is catholic, as I don't know what his beleifs are, but the sources he posted the links for, if I read is post right, were to catholic web pages."

natters is not Catholic. Yes, the links I first gave are to Catholic sites, but that doesn't invalidate their explanations of why Chick is bearing false witness. One shouldn't simply dismiss the explanations just because one disagrees with other aspects of the source.

The long post, detailing some of the falsehoods in a single tract, have nothing to do with a Catholic site, that information is straight from me, after doing some digging at the request of an earlier poster.

 

She has proved nothing, I had coffe with the pope, and he and Jack Chick are best friends, prove me wrong.

Not the same level of scripture, seems like there are holes in your proof.

Now you are realy streching the truth.

Yes it is, by changing certain word, or leaving out certain words, is down playing.

A true Christian would reject sin. How is that false.

OK, I'm not going to dispute that yet, were did you get that info from, or did you just make it up?

This info is true, even if the numbers are wrong, but let me ask you, were did you get your info from? because there is information that contradicts yours available out there, I'm not saying its right either, but the Catholic crusades happend, to deny that would be like denying that the Holocaust ever happened also.

is this your own opinion, or can you back this up? From a non Catholic source.

In fact I am going to stop right there, and ask, how are you backing this up, all of it? I could find info that contrdicts everything you said, granted it would take some time, and I don't find it nessicary to prove you wrong, the burden of proof is not on my shoulders, its on yours.

 

you make me laugh thats like asking OJ if he realy killed Nicole letting the fox guard the hen house love you brother that was a good joke

 

I'm not sure if you guys don't read, or if you guys are just burying your heads in the sand. Jack Chick has claimed the following, and they've been listed on these threads several times:

He says that the Roman Catholic Church, wanting to kill all the Jews, was the real culprit behind the Holocaust, and that Adolph Hitler was just a puppet of the Vatican. Also, according to him, the Ku Klux Klan, the Nazis, and the Masons are all secretly being directed by Jesuit agents. Oh, and while I'm at it, he claims that the Roman Catholic Church was beind the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. He also says the KKK was created by Jesuits following their failure in the Civil War, in an effort to align blacks and liberal whites against Protestants. He also says the Jonestown massacre was orchestrated by the Catholic church in an effort to get the public to frown upon fundamentalism.

But that's not all. Chick also supported and endorsed the claims of Laurie Stratton, alleged survivor of satanic ritual abuse). When her story was revealed as a fabrication, Chick stood by what she said. In addition, his website still supports Alberto Rivera, even though he has been exposed as a fraud.

That's quite a presupposition. Perhaps I haven't won as many souls as him, but all the people I've brought to the Lord came to know him without me having to break any of the commandments to do it. Come to think of it, Chick and I have won the same numbre of souls: none. We don't win souls. The Holy Spirit does. We're just instruments in that endeavor. We can't be very good instruments if we're being unrighteous.

 

Rooster said "She has proved nothing"

She has provided evidence. No one can force you to believe the evidence, but we can roll our eyes at you if you simply brush off evidence without reason or explanation.

Rooster said "Not the same level of scripture"

Yes, I agree the Apocryphal books are not on the same level as scripture. However, that is not the point. The point is that Chick said they were "always rejected by Christians from the First Century and throughout the Protestant Reformation as being devilish". This is untrue, this is falsehood.

Rooster said "Now you are realy streching the truth."

No, I am not. It's in black and white in the preface of the 1611 KJV.

Rooster said "Yes it is, by changing certain word, or leaving out certain words, is down playing."

No, it is not. That is like saying the KJV is "down playing" because it leaves the Holy Spirit out of Acts 4:25, Jesus out of Jude 1:25, God out of Phil 1:14, etc.

Rooster said "A true Christian would reject sin. How is that false."

Yes, a true Christian would reject sin. However, that is not the point. Chick said "True Christians rejected these phoney manuscripts as works of the spirit of antichrist." That is untrue - Christians did not reject those manuscripts as works of the spirit of antichrist.

