stilllearning
Active Member
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0031/0031_01.asp
Edited to comply with copyright laws and BB policy.
Edited to comply with copyright laws and BB policy.
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
How accurate is this?
- Thread starter stilllearning
- Start date
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Its hard to know how accurate. It is all based on papers that Dr Alberto Rivera supposedly once saw. There is no other evidence at all.
Many question the veracity of his claims.
Many question the veracity of his claims.
I think this comic is generally true.
There is another comic about Rivera himself at that site.
http://www.chick.com/reading/comics/0112/0112_allinone.asp
There is another comic about Rivera himself at that site.
http://www.chick.com/reading/comics/0112/0112_allinone.asp
Trotter
<img src =/6412.jpg>
Utter garbage. There was a time I would have swallowed it hook, line, ad sinker, but I am now a mature Christian and have learned just how twisted Chick is.
As Roger said, "It is all based on papers that Dr Alberto Rivera supposedly once saw. There is no other evidence at all" (emphasis added). Chick will go with anything that backs up his heretical stance and comes across as sensationalism.
As Roger said, "It is all based on papers that Dr Alberto Rivera supposedly once saw. There is no other evidence at all" (emphasis added). Chick will go with anything that backs up his heretical stance and comes across as sensationalism.
Chick?
I bought into him when I was in Jr. High at church camp and his books were sold in the bookstore there. I liked them because they were comics and actually believed him. His evolution is so inaccurate, you couldn't argue with a real scientist without getting eaten for lunch due to his ridiculous arguments. I know that is not an issue to open and don't start on it, but I'm just saying HIS (Chick's) data was all bologna actually doing the opposite (in my mind) of what he wanted me to believe because I KNEW he was wrong based on factual evidence.
I think there was a few interesting tales, one about the soldier who died and prayed for salvation; but, most you have to really watch.
He showed how he came up with using comics in one of his "comics". He showed Chinese spies with cameras in bookstores taking pictures of our kids (complete with extremely bad oriental features to make them look evil) and said that the Chinese learned how to spread communism by spies watching our kids as they read "comics". He figured if it worked for them so well, he would do the same.
I would not recommend anything from Chick; there are better handouts available that are factual.:BangHead:
I bought into him when I was in Jr. High at church camp and his books were sold in the bookstore there. I liked them because they were comics and actually believed him. His evolution is so inaccurate, you couldn't argue with a real scientist without getting eaten for lunch due to his ridiculous arguments. I know that is not an issue to open and don't start on it, but I'm just saying HIS (Chick's) data was all bologna actually doing the opposite (in my mind) of what he wanted me to believe because I KNEW he was wrong based on factual evidence.
I think there was a few interesting tales, one about the soldier who died and prayed for salvation; but, most you have to really watch.
He showed how he came up with using comics in one of his "comics". He showed Chinese spies with cameras in bookstores taking pictures of our kids (complete with extremely bad oriental features to make them look evil) and said that the Chinese learned how to spread communism by spies watching our kids as they read "comics". He figured if it worked for them so well, he would do the same.
I would not recommend anything from Chick; there are better handouts available that are factual.:BangHead:
One point, Puritans brought the Geneva Bible to America; his history is quite inaccurate on that point.
There was one KJV on the Mayflower, locked in the captains cabin which was a friends mothers who wanted him to take it to the new world just like the astronauts took books, or flags, or coins to space or the moon.
The apollo astronauts were actually given bags they could fill up to limit the amount of junk (and weight) in the capsule of personnal trinkets to either leave on the moon or bring back to friends and family.
