Chick Dissection | Creator or Liar?

The Bible in a nutshell. How the world began, how sin entered the world, and why we must trust Jesus.

Why is it completely unfathomable that God could be both a creator and a liar? I wasn’t aware these were mutually exclusive.

This is an extremely simple one that’s mostly pictures and just the regular Bible Story boilerplate.

Huh, it’s not often the cover art on a Chick Tract is actually relatively pleasing.

*toss* “Eh, the hell with the universe.” Or, like, “where am I gonna put all this crap? Meh, *toss*, that corner’s fine.” I’m picturing some kind of giant space Native American quietly weeping as God drives by in his space-cloud SUV and tosses all this stuff out the window.

The Earth, Moon, Sol, and the random enormous distant star that I’m guessing is maybe Polaris: All the same size! I also like how the Earth looks exactly like it does today. Continental Drift? What’s that? You know, Chick really ought to write a science book. To be sold, of course, under “humor”.

So, man evolving via processes we can observe in a species even between one generation and the next and logically extrapolate over the course of millions of years is bullshit, but God magically throwing man together out of some dirt is totally believable. Tell me again why these people should have any say at all in educational policymaking.

Right here, we have the answer to the Tract’s titular question, by the way: It’s “liar”. See, Genesis 2:17 says, “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” Unless God was speaking metaphorically, which is an interpretation fundamentalists are nearly always unwilling to believe, then this is an untrue statement. Even if he was talking about “you’ll be changed into a decaying form, one in which you’ll be capable of death”, that still doesn’t mean they “surely die” on that day.

Was it really much of a choice? Given that man hadn’t at that point eaten from the Tree of Knowledge, could God really expect him to, y’know, make an informed and calculated decision?

I think “fellowship” might be some kind of sexual innuendo. And I like that God can create evil, do evil, allow evil, but he can’t hang out with it, for some reason.

The implication, here, seems to be that man (Adam) had to choose between “evil” (eating the apple from Eve) and “good” (not eating the apple), as though Eve doesn’t count as mankind, and her falling to the snake’s temptation was a given, due to her nature, or something. Like, it’s the man who makes the decisions around here.

There are also a couple other troubling implications: Intelligence is evil, and disobeying a fascist liar control freak who wants to arbitrarily limit you is evil. Meaning, of course, that unquestioning ignorance and a blind subservience to anyone who claims to represent God is good. Gee, you think maybe it could be personally advantageous to me to claim to be a representative of an angry God? Why, it’s such a great idea, I’m surprised nobody’s ever had it before.

Say what you will about hell — at least they have tornadoes that wipe your ass for you.

If God was so pissy about mankind turning away from him, why didn’t he just lay down his thumb and crunch everyone up as soon as Cain killed Abel, and just start the whole thing all over again, maybe putting that tree he didn’t want them to get at on a higher shelf?

The first Olympic games must have been great. You’ve got the Slap Fight, the Sword-Toss-Into-Some-Other-Guy’s-Chest, and the hundred-meter Hop-On-One-Foot-While-Carrying-a-Woman.

So “total, arbitrary subservience” is “good” and “insubordination, regardless of context” is “bad”.

None of this makes sense, by the way. According to Biblical logic, because Jesus had yet to be born, it wouldn’t have been possible for anyone to have gone to heaven anyway. What would be the point of obeying God if all he was going to do in the end was toss you into hell so you could be tortured forever regardless of what you did? “Obey me! You, uh, you don’t really get anything out of it, and in the end I’m going to burn you forever, but, uh, if you obey me, you’ll… um… well… it’ll just be really nice of you, okay?”

Giant prophets, at least ten times taller than their tallest buildings.

“Aw, dammit, I spilled my chocolate milk.” *SLURRPPP* “NOBODY TOUCH IT!” *SLURP* “It’s MINE!” *SLURRLLLURRP*

So animal sacrifice is a good thing. Or…?


“Hey, what the… where the hell did these enormous stairs come from? Were these always here?”

So there was a “God the Son” before Jesus was born? Why? What was he called before then?

This is such a confusing and contrived story that even the angels don’t know what the fuck.

Space clouds! Whee!

Look out — here comes Jeffy.

“Her name was Mary, and she squeezed giant beetles until they puked into large bowls.”

. . .

Way too easy.

So far, this is all definitely so much easier a way to forgive than just saying, y’know, “I forgive you”.

“Coochie coochie coo! You ticklish? Eh? Eh? You ticklish?”

This is the first time I’ve ever seen Jesus depicted as a balding, middle-aged Jewish man. Jesus is Michael Gross, apparently.

There are a lot of people “no one [can] find fault or sin in”. Why is this relevant? I thought the problem was the unavoidable and undetectable Original Sin.

It’s… I have no idea what’s going on in the middle of the second panel. Is Jesus wearing a black hood and riding a giant flaming frog?

Man, tattoos were really hardcore back then.

“…separation from God”? So God… was separated from God.

