# Chick Tracts contribution to Textual Issues



## One Little Nail (Jan 15, 2014)

It was a wonderful Chick booklet called Sabotage which first opened my eyes on Issues dealing with Ancient Heretics & God Haters who had attempted to corrupt & destroy The Word of God.
Also one called The Attack which I'd like to mention.
Does anybody have any thoughts or fond memories in regards to this matter?

View attachment 3767 View attachment 3769 http://www.chick.com/m/reading/tracts/readtract.asp?stk=0031


Here's a little rundown on what Chick Tracts are http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/ComicBook/ChickTracts?from=Main.ChickTracts


----------



## mossy (Jan 15, 2014)

Seriously, you need better sources. Chick is known for distributing outright lies and fabrications. 
Terry


----------



## davdavis (Jan 15, 2014)

One Little Nail said:


> It was a wonderful Chick booklet called Sabotage which first opened my eyes on Issues dealing with Ancient Heretics & God Haters who had attempted to corrupt & destroy The Word of God.
> Does anybody have any thoughts or fond memories in regards to this matter?



Brother, I agree with the other brother about Chick. He has very little in the way of discernment. What is below is taken from a book I did some months ago in which Chick is referenced.

As I’ve noted earlier Jack Chick is somewhat of a paradox. His Gospel presentation materials have done a lot of good. Unfortunately he has been responsible for the visibility of many of the major figures in this book. Todd, Schnoebelen, Rivera, and Brown\Moses were all promoted by Chick. 

Jack T. Chick was born on April 13, 1924, In California. After service in the Second World War, he returned to California and was married. His wife who was apparently very devout witnessed to him and was instrumental in his conversion. Around 1960, he got the idea of designing religious tracts and distributing them. He created what was essentially a cottage industry, writing and printing these tracts. Jack Chick is a self-described “independent fundamentalist Baptist.” From the beginning many of his tracts heavily reflected his dispensational eschatology, and heavily implied massive conspiracy. Then, starting in the mid-70s he began embracing a series of increasingly bizarre individuals. First he became aware of John Todd. Chick said he was introduced to in 1973. He apparently found Todd’s claims compelling. They first collaborated on the Comic”The Broken Cross”
1}404 Error - File Not Found
At this point, Chick published several tracts and Comics promoting Todd’s claims. When Todd was discovered to have been running an occult bookstore, teaching witchcraft, and had been arrested for sex with an under aged girl, Chick rushed to get him out of jail early. Chick argued that Christians had been shunning Todd because of the assassination attempts against him {which no one but Todd ever observed, and this forced him to renew involvement with the occult to make a living As Chick Related, "I kept calling John, telling him he was saved, but he believed the Armenian doctrine that once he went back to sin he was lost forever. I kept at him. He pushed the occult religion at me, but I wouldnot give up now and I told him he still belonged to Jesus. I called him my brother and he told me to stop calling him that. When I almost gave up, John called me and told me that he and Sheila had come back to Christ.”{2} http://www.illuminati-news.com/0/JohnToddDefence.htm{authors note: Chick I believe is referring above is referring to Arminians, not Armenians, and I'm certain that he doesn’t mean any offense to our brethren of Armenian descent.} 

Jack Chicks letter in defense of John Todd is like an Encyclopedia of Credulity. In describing his authority for believing that there had been assassination attempts on Todd, he cited Todd’s wife as an authority. He accepts solely on Todd’s word that as a member of the illuminati that he bank rolled Melody-land, a charismatic group and school in California. In addressing the voluminous contradictions in Todd’s story, he uses argumentation that those who have read Geisler’s defense of Caner will easily recognize. He affirmed his belief that Todd was the victim of Freemasons and the illuminati. {Perhaps “extremists” Free Masons and the Illuminati}.{2}

