Talk:Jack Chick
From Academic Kids
Template:Authoronlinesource2004 (Above is a dead link) (Here is an alternate link (http://www.religionnewsblog.com/9081-.html))
| Contents |
where?
I had never heard of jack chick until a few years ago, and now it seems he's fairly well known. Has his work received wider readership/interest for any reason? Meelar 00:16, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Fark.com. Seriously. I don't think anyone knew about him until Fark started linking to him regularly. RadicalBender 00:17, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Heck. Chick's been around a long time, lurking in laundromats and phone booths. Fark just made him bigtime. -- Decumanus 00:18, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I think (but can't confirm, or I'd have put it in the article) that he's mostly a phenomenon in the U.S. south (aside from fark of course). Most of the tracts I was handed in Texas were his; most of those up here in MN aren't. - Hephaestos|§ 00:20, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- He's also well-known in the roleplaying scene ever since he published "Dark Dungeons", which (along with groups like BADD) led to the stigmatization of roleplaying by many conservative Christians.
- I first learned about him in the late 1980s from Ivan Stang's book on odd subcultures, High Weirdness By Mail. In that article, a page of a very lurid Chick comic was shown as well as an isolated panel or two. Once I'd had exposure, then I started to notice it on the fringes of mainstream culture. Not prominent, but there if you were sensitized to it, invisible if you weren't. Catbar (Brian Rock) 18:42, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
NPOV stupid
Is there any NPOV way of noting how spectacularly stupid this guy is? :) --Furrykef 19:53, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- easy, just ad facts ;) Sam [Spade (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sam_Spade&action=edit§ion=new)] 20:07, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- But they're scary horrifically scary. :( Jonathan Grynspan
Jack Chick is spreading seeds of prejudice and hatred rather than soul winnng.He si really good at promoting traditional anti-catholicism in the form of tracts,comics and books.During the 19th Century and even up to the 1960s,anti-catholicism was part of American Protestant lifestyle.The King James Version is hard for someone who doesn't understand the English it uses and it is not the only PERFECT version. I like every Bible version because they all are God's Word. That is why we have the New International Version,New King James Version,The Living Bible,The Good News bible,The New Jerusalem Bible and etc. Jack Chick is a fool to believe such nonsense !Then there is that infamous and hated Alberto Rivera whose's views contradict history including Church History.Whoever or whatever Alberto was,he is a deceiver and false prophet.Then,there is the 'claim' that Islam was created by the Catholic Church.How can this be when they fought and killed each other during the Crusades and still oppose each other till today.Hitler was never a Catholic though his parents were and he hated both Catholics and Protestants and tried to replaced them with his Nazi Religion.No one is perfect including Protestants,for example Martin Luther the founder of the Reformation preached antisemitism and told his followers to persecute Jews. I might agree with him concerning Evolution and abortion but not with cATHOLICISM
- Thanks for your comments! They are not entirely NPOV, so please try to be careful of neutrality. Would you like to form a user account? Sam [Spade (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sam_Spade&action=edit§ion=new)] 23:26, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
various quibbles
In 1996, Jack Chick's website was elected the best Christian website
Elected by who?
It was Lola's mother who converted Chick to Christianity.
What was his religion before this?
- I'd be fine w you removing these, unless someone wants to verify them. Sam [Spade (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sam_Spade&action=edit§ion=new)] 00:36, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I'll trim the "best Christian website," since there's no source.
- Probably talking orthogonally with the comment about his conversion versus his prior "religion." Fundamentalist-Christians see conversion ("born again") as an adult event. Before that, even if you are "raised Christian," you are in general considered to be "unsaved." Jdavidb 21:32, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I never understood that belief. I'm pretty sure the Christian bible says that you only need to accept Jesus to be saved. (But then, who am I to tell fundamentals how to bible-bash?) Jonathan Grynspan 06:14, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Jack Chick claims somewhere on his website (I'll find a link if anyone really wants to see it) that he was incredibly anti-Christian before his being "born again", and was antagonistic towards Christians. This may just be him painting himself that way to encourage people who are like that to become like him, though. So, it's probably fair to say that he converted to Christianity, even if he didn't actually espouse atheism at any time.---SpaceMoose 06:14, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Is it worth adding in a note that at least a few people seem to think that he's a Catholic mocking the fundamentalists? --Kadett 01:01, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I don't think so. Anyone as over-the-top as Chick is bound to have a few people who come along and say "this can't be real" if they don't know the background. The same could be said of Fred Phelps. NTK 16:05, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
When?
When did he start to publish his tracts? AxelBoldt 20:19, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Is Chick a dispensationalist?
Most of the wikipedia article relating to dispensationalism rang true for Chick, however, the quote on the antichrist did not: "By consistently teaching that the Beast of Revelation, or the Antichrist, is a political leader, dispensationalism has weakened the traditional Reformation-era identification of that figure with the Pope, and the Roman Catholic Church with the Whore of Babylon. Dispensationalism has led many evangelical Christians of the USA to temper their traditional anti-Catholicism, at least a little."
Chick has repeatedly made claims that the Catholic church is the whore of babylon, and that at the end of times, the Pope will be the anti-christ. --Havermayer 01:20, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Confusing wording
I was confused for a moment when I read this article and it said "After his marriage, he began working at the AstroScience Corporation etc." Shouldn't it say "After his wedding" or something? Because to me marriage is the entire period that you are married to someone, but if he did all this AFTER his marriage this would imply he split from his wife Lola somewhere in the 60s or so, doesn't it? Yet the article later indicates that he stayed with his wife until his death in 1998. Or am I misinterpreting this word? At any rate, it's rather confusing and maybe "wedding" would be a better choice of word. --Little-quiqueg 18:17, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Changed to "after marrying." Samaritan 06:56, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Possible copyright problem
The image of Jack Chick was drawn by Jimmy Akin, who never gave permission for its use and who retains the rights to the drawing. Proof: http://www.jimmyakin.org/2005/04/happy_birthday_.html
Jack Chick Museum of Fine Art: Pro-Chick?
I think placing the Jack Chick Museum of Fine Art in a Pro-Chick category is a huge stretch. It's hard to say it's anti-Chick, since it also supports his right to free speech, but the site contains a gigantic repository of tract reviews that pick apart almost every tract ever published. The "fan club" is an obvious spoof club, what with the "Get Out of Hell Free" card you get.
I would put this in the "Relatively Neutral" category myself.Rebochan 17:19, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
JohanL's changes
I have reverted most of JohanL's changes. First, the spelling of "theater" was changed to the British "theatre" in two places. First, I believe it against policy to make these changes except for the sake of consistency, but moreover this article is about an American so it makes sense to use the American spelling, especially for "Pasadena Playhouse School of Theater" where "Theatre" is actually wrong. Secondly, a profusion of superfluous links was added, most of which were not really related to this article and which hurt the flow and readibility of the article, detracting from the relevant links. In fact, looking at the current state of the article there are already far too many useless links. NTK 20:01, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
