New Chick Booklet Out

RornAgain>>>>>>>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ole chick hit the nail on the head again. Thank God someone still tells it like it is. When Catholics wake up from the state of denial they are in, They'll see it too, but sadly many people even after seeing the sex abuse scandels still believe The RCC is a sweet little virgin...

Wrong... SHES A WHORE!!!<<<<<<end of quote by bornagain

Dear Bornagain, 3am, enda, bobryan, et al,

I would say Bornagain's remarks are, as teenage-boy-locker-room as they are, reflect the basic beliefs of most the people on this bulletin board. The Cathoic Church reaches out to people like Bornagain, and refers to him as a "separated brother", and he responds by showing his true colors.

This is one of the proofs that the Church is genuine. So many well-meaning people who would blush to utter a cuss-word, degenerate into tourettes syndrom when they talk about the Catholic Church. No calumny too extreme, no insult too vile. The Lord Jesus promised us that the Church would be hated.

Can any of you show your bonafides? Has anyone ever called your Church "A WHORE"?.....

your separated brother

 

No, we Lutherans, are usually relegated to "Daughter of the Whore".

 

It's not the view of this Baptist

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

[/QUOTE] Enda,

Chick tracts were instramental in MY conversion from the CULT of Independent Fundamental Baptists that I was involved in so YES they can and are and will be instrumental in the conversion of souls for Jesus.
[/QUOTE]

I'm looking at things from a Catholic perspective, the chick tracts I have read always use the phrase "and I reject the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church" in the little sinners prayer section at he end.

I don't reject ALL the teaching of the CC and don't know anyone who does, I am grateful to have been born Catholic as I learned much about Christ as a catholic. Reading Chick tracts caused me to delay my conversion.

The Bible says ' Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved'
In effect Chick says ' Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and reject the Catholic Church and thou shalt be saved'

This is adding to the Word of God and we all know what scripture says about that.

The fact that Chick tracts were instrumental in your conversion explains a lot about the nature of some of your posts when you are talking to Roman Catholics. Chick tracts display no love for sinners they are just anti-catholic rubbish. Praise God, people like yourself do come to the truth but I would say more often than not its in spite of reading Chick tracts rather than because of reading chick tracts.

Yes, and God spoke through Balaam's ass.

I don't mind the truth, its just hard to find it among all the lies and exaggerations in Chick tracts.

I agree sometimes the truth can be hard to accept thats why it should be given in the spirit of love, rather than bigotry.

God Bless,

Enda

 

Sorry posted twice.

 

As has been well documented on this board, the 'seperated breathren' approach is a new one for the catholic church. This was not how it was done for hundreds of years prior to this new philosophy. What does that tell you? Think hard.

So, what you are doing is taking something that seems like it might prove something else and stating that it is, in fact, one of 'the proofs'? Where is the list of proofs? Criteria? Logical (ie. Mathematical) conclusions and assertions? That, my friend, is about as dubious a logical assertion as can be made! I am sorry, but that wouldn't hold up for a first grader, let alone a serious student of logical argument.

Several catholics on this board called non-catholic christians heretics, and their churches heretical. While not using the term 'whore', the implication is very similiar. So, to answer your question, no, my church has not been called a whore to my face, but yes, catholics as well as non-catholics use deragatory terms in reference to each other's churches. Happy?

Me? No, I am not happy. I hate it when people fail to engage in civil discourse. When someone, I don't care who, is unwilling to reason the argument to its full and logical conclusion, I feel an injustice has been done. When someone is unwilling to be logical, that shows to me hard heartedness and a willingness to ignorance. Unfortunately, many are guilty of all of this on this board. Makes it almost pointless to discuss anything.


jason

 

Raymond,

Saying 'Whore' in the context of interpreting the prophecy of the 'Whore of Babylon' is not a cuss word! I would venture to say that most people don't consider it a cuss word AT ALL.

The Bible doesn't see it as one. Harlot either.