Some of the earlier astronauts overdid it and some caused some electrical shorts in space when rolls of dimes fell apart and started floating around some of the switches that were not insulated on the back of the panels. (This is how they learned that in space, you insulate everything that may be an electrical path, because junk, including metal floats.) Luckily, except for the fire on the pad of Apollo one, the Mercury and Gemini never had a glitch they could not fix. That's the reason most astronauts had to have an engineering degree on top of so many flying hours. Otherwise, without all the engineers on the ground and the astronauts with their well experienced practice and training were able to bring back a crippled Apollo 13. Sorry, rambling again,
Back to the story:
The captain agreed to take it as a souvineer, but there is no "rest of the story" as to what happened to it that can be confirmed. The ship's captains log mentioned it only the one time. He kept it locked up because the King did not want it taken to America because he was afraid the protestants would cause a mutiny because the Protestants were being persecuted so badly by England for using the Geneva, it was a revolution in the making. Eventually, however, the Americans broke their own laws and bootlegged the KJV just to spite England, and that's the "rest of the story" on how the KJV became popular in America--when it was open-sourced by the new government.
Can any scholars correct me, but I think that England STILL claims a copyright on the KJV's translated and corrected, including the one we use today, in England itself. Is this correct? Can I print a KJV in England and sell it without permission from the government?
Fact, most countries have purpetual copyrights. Once written as an original work, it stays that way forever. We had a 50 years after death and they changed that to 70 years just a few years ago. Many copyright professors disagree with purpetual and 70 year copyrights because they cannot see why (unlike 20 year patents) that the great-great-grandkids should profit on some famous author who already made his money from his work and is now gone.
There was one KJV on the Mayflower, locked in the captains cabin which was a friends mothers who wanted him to take it to the new world just like the astronauts took books, or flags, or coins to space or the moon.
The apollo astronauts were actually given bags they could fill up to limit the amount of junk (and weight) in the capsule of personnal trinkets to either leave on the moon or bring back to friends and family.
Some of the earlier astronauts overdid it and some caused some electrical shorts in space when rolls of dimes fell apart and started floating around some of the switches that were not insulated on the back of the panels. (This is how they learned that in space, you insulate everything that may be an electrical path, because junk, including metal floats.) Luckily, except for the fire on the pad of Apollo one, the Mercury and Gemini never had a glitch they could not fix. That's the reason most astronauts had to have an engineering degree on top of so many flying hours. Otherwise, without all the engineers on the ground and the astronauts with their well experienced practice and training were able to bring back a crippled Apollo 13. Sorry, rambling again,
Back to the story:
The captain agreed to take it as a souvineer, but there is no "rest of the story" as to what happened to it that can be confirmed. The ship's captains log mentioned it only the one time. He kept it locked up because the King did not want it taken to America because he was afraid the protestants would cause a mutiny because the Protestants were being persecuted so badly by England for using the Geneva, it was a revolution in the making. Eventually, however, the Americans broke their own laws and bootlegged the KJV just to spite England, and that's the "rest of the story" on how the KJV became popular in America--when it was open-sourced by the new government.
Can any scholars correct me, but I think that England STILL claims a copyright on the KJV's translated and corrected, including the one we use today, in England itself. Is this correct? Can I print a KJV in England and sell it without permission from the government?
Fact, most countries have purpetual copyrights. Once written as an original work, it stays that way forever. We had a 50 years after death and they changed that to 70 years just a few years ago. Many copyright professors disagree with purpetual and 70 year copyrights because they cannot see why (unlike 20 year patents) that the great-great-grandkids should profit on some famous author who already made his money from his work and is now gone.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
The problem with this whole tract is that there is NO EVIDENCE outside of one man's claim that he once saw some secret Vatican papers. I love history - I have to see A LOT more evidence before I could give this any credibility.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
There is much out there claiming that he is a pure fraud.
Of course, that would be part of the great Jesuit conspiracy.
Look, there are elements of truth peppered through out this comic book, but there is also a lot of pure baloney without even a drop of mustard.
e.g. The Latin Vulgate supposedly was created from the so-called "Alexandrian" corrupted mss (actually it is "Western"), but the Clementine Vulgate preserves 1 John 5:7 (the johannine Comma) where it is absent in all Byzantime family texts (except for an 11th and 14th century text and in the margin of a couple of other Greek texts) as well as all Alexandrian texts. How then did it get into the AV?