I think the bank metaphor falls a little flat. “Deposited in an overdrawn account”? What the fuck is that even supposed to mean?

The concluding paragraph here seems to skip a few steps. It starts with a “thus”, but I don’t see how this could be a logical conclusion to anything else that’s been said to this point.

Wow, so you’re saying the Bible had some level of plot consistency? How entirely unexpected in a piece of narrative literature!

I really don’t know what this is supposed to prove. “The Bible said that a bunch of things would happen, and then later on the Bible said that a bunch of those things did happen!” I wonder if two thousand years from now, people are going to watch The Matrix, and then end up ontologically impressed that, at the end of the movie, he actually turns out to be The One. It’d “prove” just as much.

“Dude, close your fucking robe,” grumbled Satan. “Really didn’t need to see that. Wow, did that ever defeat me.”

And on his way up, he blasted all his disciples with a beam of cloud-parting radiation.

Now, are we supposed to be able to make out anything that’s going on in this image? What’s with all the headless people wandering around? Bleh, fuck it. Moving on…

Hee! I always love these. *fling* “Waaaaaaaggghhh!” And then, we can imagine, the inevitable clattering thuds, like swinging a sack full of knees into a marble wall.

What about the people who serve neither? Does lack of servitude of one necessarily imply servitude of the other?

“Oh, stop groveling.”

Oh goody. I, for one, am just bursting at the seams to spend the rest of my life being an uptight, morally condescending asshole, just so that I can spend the rest of eternity with a bunch of people just like me, where I can presumably continue to never have any fun, even though it’s supposedly “paradise”.

I mean, if you take everything that fundamentalists consider “a sin”, and combine it all with the idea that apparently “God doesn’t allow sin into heaven”, is heaven really paradise, or is it just continued servitude and arbitrary rejection of pleasure and amusement? What’s the motivational factor, here, for people to convert? What’s there in heaven to want, for someone who actually enjoys sex or gluttony or whatever else? Call me crazy, but “abandon everything you like in order to be just like us, so that you can continue to be just like us forever” doesn’t strike me as the strongest of selling points.

Hahahaha, a Catholic priest with a sign saying “GOD IS DEAD”. Why? Did I miss something? Do Catholics generally think God is dead?

Chick really doesn’t understand the concept of secularism, does he? It’s just like with The Last Generation; it’s like he’s completely incapable of fathoming the idea of lack of religious beliefs. To him, people either believe in his version of Christianity, or they believe in some magic Paga-Wicca-Satanic quasi-voodoo nature goddess or something. Or, they believe in Christianity, but they believe it doesn’t exist. Or they believe in Jesus, but they’re willfully siding against him to align themselves with evil.

The entire premise, here, even, is specious: It’s not a matter of God being a liar (which presumes that God exists and implies a willful rejection in spite of this), it’s a matter of just not buying into the idea at all.

Blah blah blah, Pascal’s Wager. If I’m wrong, and there really is an enormous, omnipotent, unobservable bee that sits in the center of the sun and controls every atom in the universe with its infinite arms, then I’ll die and be kicked in the face by a mule for the rest of time. So I’d better believe! I have everything to gain and nothing to lose!

Didn’t even feel like illustrating this one, did you, Jack?

Or this, for that matter.

So if Jesus created the universe, and the only reason for the Jesus part of God to really need to exist is to save mankind from Original Sin, then wasn’t Original Sin a foregone conclusion right from the start? And if so, why is God getting all pissy over it? And why’s he blaming us?

And continuing the whole secular thing, why would this be “the most important decision” to someone who doesn’t believe in any of this and subsequently doesn’t care? Appealing to our sense of “importance” regarding this decision isn’t going to work, because we consider the entire question rather irrelevant.

I’m sorry — the further I got into this one, the more it felt like Jack wasn’t even trying. Based on the numbering for this one — 0005 — I’m guessing it was probably an earlier Tract, which could explain its lackadaisical feel. (Though, strangely, the art seems almost better in this one.) It’s almost entirely devoid of any of the usual Chickanery, and even though it’s the expectable level of ridiculous, it just seems… half-assed. Usually, the image-heavy ones are better and more fun to mock, but this one just left me feeling kinda empty. So, sorry if it’s not the usual fare.

Next week’s will be better. Tune in then, and bring a friend.

90 thoughts on “Chick Dissection | Creator or Liar?”

  1. I hate to break it to Chick… but… did he even bother to consider that maybe, just maybe, Jesus never even existed? :oS

    He forgot to mention the biggest part of Jesus’ grand scheme; to enlist the help of an American cartoonist evanglist to produce cheap little monotone comic books! Ask Chick; he’s saved almost as many souls as what the Bible has… or so he thinks.

  2. By the way… notice in the first panel, the moon isn’t a sphere! I wonder if Chick is aware of lunar cycles and stuff like that.