I agree with you that the tactics that are used to 'teach' the truth about the CC are somewhat unattractive to the eyes and ears, but it is WHAT the Bible says! And don't go 3rd grader on me and try to play 'it doesn't say that'. You aren't going to change my mind, so don't waste your time.

The idea that persecution is a 'sign' of 'one true churchness' is rediculous. That would make the JW's, the LDS's, and *gasp* the SDA churches ALL eligible! THAT is not the sign of the true church.

The Bible tells us the signs to identify not only the Whore but the True Church. Persecution isn't even one of them. The warnings that we will be persecuted is given for those who are 'in Christ' and those who 'will live Godly in Christ'. NOW, if you are being persecuted because your church killed millions, is accused of idolatry, and necromancy, then I am CERTAIN that you cannot use that as 'qualification' for persecution for RIGHTEOUSNESS sake.

The Catholic Church has changed it's tune so many times that the Catechism has had to be rewritten (more than once) since the first time it was written. THAT SAYS SOMETHING about the 'church that hasn't ever changed'.

A Catholic friend of mine said once that most of the Catholics alive today that are older than 25 need to be 'recatechised'. Why is that? If the CC is carrying the torch of the Apostles why all the revisions and changes? Doesn't seem feesable that a church that never changes, is always changing!

If they have always had the 'truth' why do they keep changing?

God Bless

 

One of Jack Chick’s anti-Catholic books available on his website:

"Genocide in Satellite Croatia 1941- 1945" by Edmond Paris

How did he follow the courses at the Sorbonne? Did he glance through the college catalogue? How about a degree or something? I love "completing his education with sojourns in various other intellectual centers, such as Rome, Geneva, Salamanca, and Montreal." Does this mean he didn’t go to college but bummed around? Being “born in Paris of a university family” is not the same as actually having gone to school and gotten some sort of credentials to be taken seriously.

Now this is an outstanding characteristic.

I believe it takes more than this to be a credible “historical philosopher”.

Boy, I am glad he is a writer freed from any prejudice. The fact that this book is published by The American Institute for Balkan Affairs might make me think it was a bit slanted in favor of the Serbs.

The serbian American Institute for Balkan Affairs published this book because they were anti-Catholic, and it is propaganda, not because Edmond Paris is unbiased or is any kind of historian.

Jack Chick sells Edmond Paris’ books because they are anti-Catholic, not because Edmond Paris is unbiased or has any credentials.

The American Atheist sells this book because they are anti-Catholic, not because Edmond Paris is unbiased or has credentials as any kind of historian.

The American Institute for Balkan Affairs had their own agenda against the Catholic Church. We (U.S.) fought a war against the Serbs and took out Melosovic.

Serbs who published his book like to call him a "professor".
http://www.srpska-mreza.com/
(Professor) Edmond Paris: "Genocide in Satelite Croatia" (Chicago, 1961)
Professor from where? It would be nice to know.


Jack Chick says he is a "French Journalist".
"Edmond Paris was a French journalist who boldly exposes, from a secular point of view, the secret history of the Jesuits from the 16th century to World War II." http://www.chick.com


Jack Chick is now the new “publisher” of this book. It is popular with atheists and other anti-Catholics and makes Jack Chick money.

By the way, Edmond Paris is a self proclaimed “expert” on the Jesuits too.

The Secret History of the Jesuits
Author: Edmond Paris
Secrets the Jesuits don't want Christians to know

Can also be bought on the Jack Chick website.


God Bless

[ April 03, 2003, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]

 

Wouldn't a "Chick" booklet be a Chicklet?

 

Hey all,

I finally did visit the Chick site and could not help but notice that in his latest work that he makes a statement to the effect that Mary was Satan's masterpiece to control his religious slaves.

Sometimes things become clear in an instant.

And the dragon was wroth with the woman.

I may not be as expert on spotting "A WHORE" as some of you here, but I think I do know dragon's breath when I smell it.....

How could such poisonous statement about Mary be anything other than demonic?

your brother

 

FYI

Don't be fool by Jack Chick:
http://net2.netacc.net/~mafg/jtchick/jtc02r.html

Armando

 

Raymond,

That's a nice thought to try to apply the 'Woman' vision to Mary, but it is impossible to do so.