Since, in spite of all that has been revealed about Todd, including imprisonment for rape at knifepoint Chick has never repudiated him. At the time the Todd controversy reached its height Chick embraced Alberto Rivera. Once again, long after Rivera had been exposed as a fraud, Chick has continued to embrace him. Chick still sells Rivera’s work today, providing Rome’s defenders with ammo to shoot at Christians. When the late Walter Martin debated Rivera and pointed out errors in his story Chick proclaimed him and his organization tools of the Vatican. In his statement on Schnoebelen, {2}.About William Schnoebelen, Chick indicates that he has swallowed whole hog, Schnoebelen’ s story. While Chick did embrace Rebecca Brown, in fairness he does seem to distance himself from her though he’s never officially repudiated the Brown\Moses duo. Then Chick embraced Schnoebelen and carries his books. In addition he cited as an authority the Loony Dr. Peter Beter, Warnke, and is a strong supporter of the King James Only views of Riplinger and Texe Marrs. Only God knows the positive effects of those of Chicks works that were dedicated to presenting the gospel. The negative effects that can be seen from his support of persons like the above Can be measured and they are incalculable.


----------



## MW (Jan 15, 2014)

Because of people employing fundamentalist-type fear-mongering tactics it becomes more difficult to commend the AV to sober-minded people because they now identify it with folly.


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 16, 2014)

mossy said:


> Seriously, you need better sources. Chick is known for distributing outright lies and fabrications.
> Terry



Hi Terry, no chick tracts are not my textual criticism sources, I just remember reading them when I was a young Christian 20 or so years ago & found some things just stuck in my memory,like in the Attack it said that some of The KJB Translators were killed by undercover Jesuits & the sort, it was very vivid & has stuck with me. Mr Jack Chick by all accounts is a honest & sincere gentleman but has been to trusting of people.

View attachment 3770 View attachment 3771


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 16, 2014)

davdavis said:


> One Little Nail said:
> 
> 
> > It was a wonderful Chick booklet called Sabotage which first opened my eyes on Issues dealing with Ancient Heretics & God Haters who had attempted to corrupt & destroy The Word of God.
> ...



Hello David, Yes unfortunately Mr Jack Chick has been too trusting of people or maybe even naive.
the post is helpful though I'm looking for something more related to the Bible tracts mentioned.


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 16, 2014)

armourbearer said:


> Because of people employing fundamentalist-type fear-mongering tactics it becomes more difficult to commend the AV to sober-minded people because they now identify it with folly.



Hello Matthew, Theres no doubt that scare mongering has turned some people away, despite there being a few errors here & there it still has helped some people, we trust that God works all things for good to those in Christ Jesus.

I had been helped initially to see there was a "Bible Versions Issue" so I thank God for this, though you do need to exercise 
a bit of discretion, discernment, keep whats good & spit out the bones!


----------



## iainduguid (Jan 16, 2014)

One Little Nail said:


> mossy said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously, you need better sources. Chick is known for distributing outright lies and fabrications.
> ...



I'm not familiar with this claim. Can you provide any historical sources for it (apart from Chick tracts)?


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 16, 2014)

iainduguid said:


> One Little Nail said:
> 
> 
> > mossy said:
> ...



Hello Iain, No, thats one of the reasons for mentioning it, I was hoping if anybody could verify some of the claims in the tracts, thats not to say that its dubious either it could well be true, if anything you would think the process of Translation
would be hindered rather than attacking the Scholars post Translation, I know Tyndale was killed by the King & Romish
agents but he was not involved in the Translation of The KJB personally. Here is a third party which brings some credulity
to the Alberto Rivera story,who claimed to be a former Jesuit Priest, a former high ranking Catholic Bishop who converted to Protestantism,very interesting considering all the gainsayers!http://www.monsterwax.com/alberto.html


----------



## earl40 (Jan 16, 2014)

One Little Nail said:


> Hello Matthew, Theres no doubt that scare mongering has turned some people away, *despite there being a few errors here & there it still has helped some people*, we trust that God works all things for good to those in Christ Jesus.
> 
> I had been helped initially to see there was a "Bible Versions Issue" so I thank God for this, though you do need to exercise
> a bit of discretion, discernment, keep whats good & spit out the bones!



Here and there? Interesting.


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 16, 2014)

Hello Earl, I'm not in anyway condoning those errors, hither & thither.


----------



## JimmyH (Jan 16, 2014)

iainduguid said:


> One Little Nail said:
> 
> 
> > mossy said:
> ...


Tom Clancy ?