Rooster said "OK, I'm not going to dispute that yet, were did you get that info from, or did you just make it up?"

I forget where I got that information, it was in my notes. But doing a quick search on Google, I find this mentioned in "Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe" by Edward Peters, ISBN 0-85967-621-8, pp. 194-195, citing "Facts and Documents [illustrative of the history, doctrine and rites, of the ancient Albigenses & Waldenses]" by S.R. Maitland, pp. 192-194, and "Ecclesiastical History of Ancient Churches of the Albigenses" by Pierre Allix, p. 213.

Rooster said "This info is true, even if the numbers are wrong"

How can something be true and wrong at the same time?

Rooster said "but let me ask you, were did you get your info from because there is information that contradicts yours available out there, I'm not saying its right either, but the Catholic crusades happend, to deny that would be like denying that the Holocaust ever happened also."

I got the numbers from world historical population charts that I found on the internet. Even if the numbers are off, Chick's numbers are still WAY too huge - they don't even make sense logically, because Chick would have us believe that the RCC killed off the entire population of Europe at that time. I do not deny the crusades, but I do not accept Chick's numbers, as there was not enough people. 68 million??? Come on.

Rooster said "is this your own opinion, or can you back this up? From a non Catholic source."

It is not my own opinion, and yes I can back it up. My hobby is collecting and studying Bible translations, translation history, etc. I have copies of Luther's German Bible, Tyndale's Bible, the Vulgate, etc. All that I've said is easily verifiable, even from non-Catholic sources. Luther's translation was done from the second edition of the Textus Receptus (what Chick calls "the inspired manuscript"), which (among other minor differences) did not have 1 John 5:7 (which was added to the TR for the 3rd edition). From what Chick says on page 21 of the same tract, this would make both the first editions of the Textus Receptus ("the inspired manuscript") as well as Luther's translation ("the Word of God" in German) the product of Satanic multilation.

Rooster said "In fact I am going to stop right there, and ask, how are you backing this up, all of it?"

Personal research. I welcome any correction to any faulty information I've presented, but I am confident it is all correct.

Rooster said "I could find info that contrdicts everything you said"

You are welcome to do so. If you find something, we could investigate further.

Rooster said "the burden of proof is not on my shoulders, its on yours."

Actually, it is on Chick's. He's the one making the assertions, assertions which a little investigation shows to be made up of erroneous information and falsehoods.

Rooster said "thats like asking OJ if he realy killed Nicole"

A few years ago, I spent considerable time and effort investigating the JW and Mormon cults. One valuable source in my studies were the writings of Dr. Walter Martin, who logically and systematically dismantled many many Mormon and JW apologetics and arguments. I found that the vast majority of Mormon and JW apologists, instead of dealing with what Martin was saying, simply dismissed his arguments simply because of who he was. They wouldn't/couldn't simply get past that, and actually deal directly with the facts he was presenting. You are doing the same thing with those Catholic links. You may find that funny, but I don't.

 

Rooster
"I had coffe with the pope, and he and Jack Chick are best friends, prove me wrong."
''
http://www.chick.com/bc/1995/catholicprotestant.asp?FROM=Catholicpage
This would suffice for any reasonable person.

As for my own Jesuit connection. During my years at university I needed a parttime job. At another university nearby an institute that documented the history of Roman Catholicism in the Netherlands needed an employee (parttime). I got hired, mostly for being a pretty young lady, a little for being a student of both church-and arthistory.
A couple of Jesuitconvents were slowly closing down at the time (the old monks weren't gettting any younger and there were no new monks forthcoming to replace them). I helped select what was worth saving of their archives and collections of memorabilia and helped to transfer that to the institute. That's how I met Hans Kolvenbach (the black pope ) who came by to inspect the proceedings.

 

Does Jack Chick hate Catholics?
Quite the opposite. In the mid-1970's, when he first began to understand what Roman Catholicism really teaches, he knew it was unscriptural. He also knew that to speak out against it would be unpopular and hurt his publishing company.