  3. Okay… Not up to standards, unless Jabberwock was delibrately being stupid there’s a few idiocies which rather detract from my usual enjoyment of seeing idiots lambasted. The Giant prophet thing is a rather obvious one, he appears bigger then the buildings because HE’S FAR AWAY FROM THEM. *sigh* I hope the next one is better.

  4. “He forgot to mention the biggest part of Jesus’ grand scheme; to enlist the help of an American cartoonist evanglist to produce cheap little monotone comic books! Ask Chick; he’s saved almost as many souls as what the Bible has… or so he thinks.”

    That’s the thing. I’m increasingly convinced that Chick really does think that the Chickverse resembles reality in any way whatsoever, and I sincerely doubt I’m alone in that assumption.

    Also: Gotta love “Chickanery.”

  5. Leareth: No, I was being entirely sincere with that one, and do not understand how perspective works in drawing. ;P

    That comment was more that whatever scrawling-on-a-cave-wall equivalent of a process he apparently used to scan these things in seems to have reduced the artwork to spindly, nigh-incomprehensible etchings that make his usual vast spaces look even more devoid of content.

    I agree, though, and promise that the next one will indeed be better. This one seemed really promising on first skim-through, but after I got into it, it proved much less batty/uber-ridiculous and thus much less mockable in many parts than I’d initially thought. Ah, well — can’t win ’em all.

  6. “Oh, stop grovelling.”

    Hmmm, reminds me of something . . .

    God: Arthur. Arthur, King of the Britons! Oh, don’t grovel! If there’s one thing I can’t stand, it’s people groveling.

    Arthur: Sorry.

    God: And don’t apologize! Every time I try to talk to someone, it’s “I’m sorry” this, and “forgive me” that, and “I’m not worthy” … What are you doing NOW?!

    Arthur: I’m averting my eyes, O Lord.

    God: Well don’t. It’s like those miserable Psalms — they’re SO depressing. Now knock it off!

  7. From where I’m standing, the whole “original sin,” deal is the result of God screwing up, and covering His own ass by damning humanity eternally instead of owning up to his own error.

    Also, 3rd panel: I don’t know what fundies are so uptight about Satan for–all he really wants is a hug.

  8. “He was named Jesus (Saviour)”

    Jesus (or Joshua, from Yehoshua) actually means “God helps” or something similar. Which isn’t quite the same thing.

  9. Ya know, Jabberwock, with the whole “eat of the Tree and you will surely die” thing, I think God meant Adam and Eve would die spiritually, as in, lose fellowship with God.

  10. Once again, you have proven beyond all doubt that you Jabberwocky are the master/mistress/mastress of Chick Dissection.
    However, in response to the ‘Chick vs Secularism’ panel we must remember the fundamental rule of Chickism:All Chick tracts occur in that mythical place, like Merry England and 50’s Suburbia, known as the Chickverse. Within the Chickverse there are only three types of humans:
    The Good (those that believe the KJV Bible and Chickstianity)
    The Bad (scientists, pagans, Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, other Christian denominations, Mormons and anyone with even the slightest contention with Chickstianity)
    And the Dummies (the majority of Americans (I presume) who blunder through life unaware of the Chickstian heritage, history etc of the U.S, and are even unaware that Jesus may have existed)
    He gets closer to a view that there may be more to this world than black and white (with a monotone gray) over time. I mean, its progress, isn’t it?

  11. Yeah, I do agree with Felis in that when God was talking about the tree of life He was talking about spirital death…but then that would be a metiphore…and Jabberwocks whole point was that Chick and his crew don’t belive that the Bible can contain metiphores.

    But you would think an omnipitant being would know how to use one…

  12. “Ya know, Jabberwock, with the whole “eat of the Tree and you will surely die” thing, I think God meant Adam and Eve would die spiritually, as in, lose fellowship with God.”

    What does it mean to die spiritually? Did they stop believing in God? I doubt it…. they talked to him, I am sure they still believed. Are their souls in Heaven? Then their “spirit” didn’t die. And if their spirit died that day and Adam lived another what… 900 years? He got on pretty well without his spirit didn’t he? What purpose does it serve? Is the spirit like the appendix or tonsils? If God were so grand, couldn’t he have used words that wouldn’t be easily misunderstood by man and misused by the serpent? Not very clever, God.
    Dying spiritually… what does it mean really…

  13. Dull tract this time around, but it had its moments. I’m surprised he’d never explicitly mentioned Pascal’s Wager in anything (at least, anything I’ve seen). Do you think maybe he knows how easily beaten it is and wants to disassociate himself from it? Or is it that he can’t bring himself to mention the name of someone from the country of “Freedom?”