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 16, 2014)

JimmyH said:


> iainduguid said:
> 
> 
> > One Little Nail said:
> ...



Hello Jimmy, are you suggesting that its a work of fiction


----------



## JimmyH (Jan 16, 2014)

One Little Nail said:


> JimmyH said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Clancy ?
> ...


No Robert, just a poor attempt at adding a bit of humor to the thread. I had not previously heard of Chick tracts and know only what I've read in this thread ...... nothing serious or personal I assure you ....


----------



## earl40 (Jan 16, 2014)

JimmyH said:


> One Little Nail said:
> 
> 
> > JimmyH said:
> ...



From what I have seen and hear your anology is closer to true than many of Jack's tracs are to The Truth.


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 16, 2014)

JimmyH said:


> One Little Nail said:
> 
> 
> > JimmyH said:
> ...



My apologies Jimmy , I also meant it in a humorous way, alot of the little tract booklets I think actually are written fictionally
with Gospel & moral stories tied in, Im very surprised that you've never heard of them apparently they are the largest underground comic publishers in history, they are quickly nearing the 1 Billion sales mark!

I suggest you go check them out on the Internet, there is also some parody sites as well plus a catholic site as well which 
dislikes them for their anti-catholic Fundamentalist tracts like death cookie & why is mary crying? 
The Nightmare World of Jack T. Chick | Catholic Answers
Comics put the fun in Fundamentalism! unfortunately his tracts contain violations of The Second Commandment.
The 10 Most Awesomely Insane Jack Chick Mini-Comics - Topless Robot - Nerd news, humor and self-loathing.

Somebody Goofed Read A Tract On Chick Mobile

View attachment 3773


----------



## bookslover (Jan 16, 2014)

Wow! I had no idea Jack Chick was still alive! I wonder, sometimes, why it seems as if its the nuts who get to live to extreme old age (see: Camping, Harold). Benny Hinn will probably make it to 100...


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 16, 2014)

bookslover said:


> Wow! I had no idea Jack Chick was still alive! I wonder, sometimes, why it seems as if its the nuts who get to live to extreme old age (see: Camping, Harold). Benny Hinn will probably make it to 100...



Richard life is a blessing though for us us believers to die is gain! 
look me thinks jack be naive but we ought to heed The Lord's admonition in Matthew 5:22.


----------



## davdavis (Jan 17, 2014)

I believe he was being facetious, while at the same time one must emphasize the harm, though possibly unintentional he has done. His support of Alberto Rivera's conspiracy theories have been used to discredit witness to Romanists. His support of Todd and Schnoebelen discredit witness to the Occult and Mormonism. His acceptance of Rivera's contention that the Muslims were created by the Jesuits discredits our witness to them. I'm not a KJV-only person, but I can assure you his sort of easily discredited Landmarkism-style conspiracy theory discredits that movement. I believe he is sincere. Unlike Camping, I don't believe Chick has descended into outright heresy, but it is sad that someone that is so widely distributed has so little discernment.


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 17, 2014)

Im just going through the Jack Chick website & found another tract on the Bible Versions page

View attachment 3775 No Liars inHeaven

it all seems to be coming together now. Does the Bible you use make Jesus out to be a liar?
You can check out John 7:8 at http://www.biblestudytools.com/compare-translations/


----------



## iainduguid (Jan 17, 2014)

One Little Nail said:


> Im just going through the Jack Chick website & found another tract on the Bible Versions page
> 
> View attachment 3774 No Liars in Heaven
> 
> ...



With respect, this simply illustrates the problem. How exactly does Mr. Chick's graphic artwork help to establish a text critical issue, except by making it sound as if some Bibles have deliberately omitted a word? There have been two different readings of this verse circulating since at least the time of Chrysostom. F.F. Bruce has a helpful discussion in the NICNT which actually substantively engages the issues on both sides. He concludes that even if the original reading is "not" (ouk) rather than "not yet" (oupo), there is no issue as to Jesus' veracity, since he uses the Greek present tense which can allow for a different action later.