After much prayer, he made the decision that, no matter what it cost him personally, he would publish the truth that Roman Catholicism is not Christian. He did it because he loves Catholics and wants them to be saved through faith in Jesus, not trusting in religious liturgy and sacraments. He paid a price for that decision in many ways, as priests and nuns entered Christian bookstores screaming and making a scene, demanding that the store owner not stock Chick tracts. Some "Christian" media have even refused to accept advertising from Chick Publications, fearing any "controversy" that might hurt their cash flow.

But God has been faithful (as He always is) and has protected Chick Publications over the years. Jack Chick has made it clear that if he had it to do over again, he wouldn't change a thing. The letters from so many Catholics who have read Chick's anti-Catholic material and have gotten saved carry one theme: "Thank you for loving us enough to tell us the truth!" Those precious people make it all worthwhile.

 

Hitler's Death Camps
Holocaust . . . or Inquisition?


Issue Date: January/February 1989

Dr. Alberto Rivera, ex-Jesuit priest, says "holocaust" is the wrong word. He prefers "inquisition." "The Jews have not let us forget the Nazi slaughter of their people, but no one has continued to remind us of the other four to six million non-Jews also executed," he points out.

Bohdan Wytwycky in "The Other Holocaust" documents seven million non-Jewish civilian victims of the Nazi death machine in Poland, Ukraine and Belorussia. Historians suggest that the death camps and gas chambers were used specifically against the Jews, yet no serious investigation has been directed toward this even larger number of non-Jews who were executed. Dr Rivera states that in his training as a Jesuit he was taught that the Vatican manipulated the Nazi death machine not just against Jews, but more broadly against ` all "heretics."


When we remember that the Jesuits were specifically established to counter the "heresy" of the Reformation and that that objective has not changed, we are constrained to examine this other group of victims more carefully. Other books published by Chick Publications such as Secret History of the Jesuits by Paris, Godfathers and Smokescreens by Jack Chick, document the Vatican's support of Hitler's rise to power. History also proves that the Vatican has used every available means to stamp out "heretics." Romanism defines heretics as anyone who does not give blind obedience to the pope. Her treatment of them is most currently illustrated by the bloodshed in North Ireland and the attempt to turn South Vietnam into a Catholic dictatorship under President Diem just prior to the Vietnam War.

In that case, the "heretics" were the Buddhists who had to torch themselves in the streets to get enough world attention to stop their inquisition. Many of them converted to Catholicism under the persecution. ("Vietnam, Why Did We Go?" by Avro Manhattan.) The most detailed evidence available that many of these World War II executions resulted from the refusal to convert to Catholicism comes from Croatia. Avro Manhattan in his book, "Catholic Terror Today," provides extensive photo and documented evidence of the inquisitional nature of the war.

Upon the disintegration of Yugoslavia, Ante Pavelitch became the leader of the independent Catholic state of Croatia under the protection of Mussolini and Hitler. Pope Pius XII also supported him with diplomacy and money. When he was firmly in control, he issued an ultimatum to the non-Catholic population (heretics): convert to Catholicism or die. Most of them were Eastern Orthodox and their churches were closed, parish documents destroyed and worshipers often arrested, imprisoned in their own churches and set on fire. Those who did not convert were submitted to unbelievable torture or were slaughtered outright.

 

Was Alberto Really Who He Claimed To Be?
As soon as Alberto Rivera went public with his testimony, the Roman Catholic Church began its damage-control operation. Alberto knew too much! Having been prepared for leadership in the Jesuit order, he had been briefed on things too sensitive to put in writing. Now he was telling the world!

Alberto was immediately denounced as having never been a priest, even though he possessed clear documentation. Christianity Today printed an article written by Gary Metz, attacking Alberto and accusing him of all sorts of things. Alberto refused to spend his life arguing with his accusers. Instead, he just pushed on, preaching the gospel, and trusting God to defend him.

The Lord raised up other Christians who examined the charges against Alberto, and found him to be exactly what he claimed to be. Below is an abundance of evidence. Read it for yourself.