  14. Well, the copyright says 2005, so maybe he was just lazy that week.

    Every civilization has come up with its own mythology about the creation of the universe. It’s a little annoying that so much of our society has latched on to this one. The same thing goes with Revelations. Hey, if I’m going to pick an apocalypse, I’d choose Ragnarok. Now that’s a world ender. If you’ll excuse me, I’ll be hiding hanging out inside of Yggdrasil. Would any of you ladies like to join me? (sorry, can only fit one) 😉

  15. Jack, Atheists like myself aren’t calling god a liar, we calling him non-existent. Also the bible can’t be the literal word of god because it says that the sun goes around the earth. As Gerardus Bouw (auther of 1992 book Geocentricity)said “If God cannot be taken literally when he writes of the rising sun, then how can one insist that he be taken literally when writing of the rising of the Son?”

  16. contradiction:
    panel 8: Jesus would become the sacrifice for humanity
    panel 15: had forces of darkness known Jesus would rise they wouldn’t have him crucified.

    so which one is it, was he predetermined to die and sent to Earth with precise purpose of dying for our sins our did forces of darkness put a cog in wheel of some other plan?

    If former then what kind of father would make a child whose main purpose was to die? If latter then God either isn’t omnipotent or just can’t be bothered to save his only son.

    Not exactly deity I would want to worship.

    And when Jesus left heaven to be born arrow points to Atlantic, not Middle East.

  17. Heyyyy! If Jesus taught men to love each other, why’s homosexuality a SIN, eh? JESUS TOLD US TO DO IT!


    Also: LOL @ Chickanery.

  18. Daniel: he’s done those in every language, and the combinations are really weird. There are very slight differences between the ones in various African languages, some of them were put out before he had more than just the white one, etc.

    I love when people don’t notice irony or think reference is deliberate. Know thine own stupidity, all ye. You don’t have to be religious to understand Them (the stupid masses) are Just Like You.

  19. Haha, aww.. that picture of man running into the devil’s open arms is horribly cute, I can just imagine them huggung eachother all like; “I knew you would choose me!” and some cute giggling and then they dance away hand in hand.

    Okay, now for some more serious comments.
    I want to add something to that whole “why didn’t god start over without the tree”-thing. Few weeks ago I got some pamphlets from Jehova’s Witnesses(AWESOME! I love reading these!) and there was rather interesting advices to newbies of how to answer to the question “Why does god allow so much evil”
    Basically they said that they should distract people with telling about His good sides(In other words avoid the question with all cost! haha!) or if they start telling how they could’ve handled the situation, they should be told the usual “god is so much wiser than you, so shut up”-crap.

    How can these people BELIVE in that turd when they don’t know the ansers themselves?

    Anyway, thanks for yet another entertaining dissection!

  20. According to the Bible, God made man in his image. Man is imperfect so therefore God is imperfect? RE: eating from the tree of knowledge of good and bad….shouldn’t we all be eating from that? Maybe the world would be a better place. Murder—Bad, Love—good, Rape—bad, Giving/caring—good. If God is perfect and all seeing and all knowing, why didn’t he see that fruit-eating incident coming even before it happened? Why didn’t he stop it and save the world from all of this pain and misery? How can people believe in something that cruel? Whatever happened to unconditional love? What sort of lesson did we learn from that whole story? What about do-overs, second chances, Mulligans? Damn this is a difficult game to play, isn’t it?

    To answer a question from earlier: I think the son of God was called God Jr. before he became man.

  21. Also, loved the panel and comment on the creation of the universe. The planets were just tossed like dice in a crap shoot. That explains a lot.

  22. I asked a fundie minister once why they consider some Bible things to be explicitly literal and others sort of wishy-washy metaphorishy. I was told that God gives those who need it the inspiration to tell the difference. Nice logic there.

    I also prefer to try to convince fundies that the universe operates more like it does in “Sandman” than then the CHICKAVERSE. Where God DID do evil and original sin and the apple and all ON PURPOSE, and oh, it didnt quite happen on earth, exactly, or something. Oh and more importantly to Chick, the devil absolutely did NOT make ANYONE do it.


    Sorry, that was really funny.

  23. I might just be splitting hairs here, but I think the “surely die” thing could technically be considered God telling the truth: Death is absolutely unavoidable for all humans, so if the apple was sort of a Pandora’s Box/Baldrick’s Trousers kind of thing that unleashed not only the knowledge, but also mortality. As far as I know, God didn’t say he would instantly die, just that it was 100% assured to happen. Adam and Eve did die. Also, God could have thought it was an instantaneous death. I think being up in heaven for such a long time would skew anybody’s perception of time. It’s like that old joke about the man who climbed a mountain to talk to God and he said, “God, how long is a million years to you?” And God said, “A minute.” And the man said, “How much is a billion dollars to you?” And God said, “A penny.” So the man asked, “Can I have a penny?” And God said, “In a minute.”

    It also could have been a sort of AIDS kind of thing: if you get AIDS, you will surely die. That’s pretty much true. Most, if not all, people who get AIDS don’t die instantaneously, though.

    1. “I might just be splitting hairs here, …”

      You are’nt.

      “.. God didn’t say he would instantly die, just that it was 100% assured to happen. …”


  24. This was the very first Chick tract I ever found. It was in my school bathroom. I picked it up, read it, then passed it around to my friends. We all laughed pretty hard, then we realized that it was real.