Of course, one helpful aspect of this particular verse is that it shows that modern translations are not opposed to siding with the Majority text against older manuscripts where they think it correct, even the much maligned NIV. But if you want to engage the issues you should consult people who actually read Greek and know what they are talking about, not comic scaremongers...


----------



## Logan (Jan 17, 2014)

One Little Nail said:


> Also one called The Attack which I'd like to mention.
> Does anybody have any thoughts or fond memories in regards to this matter?



I just read through "No Liars in Heaven" and "The Attack" and frankly I'm speechless. There are so many inferences, falsehoods, conspiracies, historical inaccuracies. 

Apparently the Jesuits were afraid of the KJV because the English would have "textus receptus" in their own language (direct quote: "Holy Mother...this could be disastrous if such a Bible got into the hands of the masses"). Never mind that the English had it in multiple translations for a hundred years already, no! The KJV must not be translated!

Satan used intellectuals to produce mutilated Alexandrian manuscripts? He also used Jerome to create the "Latin Vulgate"?

I don't think he knows what the textus receptus is, he seems to use it interchangeably for "Bible" and says the Jesuits tried to corrupt it by infiltrating the translation committee and placing the Apocrypha in it? God used armed guards to prevent the secret Jesuits from making changes to the translation?

It's all extremely imaginative but the lack of truth is terrible. Robert, please don't consider this to be a slight against you, but these Chick tracts seem to be very poor material. I don't know that Mr Chick has tried to lie, but what he has produced is indeed a huge mess of lies.


----------



## kodos (Jan 17, 2014)

Logan, I have found that I'm often speechless when reading a Chick tract. And not in a good way. Most of the tracts I've seen of his have been awful.


----------



## Free Christian (Jan 17, 2014)

Unfortunately the tract had depictions of Jesus and .... My alarm bells always go off when I see depictions of Jesus, God, Angels or demons. Regardless of who uses them. 


armourbearer said:


> Because of people employing fundamentalist-type fear-mongering tactics it becomes more difficult to commend the AV to sober-minded people because they now identify it with folly.


 Sadly true


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 18, 2014)

iainduguid said:


> With respect, this simply illustrates the problem. How exactly does Mr. Chick's graphic artwork help to establish a text critical issue, except by making it sound as if some Bibles have deliberately omitted a word? There have been two different readings of this verse circulating since at least the time of Chrysostom. F.F. Bruce has a helpful discussion in the NICNT which actually substantively engages the issues on both sides. He concludes that even if the original reading is "not" (ouk) rather than "not yet" (oupo), there is no issue as to Jesus' veracity, since he uses the Greek present tense which can allow for a different action later.



I believe there can only be one true reading, as The Holy Spirit would not have given 2 readings so one is true & the other false, as a K.J.B./T.R. Text adherer I would choose the later reading "not yet", if the Greek present tense allows for a later action any new translation could or should have added yet or another word/words in _italics_ to clear up any confusion, because its the English Translation that we are referring to & not the Greek, and the omission does make it look like He makes a deceptive statement or lie considering He did go up to the feast later, but thats just my opinion of it.



iainduguid said:


> Of course, one helpful aspect of this particular verse is that it shows that modern translations are not opposed to siding with the Majority text against older manuscripts where they think it correct, even the much maligned NIV. But if you want to engage the issues you should consult people who actually read Greek and know what they are talking about, not comic scaremongers...



Hello Iain,I've not posted this thread to support Jack Chick or to use comic scaremongers to promote Textual Criticism haha it is just a thread I came up with to generate discussion & interest on the subject & get fellow Pbers thoughts on the subject 
also to look at Chick Publications Textual views from a purely objective viewpoint thats all, judging by the amount of views this thread has received in just a day or so, it looks like it has worked.


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 18, 2014)

Logan said:


> I just read through "No Liars in Heaven" and "The Attack" and frankly I'm speechless. There are so many inferences, falsehoods, conspiracies, historical inaccuracies.



Hello Logan, Yes there seems to be a lot of inaccuracies, I'm in total agreement with you, maybe Mr Chick would call it 
artistic licence?



Logan said:


> It's all extremely imaginative but the lack of truth is terrible. Robert, please don't consider this to be a slight against you, but these Chick tracts seem to be very poor material. I don't know that Mr Chick has tried to lie, but what he has produced is indeed a huge mess of lies.