 

When you have read the rest of Alberto's testimony, you will understand why Rome went to such effort to discredit him. His information fits so well with the evidence of history, it becomes clear he had the "inside track" on information you weren't supposed to hear.

It apears that Alberto has made definate statements regarding the Catholic Church these statments are in his pown words, and Jack uses Albertos statments to prove the truth, unless Alberto is the Liar, Jack Chick is not.

 

Guys (and Gals)...are we really getting anywhere with this? (sigh) This thread has turned into a revolving door. "no, he's not". "yes, he is". "no, he's not". "yes, he is". blah, blah, blah. He said/she said.

Rooster, the only responses that "they" have come from Catholic articles. And we know that if you cross the Catholic church and if you have any credibility, they'll smear your name for all its worth. That's what the RCC has done to Jack Chick, Alberto Rivera, and I'm assuming others.

You know, it's a shame that so many Protestant Fundamentalists are bowing down to this system. It's sad and also scary. Someone once told me that many Protestants are gradually running back to their original "mommy" - the RCC. Its amazing to me. All we can do is contend for the faith and not get sucked in.

"Revelation 17 - vs. 4 - and the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and teh filthiness of her fornication (vs5)and on her forhead a name was written: MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." "(vs9) Here is the mind which has wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits." (My apologies to my KJVO brothers and sisters out there. I was quoting from the NKJV.)

Anyway...those are my thoughts for the night.

 

AMEN brother, you are absolutly right, it is futal to go round and round. To all that posted, I think the best we can do is agree to disagree, and move on, thanks for your opinions, and God bless.
Your Brother in Christ ,
Rooster

 

Sspinko52 said "Rooster, the only responses that "they" have come from Catholic articles."

No, my long post on page 4 was entirely my own research, and although Rooster asked some questions about it, nobody has really dealt with the falsehoods I posted from that single tract. Should I do a similar post for the full-size comic "Sabotage?" That post will be much longer.

 

When studing about other demnonations/relgions, or cults, you don't just go to the opposing side. You go directly to the source as well. At least a smart researcher would do that. So why is it wrong to go and see what the Catholic Church has to say? No, they will not admit to things that they have done wrong. But then again, they may contridict themselves. And this is what you look for. I have not read every web page that was posted. But I do believe that there is enough evidance that some Chick Tracts have some falsehoods in them.

History is one of my hobbies. I especialy like Southren Civil War History. And let me tell you that the KKK was not started as a racial club, but to keep carpetbaggers from taking all the Southren lands and plantations. Had I realized that one of the Chick tracts said the Jusists started the KKK, I would have never passed one chick tract. I read all the Chick Tracts that I had recieved in a sample package. That particular tract was not in there, or if it was in there, then it was before I started my extensive Civil War Research.

Another favorite area is the Renniassance and Middle Ages. And I have to agree that there were not 68 million people in Europe at the time of the Inquision. My Husband has done extensive research of the Inquision, and he is of the same mind. That little stretch of the truth is enough to cause someone to really question if Jesus is real.

Again, I do believe that there is enough proof that in some of the Chick tracts there are falsehoods and there fore none of them should be used.

Stacie

 

Anyone who exaggerates..... You know what an exaggeration is? The truth tainted with a lie. Sound like something familiar from Genesis and when Jesus was tempted?

 

exaggerates That's how you spell that word!!!

That's what I was trying to say when I said "stretch of the truth." I couldn't figure out how to spell it.

And I agree with you. That's why I think it is so important to tell only the truth when we are trying to bring some one to Christ. I am trying learn how to witness to Mormons and exMormons to bring them to Christ. I have learned that when some Mormons find out the Truth about their church then they can't or won't believe in the True God and are totaly turned off to relgion and believe it to be something weak. There is a lot of bitterness when you find out that something like that is a lie.

While Christianity is not false, if we bring people to Christ by lieing, I believe it could cause that person to loose their faith when they find out the truth.

Stacie