The Characteristics that identify who the woman is, and what she does, DOES NOT point to Mary.

Revelation 12: 1. And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

1. Clothed with the Sun (clothed with Christ)
2. Moon under her feet (standing on the Word which reflects Christ)
3. Crown of 12 stars (12 tribes/ 12 Apostles)

2. And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

4. Was with child, and was in labor

3. And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
4. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

5. The 'dragon' has the same characteristics described about the BEAST. 10 horns, and 7 'heads'. (ch 13)

6. Dragon is associated with Satan, who took 1/3 of heavens angels with him when he was cast out.

7. The dragon, stood waiting to kill the Child as soon as it was born (Rome)

5. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

8. The woman gave birth to a Child and He was taken to God, and His throne. (Jesus)

6. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

9. The Woman was protected during the 1260 days/years of rule by the Beast, IN the wilderness. WHO did this happen to? NOT Mary.

7. And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8. And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

10. SO, we see the Man Child BORN before Satan was cast out, and BY WHOM was he cast out? Michael and HIS angels. Who's Angels? (the Lord's)

10. And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

11. Salvation is come by the power of Christ, because HE cast out Satan.

11. And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

12. But 'they' (who is this now?) overcame Satan by the Blood of Jesus, and the Word of their testimony, and there were martyrs. hmmmm

12. Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

13. WE are warned because it is US that he is going to attack. Who are we?

13. And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

14. The WOMAN is persecuted by the dragon. The SAME woman who brought forth the Man Child. 'THEY' are persecuted. The Woman is a THEY.

14. And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

15. And 'they' are taken out of his way, for the duration of the 1260 days/years. Kept safe in the wilderness from Satan.

15. And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

16. So we see specifics here. A 'flood' (many people) come after 'them' so that the 'woman' could be taken by force. If it is Mary, WHEN has a 'flood' ever tried to take her?

16. And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

17. BUT, the earth made a way for 'them' to not be taken, by the 'flood' that was sent out by the Dragon/ Beast.

17. And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

18. And here we see the EXACT identification of the woman. She has OFFSPRING. NOW, unless you are willing to submit that Mary had offspring, you have to admit that this is talking of SOMEONE ELSE. The REMNANT of 'her seed' (since when do WOMEN have seed?) are who the dragon goes after. And there is a CLEAR distinction of WHO those people ARE.

They are those who KEEP the Commandments of God, and HAVE the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Which is? Rev 19:10. And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

SO, does MARY, and HER offspring have the Spirit of Prophecy?

Does Mary, and HER offspring KEEP the Commandments of God?

Did Mary, and HER offspring go into the wilderness for 1260 days/years to be protected from the Dragon/ Beast?

It is QUITE clear that Mary is NOT the woman in this text.

God Bless

 

Wonderful claim - just not in the actual text of Chic's material.

Sorta like Purgatory is a wonderful claim - just not actually "in" the Bible.

And very much like the opening claim that Chic says "Satan is a creator" as if Satan's "plans" and "work" - make him "a creator" like God.

Fascinating "spin" our bretheren are using.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Wonderful claim - just not in the actual text of Chic's material.
</font>[/QUOTE]I think you'll find that this is quoted in the 'Man in Black' tract, you must have missed it.

Whilst you're checking it out look at the sinners prayer at the end of the tract. Do you think that it is right to tell catholics they must reject Catholicism?

I'd be interested to hear what you think and also what Chicks supporters (eg.Born Again, 3AM etc) have to say about it.

This caused me great problems at the time of my conversion.

In Christ (In spite of Chick)

Enda

 

From the comic book: "Vandals plundered,
raped and destroyed Europe."


The Vandals were a tribe at the front
of a chain of barbarians pushing one another
west. The Vandals took over what is
now France, Spain, and part of Africa
across the Mediterian from Spain.
The Vandals considered themselves better
Christians than those in Rome.
Those in Rome kept the old statues built
during the heyday of the Roman Empire.
When the Vandals sacked Rome, they
tore down those heathen idols that
the Romanish Church kept about.