No offence taken I am not in any way, shape or form affiliated with Chick Publications so none taken, I was just thinking
with the fact that many of his tracts are fictional tales with Gospel messages tied in, that when he came to do these tracts
that he used to much artistic licence were he has taken some truth mixed it with fiction & blurred the lines of reality.
In the end whether he's sincere or not he probably has done more harm than good.


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 18, 2014)

Free Christian said:


> Unfortunately the tract had depictions of Jesus and .... My alarm bells always go off when I see depictions of Jesus, God, Angels or demons. Regardless of who uses them.



Hello Brett, Ive never liked that myself as its a clear violation of The Second Commandment having pictorial representations
of The Lord Jesus Christ, from what I remember these tracts always had a Great judgment scene in the back of them & the evangelical tracts liked to have gory crucifixion images, but that goes with the territory as the tracts promote an arminian type gospel with a 4 point salvation plan on the back page of most of them, so mankind apparently needs some kind of emotional pictoral inducement to help them on the way to faith!


----------



## Free Christian (Jan 19, 2014)

I should add too though. That in the past I have read a Chick book or two and still have one (shock horror to many im sure ) And will admit too that it was the reading of one that first got me thinking about translations many years ago. I went to the KJV not long after that, then after a number of years, later switched to another version. In recent times though since being here I have gone back to the KJV, for reasons I have written about here on this forum before.
So I guess in ways the seed for looking into translation issues was first planted back then, through, a Chick publication!
Bit like when I was saved in a Charismatic Church.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jan 19, 2014)

armourbearer said:


> Because of people employing fundamentalist-type fear-mongering tactics it becomes more difficult to commend the AV to sober-minded people because they now identify it with folly.


----------



## One Little Nail (Jan 22, 2014)

Just to some up it seems to me that Chick Publications are a King James Bible Only Advocate, from what is shown in their Books & Tracts,from what is taught by Barry Burton & by there endorsement of Sam Gipp.

as a side note it is presumed by many that Sam Gipp holds to Peter Ruckman's erroneous doctrine that the K.J.B. is given
by inspiration of God, this is not true for in Sam Gipp's book An Understandable History of the Bible, 1987, we find in Chapter 9: The Authorized Version, I do not believe that the King James Bible is a new inspiration. "Inspiration" starts with a blank sheet of paper, a man of God, and God. so though he is a strong believer in The K.J.B. even equating it with the original autographs; 
I personally believe that God has perfectly preserved His Word in the King James or Authorized Version. I can at least produce a King James Bible to show what I believe in. Any person who claims that God inspired the original autographs perfectly, cannot produce those original manuscripts to prove it! I do not believe that the King James Bible is a new inspiration. "Inspiration" starts with a blank sheet of paper, a man of God, and God. I am saying that the Authorized Version is every word of God that was in the original autographs, preserved to this day. "Preservation" starts with God's manuscripts, a man of God, and God. The end result of both is the same: the perfect Word and words of God. It only makes sense 
An Understandable History of the Bible - by Samuel C. Gipp

I hope you all have enjoyed this most serious thread on Chick Tracts contribution to Textual Issues.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jan 22, 2014)

One Little Nail said:


> I hope you all have enjoyed this most serious thread on Chick Tracts contribution to Textual Issues.


No, I haven't. I think that those that have _sound_ arguments (historical and theological) for the Textus Receptus probably roll their eyes every time someone as unsound as Jack Chick is brought into the conversation. A Christian is to be sober and truthful in his thinking. The renewing of our minds produces this kind of sobriety. Jack Chick's approach violates the Scriptures by:
- Arguments from conspiracy when we're commanded not to be given to them.
- Assuming the worst in others he disagrees with then the 9th Commandment requires that we assume the best.
- Repeated violations of the 9th Commandment in his representations of views that I might otherwise disagree with anyway but not in the manner (or for the reasons) that Chick presents.
- Making some secondary issues so primary to cast outside the camp many who are otherwise our brothers and sisters.

In short, this thread has not been serious in the Biblical sense of the term but alarming in the lack of discernment exhibited.


----------