    Question about the first panel… Earth seems to already have water on it, and yet that sun is pretty damn close… Did God not invent evaporation yet?

    Dammit, man didn’t chose evil. God was like “Don’t eat that because I said so.” Next time a small child does something I tell them not to, I’m going to boot them in the head and then poll Christian witnesses on whether or not that was justified.

    You know, I’ve thought about the whole “everyone before Jesus goes to Hell thing”. Pretty much makes you want to just kill everyone in sight. Have some fun before you get tossed into the pits.

    Okay, here’s what pisses me off the most about Christian theology. Their arguement. “The Bible is the word of God.” “How can you prove this?” “Because the Bible says so, and it is the word of God.” Tried doing this on an essay once to prove a point to my dick of a history teacher. I failed.

    I think I solved the mystery of the Holy Trinity; God has MPD. Also, the reason fundies are so retarded is because their ancestors were beamed with Jesus Radiation. I didn’t see it, but I’m pretty sure that’s the basic plot of Silent Hill.

    Hey, Mr. Secondhand Smoke, virgin birth isn’t a fable. A komodo dragon did it. Pwned.

    I’m still half thinking that Jack Chick may be like a more elaborate version of Andy Kaufman. If he ever gets cancer, I’m calling his bluff. And if I’m wrong, I still get to piss on his grave.

  25. Rose: Well, the thing is, he says “for in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die”. I mean, even if God was speaking from a skewed sense of time (in which case, why should we even bother taking anything he said in any literal way, given the apparently irreconcilable differences in perspective?), presumably Adam and Eve lived to be nearly a thousand years old (as it claims is the case for early humans, with Methuselah holding the record, if I recall correctly). I can understand a single contemporary human’s ~70-year lifespan passing by in an omniscient blink, but one would think God would be able to at least sense the difference between a single day and eight hundred years.

  26. One day a Catholic Priest, a bespectacled academic, a man with a goatee beard and a fat man in a scribbled-on suit picked up protest signs about their lack of literal belief in the Bible and took to the streets, because they served the Devil. It was a bit foggy that day, almost as if there were lazy scribbles in the air, so very few people saw the tiny demonstration. But Chick saw it.

  27. Okay, so, new theory: The angels didn’t want human souls hanging around where they were living, so God realized he’d have to build a ‘Heaven’ for them to go. Building etherial real estate takes more work than creating a physical planet, and Satan didn’t mind human souls being in his ‘Hell’ setup — it’d give the demons something to do.

    So, the easy way out? Damn all souls until he got around to creating heaven.

  28. You know, I’ve attended a Christian school, and oddly enough in the religious education classes we had to watch The Matrix because the story of Neo taught us about Jesus (I’m not joking, I can send you the essays or whatever I had to right on this if you don’t believe me). I don’t really remember what they were aiming at achieving, as by virtue of the fact that I was holding the schools grade averages up, no-one asked questions when I didn’t attend classes.

  29. Levall: By die “spiritually”, I think that meant “out of favour with God”, because – think about it – all those who are spiritually dead (unsaved) are ALSO out of favour with God.

    Or, Rose: I think God just meant we would die in the end.
    By the way, do you have any turnips?? I might buy a nice little one, all of my own.

    Prof. Woland: Funnily enough, it was the same for me. We had to watch DUM-DUM-DUMDUMDUM-DUUM-DUM Star Wars once, because The Force is meant to be like some sort of New Age-y god or something. Yes! George Lucas is a Hindu! IT MAEKS SENZE! RLY!. We were discussing other religions. We even read this book called The Case of the Dead Certainty (Google it!).

    We also had the whole ID thing – we missed three bloody lessons to learn about how the good ol’ bacterial flagemagellum proves the Lord’s handiwork. Those silly evilutonists.

    Still, I remember I put the effort in all the same, especially because the teacher was an okay guy.

  30. “Levall: By die “spiritually”, I think that meant “out of favour with God”, because – think about it – all those who are spiritually dead (unsaved) are ALSO out of favour with God.”

    But that’s part of my point. For a God that is supposedly omniscient, he really didn’t put a lot of effort into making sure his Word would be understood. Different people have different interpretations and they would all be “right.”
    If God is going to use words games “On this day you will surely die.” But… I don’t mean die, I mean like, die spiritually, see? I’m God and I’m all mysterious like that.”
    Wait… maybe it was more like a parent warning their kids. You know… “You can’t have that, you’ll shoot your eye out.” Then when the eye doesn’t get shot out you have to think of a new threat. “Crap… they ate from the tree. Well, they aren’t gonna die, that was a threat really… but… out of my garden!” How embarrassing for God; called on his bluff. Luckily, there are believers who will reinterpret his infallible word to settle the argument…

    So I was once saved. Can I be unsaved? I really hope so or I’ll be the most surly soul in Heaven.