Every since someone who watonly tears
up stuff is called a vandal.

 

I am not a proponent of bashing other churches or of making false charges against them - that includes false charges against Jack Chick.

For example, I never found a place where careful reading of the article shows Jack to teach that Satan created Mary. Not even in "man in black".

Rather - I do find that he argues for the mythology attached to Mary to be error - and not accidental error.

When the argument is made "against Catholicism" or against "the teachings of Catholicism" - even my Catholic friends admit that he is talking about the "distinctives of Catholicism" - not "acceptance of the Bible" or "God as Creator" or "Jesus as the Son of God" - shared by all Christians including Catholics.

Attempts to obfuscate these obvious points does not help the Catholic argument.

It is much easier just to admit that there are teaching differences - and then go look at what the real differences are rather than promoting that someone really things "Satan created Mary".

Carefull reading will not support that straw man complaint.

There are so many large areas of differences - why make stuff up, there are plenty of real ones to choose from.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Just read 'Man in Black'. Absolutely disgusting. That's all I can say.

 

That brings up a good point.

How do Catholics "think" non-Catholics should view the Catholic church IF they do not give up their doctrines as non-Catholics?

Basically many non-Catholic groups DO find the Catholic church to be in error.

Many non-Catholics DO accept that the Catholic church slaughtered millions of Christians during the dark ages.

Many non-Catholics DO think that the prayers to the dead - are simply that - prayers to the dead.

Many non-Catholics do not think that the Pope is the "Vicar of Christ on earth".

Many non-Catholics do not consider the Catholic church to have any right of succession at all to the work of Peter.

Many non-Catholics view the entire system of Purgatory and Indulgences to be pure mythology invented by the Catholic church in the dark ages to fool the masses that were in ignorance. They utterly reject Purgatory AND Indulgences as being pure error - fabrications of the Catholic church.

Many non-Catholics think that the adoration of Mary as "Queen of Heaven" and "coredemptrix" and prayers to Mary, and Mary's altars to be "worship of Mary" -- pure error.

Many non-Catholics think that veneration of Mary as "sinless like Christ" is an error invented by the Catholic Church.

Many non-Catholics view the Catholics priests has having no power at all to turn bread into the Body of Christ, no power at all to absolve sin, no power at all to grant an indulgence. Neither priest nor pope - have anything at all to offer - EXCEPT that they (like any other Christian) might choose to accept salavation and follow Christ.

In other words - EVEN when they don't express these ideas in as blunt and objectionable a way as Jack Chick - the underlying doctrinal positions continue to utterly reject the Catholic "distinctives" as "false" and "pure error" invented by the Catholic church over time.

IF you allow non-Catholics to continue to believe their doctrines - and those doctrines utterly reject the salient - key-points of Catholicism's "distinctives" what "conclusions" DO Catholics expect the non-Catholics to "Draw" regarding the Catholic church and "apostacy"??

I doubt that any catholic will answer this question - (it is a simple one but you have to simply admit to the obvious differences and then address the question). Still I am hoping there might be someone that will give it an honest shot.

In Christ,

Bob

 

You that site took me to one of the best track chik did to tell others of the Mary worship cult.

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0040/0040_01.asp

 

Protestants spilled blood too. Just ask Thomas More.

Tis simply an expression of the 'communion of the saints.' I certainly won't "spill blood" over this one.

I, for one, do not believe in the 'primacy of the Pope'. He is simply the 'chief bishop' of the Roman communion.

Indulgences, yes, I agree. Purgatory MAY be, IMHO, a reality. It all depends on whether one embraces 'inputed' or 'infused' righteousness. Again, I won't spill blood over this one either.

No-other human in heaven is more-important than Mary...she bore the Son of God. Yet, I agree, that the RCC goes too far when she calls Mary "coredemptrix". A common misconception of RC doctrine is that RC's 'worship Mary'. That is not the official position of the RCC.

(John 20:22-23) And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: {23} Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.