If you believe it is canonical then it follows that God used the Vulgate to preserve it.
The KJV translators used this and several other vulgate favorites (though I believe the Comma to be apostolic) in the AV.
To write off the Vulgate which dominated Christendom for over 1000 years is IMO ignorance (in the technical sense of the word).
HankD
e.g. The Latin Vulgate supposedly was created from the so-called "Alexandrian" corrupted mss (actually it is "Western"), but the Clementine Vulgate preserves 1 John 5:7 (the johannine Comma) where it is absent in all Byzantime family texts (except for an 11th and 14th century text and in the margin of a couple of other Greek texts) as well as all Alexandrian texts. How then did it get into the AV?
If you believe it is canonical then it follows that God used the Vulgate to preserve it.
The KJV translators used this and several other vulgate favorites (though I believe the Comma to be apostolic) in the AV.
To write off the Vulgate which dominated Christendom for over 1000 years is IMO ignorance (in the technical sense of the word).
HankD
Last edited:
ReformedBaptist
Well-Known Member
If a man declares such and such, you take it face value: the belief of that man. When it gets declared as facts of history, even in a comic, then its open to scrutiny. It will either be supported or not. And if not, then its either conjecture, opinion, et.
An over-reaction to this is silly. It gives it too much attention. If its not historical fact, then take it for what it is -- a comic book.
An over-reaction to this is silly. It gives it too much attention. If its not historical fact, then take it for what it is -- a comic book.
glfredrick
New Member
Seems to be the thinking of a majority on this board...
I believe that if these "secret" Vatican papers existed, its officials woulda made use of them by now.
And I DO NOT believe the part about the Jeezits. While it's an apostate org, they did NOT infiltrate KJ's court.
The GENEVA BIBLE was quite widespread in England when KJ became king. The RCC's efforts to suppress it had flopped. THEN woulda been the time to have made use of the "secret Vatican papers". The "big break" came with Henry VIII's ending mosta the RCC's power in England. There was a temporary hiccup during the reign of "Bloody Mary"(1553-1558), but her successor, QE1(1558-1603) squelched the partial return of power the RCC had enjoyed under Mary. And the "Gunpowder Plot" of 1605 destroyed whatever sympathy KJ1 had had for the RCC.
While the Jeezits are not to be trusted, they're NOT as dangerous as Chick tries to make them.
Chick made some of the best tracts to lead folx to salvation I've ever seen. However, his hatred of the RCC & his embracing of the KJVO myth have led him astray on several matters. It appears this comic is a combo of those two faults of his.
And I DO NOT believe the part about the Jeezits. While it's an apostate org, they did NOT infiltrate KJ's court.
The GENEVA BIBLE was quite widespread in England when KJ became king. The RCC's efforts to suppress it had flopped. THEN woulda been the time to have made use of the "secret Vatican papers". The "big break" came with Henry VIII's ending mosta the RCC's power in England. There was a temporary hiccup during the reign of "Bloody Mary"(1553-1558), but her successor, QE1(1558-1603) squelched the partial return of power the RCC had enjoyed under Mary. And the "Gunpowder Plot" of 1605 destroyed whatever sympathy KJ1 had had for the RCC.
While the Jeezits are not to be trusted, they're NOT as dangerous as Chick tries to make them.
Chick made some of the best tracts to lead folx to salvation I've ever seen. However, his hatred of the RCC & his embracing of the KJVO myth have led him astray on several matters. It appears this comic is a combo of those two faults of his.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think we can probably count on one hand the number of (at least active) members who think this way.
So, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for this? What about the Jesuit Oath of Induction?
http://www.remnantofgod.org/jes-oth.htm
Notice the first paragraph of this article.
I would say something recorded in our Congressional Record whether you believe it true or false would still qualify as evidence.
http://www.remnantofgod.org/jes-oth.htm
Notice the first paragraph of this article.
I would say something recorded in our Congressional Record whether you believe it true or false would still qualify as evidence.