  31. as far as i know when god told adam and eve they were gonna die, they WERE gonna die, as in actually fall dead to the ground. according to what i was taught back in catholic catechism, adam and eve had the gift of eternal life, but since they sinned god said they had to die and in the process screw us as well by passing original sin.

  32. Okay, I know this is a little picky, but Polaris is NOT the brightest star in the sky.
    a href=””> It’s actually a fairly dim one. The brightest “star” in the sky is the planet Venus. That makes me wonder; where are the planets in that God-tossing-the-universe page?

  33. A cumshot joke is “too easy?” Sexual humor is NEVER too easy! It is appropriate for ALL situations! Including funerals, weddings, and preschool.

  34. Levall: Yeah, there’s that to it as well. Of course, the fundie response will be to say that we must be “more pereceptive!” It doesn’t hurt for God to be more DIRECT now, does it?

    It gets confusing sometimes.

  35. You know, the Eden God was kind of a dick, also referred to himself in the third person a lot. But if as was previously mentioned, they already had eternal life, why was god scared that they would next eat of the tree of life and live forever. He seemed REALLY worried about that.

    Also, no matter what, the fact that people held the pens or quills or chisels or whatever, means that they added perspective to the stories. Even if the Bible is the literal WORD of God, its tainted by being passed down to people who are by definition imperfect and also had to try to put whatever god showed or told them into words others could comprehend.

  36. Paleone: he WAS kind of a dick? I don’t think there’s much evidence of him changing much between then and now, really. Except that instead of the oldfashioned smiting-with-thunderbolts he now uses AIDS and Iraqi bullets to punish, of course.

  37. Paleone: It’s one big game of telephone. Jesus says “Be nice to everyone”, and it comes out on the end as “Kill the faggots”.

  38. This is off-topic, but have any of you seen this?:
    I would pay so much money to pull a stunt like this on an unsuspecting Jehovah’s Witness or similar. I’ve never encountered one, but I did get accosted by Mormons on a shopping precinct once when I was sixteen or so, and I had no idea how to politely escape so I just stood there nodding and smiling and finally pretended I had to catch a bus and was forced to avoid that area for the rest of the day. Just wish I’d been able to think up something like this. I’ve never seen Doctor Who, though, so it’d have to be Harry Potter or something.

  39. AhahaHAHAHAHAHA.

    That was just great. I would only recommend pulling that sort of stunt on your doorstep; you’d look really stupid if you started talking about that in the mall!

    Or, alternatively, you could tell them that your Savior is called Richard, has a superior intellect, and that you ALSO have Holy Books that are scientifically proven to have been written first-hand by the man himself (at this point, hold up a copy of The God Delusion)!

    Or, if you like, politely tell your religious proselytizers/stalkers to fuck off.

  40. Praise be to The Doctor! Hallelujah!

    This is a very blasphemous video about The Doctor. Notice how Nerdy pervs over the books (*shudder*). I like to call it “Trials of a Time Lord Fan.”

    Those blasphemers are calling us Whovians idiots! They will suffer eternal torment, by being imprisoned in the TARDIS forever! Truly the Lord is mighty!

  41. I originally find very witty commentary in these dissections (although lately, much like the tracts themselves, I’ve found them to be dull repetition of certain points); however, I also found this one particularly lacking, in that you seem less and less concerned with making commentary on the tracts, or even making reasonable arguments. The comparison of the Bible to the Matrix was a rather stupid one. Even from a purely literary stance, there is quite a difference between a film written and directed by a team of people and a collection of books written and compiled over thousands of years. Your point doesn’t stand up to scrutiny even in the literary world; how do you expect it to hold weight in discussions of religion, except to rouse others who think the same as you into mindless agreement? Have you, in your hatred of Chick, become too much like him?

  42. A friend of mine attends a public school which has a dress code that doesn’t allow any variations from the uniform clothes expect if it’s religous. It was installed to allow Muslim girls to wear the hijab (though it has to be a uniform one) and for Hindu girls to display their bhindis, so of course Christians get to wear crosses and Jews can wear the star of David.

    She got the actor DC Anderson’s watchchain as a present from him after meeting him. She wanted to wear it. She started the Church of the Phantom of the Opera.

    I’m sort of confused over it, though. I guess there’s different denominations… Original is Catholic, Susan Kay is Protestant, musical is Anglican, and movie is Unitarian is all I can come up with.

  43. Mark: I admitted at the end of this one that it was somewhat lacking. In part, this one was just standard Bible stories, and I’ve already made many arguments against all of it, and others have already made even better arguments against it long before I have. It’s a lot more fun and a lot more mockable when it’s super-fundie nuttery.

    While I agree that this one wasn’t as good as usually, I disagree on your assessment of the Matrix comparison. The point isn’t the duration of time spent writing a piece of creative work — the point is that people take this particular creative work (the Bible) at face value, and unquestioningly feel that because later parts of that creative work are consistent with things that earlier parts of the creative work said would happen, that somehow makes the creative work “real” instead of just — as a rational person would conclude — narratively coherent. I could have just as easily used any other collaborative work with a prophecy/fulfillment theme in it, and the point would still stand.

  44. Jabberwock, meh, don’t feel bad.

    Granted, this tract was pretty mundane compared to the others, but that’s because we’ve more or less broken the stupidity record.

    I mean, come on… think about it; The Trial, Fairytales and Wounded Children were among the most absurd and idiotic of Chick’s tracts, and that’s a category with some wicked competition! After The Trial especially, it’s going to be hard to top that level of stupidity, so now all his other tracts are going to seem rather tame by comparison.

    Let’s hope with forthcoming 200th tract is another milestone in lunacy!

  45. DMC: “Satan’s Flippers” A young boy learns on a trip to Sea World that while it may seem “cool” to watch dolphins in their tanks, only God can give you an eternal sense of wonder.

  46. Small point: I don’t think the Balding Middle-Aged Jew is Jesus; if you look carefully on the right you’ll see Him (at least His back) preaching. Compare that view to the Christ-on-the-Flaming-Frog and you’ll see what I mean. The Balding Jew appears to be examining someone’s (now-healed) foot.
    I consider myself a born-again Christian who finds this site makes more sense than most Fundie ones. Love the view of Faceless (and here Bodiless) God tossing out the earth and moon, “Eh, this spot looks good enough, I’ll just toss it here!” Also, since Faceless God is so blinding bright, can you blame Man for choosing the Devil? “My eyes! They burn!”
    Keep ’em coming, these dissections are great!

  47. DMC: Good point.

    Jonas: Haha. You know, that sounded so plausible I actually had to go and look for myself to make sure he didn’t release a new one.

    Panda Rosa: Yeah, I see what you mean. Kind of a weird illustration for what’s being described in the text. And I will… hopefully a new one up later tonight.

    1. “Kind of a weird illustration for what’s being described in the text.”

      Not at all. Jesus is all talkie, as usual, leaving it to someone else to actually do anything. Also John 12:1-11 and Mark 14:1-7. Note how the later John comes with a differnt version (it was Judas) and an explicit explantion (he didf it only to get the money for himself), while the former version might have raised the question whether the unnamed guys who complained about the waste might not have had a point after all.

  48. Okay, I just want people to understand that not all Christians are total wackjobs, and many of us do not want to be associated with “Chickians”. I’ll use my church as an example. Our pastor, Reverend H (I won’t use full names) is a very kind, smart man who supports gay rights. His wife is a PhD scientist, and his sermons aren’t about hellfire and condemnation, but usually about loving your neighbor and helping others. He is very religious, but he doesn’t have a one track mind, either, so he’s an interesting person to talk to, as well. Even though I consider myself a Buddhist, now, I still highly respect him and the Christian faith. So, in conclusion, mix up genuine faith with Chickianity, and you’ll be getting a visit from Mr. Heavy-Prayer-book-on-the-end-of-a-rope, capice?

  49. I don’t class all Christians as like Chick, don’t worry. Something like ninety percent of the people I’ve known throughout my life are Christian, so I’d be very lonely if I did.

  50. Nah, I most certainly don’t see all Christians like Chick. Christians are people like everyone else; some are good, some are good, most are somewhere inbetween.

    Funnily enough, it’s not Chick’s beliefs that are the source of amusement in his tracts. Granted, some of them are really whacked, but for the most part they’re typical of American Fundamentalism.

    The source of amusement in Chick’s tracts is *how* he presents his beliefs. The man has a complete inability to create believable characters, likely scenarios and dialogue that is not corny and melodramatic. He has such a skewed, unrealistic, exaggerated and black-and-white view of all who do not share his views that one has to wonder if he ever sets foot outside his front door.

    That is why we laugh, and that is why his tracts get read!

  51. Re: the Catholic priest holding up “God is Dead” sign

    I think this is a reference to the fact that catholics
    use crucifixes quite a lot (i.e. crosses with Jesus’ body
    still on). As someone who was brought up Catholic,
    briefly converted to pentacostalism and then became an
    atheist (whew!), I remember how obsessed the fundies
    were with the idea that Catholics “worshipped a dead

  52. “So there was a “God the Son” before Jesus was born? Why? What was he called before then”

    Answer-Yahway, the 2nd power in Heaven. Not in Genesis “Let US make Man in OUR image”. Christ always was, always existed. To say “there was a time Christ was not” is Arian and condemned at Nicea.

    1. “To say “there was a time Christ was not” is Arian and condemned at Nicea.”

      Which is why JW are not allowed in. Additionally they believe Jesus was Michael.

  53. Other than the obvious slam at priest, not soo bad..and no, those of use “working out our salvation w/fear and trembling” are not all condescending, uptight or assholes…unless but that, we are considered due to have concrete that case, are you not for YOUR stance??

  54. Dude,
    No, G*D is NOT a liar: She’s just insane. How else do you explain people EXACTLY LIKE ‘Lil Hardass-I-mean-Suzie who still believe that the Earth is flat and the center of the Universe?

  55. Haha! Funny, I found this exact tract at a local thrift shop right in Deland, FL. It was hidden behind an old Technics turntable I was about to purchase.

    I’ll tell ya, those mofo tracts are hard to rip up. X_X

  56. “No one could find sin in him” So he was falsely crucified? Perhaps if you tried reading that Bible, Jack, you’d realize he was put to death for Blasphemy – claiming to be God. Don’t you remember, the rending of garments, etc?

  57. I don’t even know where to start. So I guess the start is as good a place as any. The fundies believe that “evolutionists preach” that the Big Bang theory claims that the universe was created from nothing. Of course, cosmologists claim no such thing. Unlike the Chickverse, which was creatio ex nihilo.

    Page 2. They also claim that non-fundies believe that man was created from mud. I wonder if we can quote-mine Genesis the same way. Also with the “choice” between good and evil, WHAT CHOICE?!? “Eating from this tree is evil. But you won’t know the difference between good and evil unless you eat from the tree.” The talking snake was right. (But I still can’t understand why the talking snake is literal, but Jesus’ command to sell everything they own is metaphorical.) Maybe the snake’s tongue was forked, but the “God”‘s tongue was looped in some kind of Möbius strip.

    The whole Cain and Abel thing, I don’t get. Maybe because Cain’s offering of fruits and vegetables doesn’t contain the lovely smell of burnt blood that this “God” loves so much. Hold on… maybe it was Abel’s offering that got God addicted to the smell. (Then there’s the issue of who was the mother of the Canaanites but that’s something else.)

    Page 5 makes sense. I’m certain the entire purpose of the invention of “God” was to maintain a caste structure within Jewish society with the Levites at the top. Well, Genesis & Exodus are a made-up , and it’s Leviticus contain the list of rules and regulations. So of course, “God” would choose the nation that is subservient to the Levites to obey their stupid and random superstitions, er, I mean, “laws”.

    And, man killed the prophets… I wonder why… because prophets killed children (or rather had bears kill children)?

    More sheep imagery. Perfect for the sheeple.

    And, if Jeebus was the “Son of God”, and not the son of Joseph, why do the writers of two of the “approved” gospels include complete (and inconsistent) genealogies of Joseph back to David?

    etc etc…

    But if Jesus is really who he [ie who Jack] claims he is, isn’t Pascal’s Wager worth it?

    You know, it’s sad that I only came across this site last weekend, oddly enough from a link from ED, but I’ve spent the past few evenings bursting my gut with the lulz from Chick’s tracts. You really do have to wonder, is he a Poe? When you can’t tell the difference between a parody and the real thing, you have to wonder about the integrity of the real thing. But I’m wondering, if I should go through and add my 2p worth to the others, and bump the threads by 3-4 years???

  58. Awww, I like how Adam is running into the arms of his long-lost lover, Satan. Ain’t romance beautiful? 😀 Pity they left this scene out of the Bible. I would give anything to see the steamy gay sex between Adam and Satan–and maybe a demon or two.

    I like how “He taught men to love each other” is portrayed by one man doing some kind of foot-fetish thing on another. Or is that supposed to be someone who was healed? What was he healed of, a bunion? Nah, I prefer the foot-fetish explanation better.

    Jeez, this one is just filled with sexual innuendo, isn’t it? I just HAD to save the panel where the Holy Spirit is coming upon Mary in a giant, explosive blast of glowing semen. I am sure it will be handy on some of the forums I frequent.

  59. Panel 10: To borrow a quote from Archer, “Phrasing!”

    Panel 19: Apparently, Catholic priests are big fans of Marilyn Manson. Who knew?

    1. The phrase was coined by Friedrich Nietzsche. Spiffy remarks against religion he had, while his own philosophy was equally idiotic. Sort of like Ayn Rand.

  60. “Why is it completely unfathomable that God could be both a creator and a liar? I wasn’t aware these were mutually exclusive.”

    I mean, Steven Moffat is the creator of a bunch of awesome shows like Doctor Who and Sherlock, and yet he’s one of the biggest liars around.

  61. I’m kinda surprised no one else took a hard look at the “prophecies” that Jesus supposedly fulfilled. Chick uses that list a couple of other times, and once I decided to look them up.

    That very first one, with Genesis? It’s about, basically, enmity being between the seed of the serpent and the seed of Eve. The “fulfillment?” It’s about Jesus being crucified between two criminals. Nothing about serpents or women. The other one that is “fulfilled” by John 19:18 is just as baloney.

    I’m pretty sure he just bombards readers with a semi-random list of verses and hopes no one looks them up.

  62. Ha ha, nice one! As it happens I spotted this in the wild today. Chick tracts are rare here in CA it seems (I’ve never actually seen one before), so I thought I’d look it up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *