An example of Jack Chick's tracts. Credit:

Jack Chick dressed hatred in theology

Jack Chick died this past week. His name is obscure; his work, however, was not.

Jack Chick was a cartoonist who created a series of fundamentalist Christian pamphlets, in comic book form. The pamphlets were morality plays in miniature. They generally described people who did not believe in Jesus, or who had somehow sinned, and/or had not accepted Jesus as their personal savior, and how they had been condemned to hell.

Since we Jews have now finished our season of confession, I must confess: I always had a grim fascination with those little booklets -- which usually appeared on grocery shelves and in other public places.

Jack Chick sold over 750 million of these tracts, and they have been translated into more than one hundred languages.

Jack Chick's work was hate literature, with a theological overlay.

He had a rather long enemies list. He hated the Roman Catholic Church, Mormons, gays and lesbians, New Age religion, Dungeons and Dragons, Muslims, Freemasons. Any biblical translation that was not the King James Version was a heretical work, allied with the Devil.

Think of Dana Carvey's "Church Lady" in printed form, and you get Jack Chick's work.

And, yes -- Jack Chick hated Jews -- or, more precisely, Judaism. His booklet "Where's Rabbi Waxman?" portrays a particularly righteous ultra-Orthodox rabbi who dies, but because he died "in his sin," he went to hell.

This is raw, unabated, Jew-hatred.

This is about what I think about the afterlife. Normally, I could not care less about what people think happens after you die. Judaism has its share of opinions on this, and certainly its view of olam ha-ba, the world to come, was the source of the Christian belief in heaven. (On hell, Jews are much more circumspect).

Normally, if someone says that I, as a Jew, am going to hell because of what I believe or what I don't believe, it would not phase me. Sticks and stones can break my bones, but bad theology does not hurt me.

Except when it does. Because here is the tragic truth: those who think that Jews are going to hell, quite often will create living hells for them -- right here on earth, in this life.

Ask any Jewish kid who has been tormented about how he or she is going to hell, and that kid will tell you that stones and fists often accompany this theological perspective.

Here is the good news. In my own life, I have rarely encountered people who have been influenced by Mr. Chick's screed. I guess that I have been lucky. I know that they are out there, but God (or luck) has kept those millions of people away from me.

Quite the contrary. In recent decades, my experience of Christianity, through its practitioners, has been loving, deep, and powerful.

That is the Christianity that I have encountered.

And that is, I daresay, the Christianity that the world needs today. By extension, that is the kind of religion, in general, that the world needs today.  I can only wonder how many people picked up one of Jack Chick's tracts, and concluded: "If that is what Christianity (or religion) is, count me out!"

Let us be clear: bad religion is the religion of nightmares. Bad religion drives out good religion.

Good religion is the religion of dreams.

The only antidote to bad religion is good religion.

So, yes -- Jack Chick has died. As I said, I had a quirky fascination with his work.

But as for my saying Kaddish for him....Kaddish is supposed to get you a place in the World to Come.

Jack: you are on your own.


  1. Substitute gay for Jew, and you don’t have to change a single other word of this article. Chick’s antigay tracts were absolute miracles of lies and projection.

  2. I remember reading Chick tracts way back when. I was always fascinated by the theology, the clarity, and the intensity of his little comic-books.

    Like it or not, good or bad, Chick put forth a well-crafted product that even a school-kid could understand. You may not have liked the message, but that didn’t stop you from reading every little page of it.

    That quality and readability, set Jack Chick apart from the rest of the tract pack.

    Sure, Chick could have been a little “nicer” (or something) towards various groups. Clearly so. But as Salkin’s own words suggest, the Gospel of Jesus Christ itself is the main sticking point for everybody, no matter how nice a Christian tries to be.

    Chick made sure he spelled out the Gospel correctly and compellingly. He did pretty good.

  3. Chick’s view of the Gospel was warped and distorted, a caricature of the Sermon on the Mount and the faith handed down to us by the Fathers. He was intensely certain of his own righteousness and judged others with contempt.

  4. I’m humbled that Mr. Salkin has met some grace-filled Christians (amidst the loud ones with generalized anger), and hope to live up to that. Indeed, that is the religion we need today. Thanks for the reminder.

  5. The only good religion is no religion. Why promote a fantasy world?

  6. He wasn’t the first, and unfortunately won’t be the last, to make a comfortable living out of vile, irrational and just-plain-silly beliefs.

  7. Rabbi or RNS editors, I think you got fooled by someone trying to troll Chick. The image above is a parody of Chick Tracts replacing Chick’s version of Christianity with the Cthulhu stories of H.P. Lovecraft. It comes up on image searches close to the top.

  8. His inaccuracies and harsh attitudes (and lack of homework) towards Catholics in particular, was a true blight on his record.

    But a lot of his material was pretty good, and made people think about exactly what was at stake regarding their own lives and their need for the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

  9. What the hell? That isn’t a Chick Tract. It’s a parody. Can you really not tell the difference, or are you trolling us?

  10. In the Baptist Church of my youth before it became a Christian congregation and I am not talking about the UCC, these hideous little tracts were given out especially to adolescents and sometimes even to little children to “scare the hell out of you”. I always thought they were written by some perverted old man who had major emotional issues and as soon as I out of sight of the Sunday School teacher promptly threw them in the rubbish ben. As for King James or “st james” as some sweet but ignorant folkes called the translation that bears his name he was the most notorious bugger in all of English history! There is an old English ditty that goes “when James was king and buggery ruled the land” so apparently Chick either did not know this or did not know what buggery meant! As for Jewish people and I am very proud to have Jewish ancestry even if it is only a wee bit there are many loving and wonderful Jews who will see the face of G-d long before if ever Mr Chick will. You just cannot hate and expect heaven awaits you!!!!

  11. I think they did a quick Google search, picked one that looked interesting, and didn’t pay attention. They have since fixed it (see above).

  12. His theology was not correct or orthodox in many points — such as his KJV only view. Chick was a great example of the heresy that is fundamentalist American religion — a faith far from the Gospel.

  13. Very well done Rabbi Salkin. I particularly found this resonant: “those who think that Jews are going to hell, quite often will create living hells for them — right here on earth, in this life.”

    There are several different group defining words that could replace “Jews” and be equally fitting. Ben has already mentioned LBTG folks. I’d add “disobedient women, divorced people, POC, disabled folks, etc.”

    Chick was a world class hater and very detrimental to the Christian religion. Good riddance.

  14. In the little book of Jude, the Bible talks about 2 different soul winning techniques:
    On some have compassion knowing that it makes a difference. But others save with fear, snatching them from the fire, despising the very garment that is stained by the flesh. Jude 22,23
    Without question, Jack Chick’s ministry fell squarely into that 2nd category. But that’s okay.
    Hey, suppose you’re a doctor and a surgery-shy patient with an ugly-looking tumor on his neck came to you and asked “Doc, can you give me some medication for this little bump here?” Seeing his reluctant attitude, you just might scream “ARE YOU CRAZY? IF YOU’RE NOT ON THAT OPERATING TABLE IN 24 HOURS, YOU’RE A DEAD MAN!!! ”
    Well, Jack Chick was to the human soul what every responsible physician is to good medical practice. He said it like it is, biblically. “ARE YOU CRAZY? IF YOU DON’T ACCEPT CHRIST AS SAVIOR, YOU WILL SPEND ALL OF ETERNITY IN HELL!!!” Look very closely at John 3:16 (n.b….perish…).
    I myself was a once hard-headed unbeliever who needed to hear the gospel via the 2nd category. Thanks, Jack

  15. So you basically agree with Chick’s outright bigotry against anyone who wasn’t his style of Christian.
    In this case Rabbi Salkin is describing Chick’s virulent anti-semitism. Something you don’t seem to have a problem with.

    Your analogy of Jack Chick with a doctor is offensively self-serving nonsense. Harranging people for not belonging to the same religion as you is not offering anything of use. Especially to those on the receiving end. Its simply trying to feel better by attacking others.

    Barry, you have some repugnant beliefs there. I am glad you are at least honest enough to present them in their plainest form.

  16. Just a note on Jack Chick’s “screed”. While I have seen his tracts put out here and there for people to read, I actually had someone push them on – I was flying out of Atlanta and was talking to the young lady sitting next to me. Only a two hour flight and we never once even touched on religion of any sort. However, we got up to deplane she tried to hand me a half dozen of Chick’s pamphlets. When I said no she was quite insistent – if I read them I’d learn something – the only reason that she finally accepted my “no” was the fact that I told her that if I did take them they’d end up in the first trash container I passed. She was never unpleasant about it. Just insistent.

  17. What do we do with Biblical truth, or at least what we sincerely believe to be biblical truth, when that truth is popularly given an image of hatred? 2 choices:
    We can compromise, spin, rationalize, or weaken that truth until it’s something less. This widely popular approach helps us offend the fewest people and retain the most friends.
    Or, we can stand by the truth no matter what the cost. This was Jack Chick’s choice.
    The author called Jack Chick anti-semitic. But perhaps a more accurate word might be anti-Judaistic. By that I mean, rather than hating people, perhaps he hated any form of thought, either religious (Judaism, Catholicism, etc.) or otherwise, that stands in the way of eternal, biblical salvation through Jesus Christ. Rather than hate, is it possible that Jack Chick loved you so much that he was willing to risk your anger and rejection in order to save your immortal soul?

  18. Only fanatics and the dense think they have a monopoly on biblical truth. Ask 1000 Christians and you will get 1000 different answers as to what falls under such a definition.

    You want to justify hatred of other faiths, so be it. Just don’t pretend you can make any claims of the moral and ethical teachings of your faith. It just looks like any serving behavior is justified by calling it biblical.

  19. If that is not the most convoluted notion of love I have read then I am at a loss to name another! It is like the SS telling concentration camp prisoners that it is because the Nazis loved them they were being exterminated! God honours those who honour him regardless of the human name we give God Jesus as a Jew speaks of “other sheep” and in doing so stands squarely in the Tradition of the Prophets that repeatedly tells us that God reads the heart not the words of the mouth. St John teaches us over and over again if you want to know if God is with you, and in you, you can know this is if you love. God above all else in Christ is Love not “biblical truth”. Jesus is the Word not the Bible which is the Church’s book.

  20. portrays a particularly righteous ultra-Orthodox rabbi who dies, but because he died “in his sin,” he went to hell.

    Well yes………….it is his (Jack Chick) belief after all. And……….in accordance with the NT as well.

    This is raw, unabated, Jew-hatred.

    Get out of town. How is it hatred when it is “his” truth? Is he supposed to compromise his beliefs?

    “Esau I have hated”.

    A few choice excepts from the Talmud — talk about hate!

    Gentiles are inclined to bestiality, lewdness and murder. Gentiles prefer sexual relations with cows more than their own wives. Eve had sexual intercourse with the serpent, transmitting lust to the gentiles, from which Israelites are exempt. (BT Abodah Zarah 22a).

    A gentile who observes a day of rest deserves death. (BT Sandendrin 58b).

    God is displeased when Jews show hospitality to gentiles. (BT Sanhendrin 104a).

    It is forbidden to teach gentiles the Law. (BT Hagigah 13a).

    A gentile who studies the Law deserves death. (BT Sanhedrin 59a).

    It is permissible to cheat a gentile in court. (BT Baba Kamma 113a).

  21. Check out Roy Hob’s comment. Evidently you have a lot in common with a neo-nazi. Not sure if that is ironic or pathetic 🙂

  22. this man has already had one of his rants removed and needs to be removed period. write RNS and ask he be permanently banned.

  23. I also had a perverse interest in these hateful little comics. It may not be Christian to say this, but I am glad Jack Chick is gone. If there is Divine justice, which I believe there is, Jack Chick must be roasting in cartoon hell right now. Thank you, Rabbi Salkin, for not letting the passing of this cruel propagandist go unnoticed.

  24. “You can be sure you’ve made God in your own image when you find that God hates all the same people you do.”
    — Anne Lamott

  25. “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord Lord,’ will enter the reign of God.”…

  26. They’re always so nice.

    Except for the ones that aren’t.

  27. But this is just what I was saying below.

    It’s his sincere religious belief. How can we criticize sincere religious belief? That would be like insisting there is a higher moral standard than human religion!

    At least the hobsit was consistent and supported sincere religious belief, instead of pretending to be outraged by it whenever it is convenient.

    Sarcasm off?

  28. Actually, rev, I don’t want his comments to be removed. I don’t want anyone’s comments removed. The answer to bad speech isn’t censorship, it is more speech. In this case, I think thinking intelligent people need to see these comments for what they are. Hiding them does no one any good.

  29. Messiah – the Hater:
    “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power” 2 Thessalonians 1:8

  30. Why do you come here? I don’t bother the readers of Huffington Post as an example. A legitimate question.

  31. Exactly Kevin Young. The Falling Away is surely complete when so called Christians can deny the simple interpretation of the Word which they claim to honor.

  32. I come here and other sites to help fight confirmation or cognitive bias, both for myself and others. Hopefully a meaningful and thoughtful dialogue can be achieved.

  33. Hate speech is not “bad speech” it is far worse and banning it is not censorship and our disagreement here is as old as the First Amendment and will no doubt be debated for many years to come. If you are a member of a minority community as I am you tend to see “bad speech” in a very different light!

  34. Ok….but we are talking about Faith: which is a belief in that which is unseen. Do you honestly believe you will change the “faith” of those who hold to religious views?

  35. So now you are one of the Mods here? Determining who should and should not post here. How very totalitarian. I forgot, that is not an insult to you. 🙂

  36. Thank you for demonstrating first and foremost that when the Fundamentalist Christians disavow neo-nazis/white supremacists as “not being real christians”, that you are as much of a “Bible Believing Christian” one of them as they are.

  37. Dude…..relax. It was just a question.

    It is a head shaker for me. This is a website about Religion after all. I don’t go to homosexual websites and try to change their minds. So I’m just curious as to why an atheist comes to a religious site. That is all. Take a valium.

  38. Dude, it was a nasty one. Valium is for wussies. Its Friday. Time for beer. 🙂

  39. Keep doing it! I encourage you to demonstrate your Christian beliefs as much as possible. A lot of the Evangelicals here want to deny your beliefs are part of the same faith. Please show them the error of their ways.

    I am being completely straightforward and unironic here.

  40. Again….for quoting scripture. Crazy how an agnostic/atheist thinks he can come to a Religious site and try to convince religious people out of being religious. And try to convince religious people from reading Scripture. Some sort of weird parasitic behavior.

  41. Except LGBT are not God’s chosen people- as the Jews are. He loves them. He will forgive them upon repentance. But He has clearly taught that they are sinning against Him

  42. I am not arguing with you. I am encouraging you to express your Christian beliefs. A lot of evangelical types want to deny that someone such as yourself is even Christian. I believe you are just as much part of the faith as they are.

  43. Typical response. Your comments carry no weight because you’ve made yourself a known hater. But keep it up because it suits your needs.

  44. From what I’ve seen, anyone who disagrees with you is a hater, left. Homosexuals are not God’s chosen people , like the Jews.

  45. I a, a gay man, 66 years old, and I’ve been listening to antigay garbage my entire life. I don’t want it hidden where it can be dismissed as unimportant, or worse, non-existent. I want it out where every decent, Kind, intelligent person can see it, and know it for what it is.

  46. The key phrase here is “intelligent person” which I fear may be or should put on the endangered species list!

  47. I thought the topic was theology and one’s approach to a “non-believer”. Is “unseen” unknowable or unproven? I, too, once held religious views for many years until I stepped out of my comfort zone and was challenged by other view points.

  48. Re: “But He has clearly taught that they are sinning against Him …”

    Wait, hasn’t your deity also taught that everyone is “sinning against him” (e.g. in Romans 3:23 and elsewhere)? How are the “sins” of LGBT folks appreciably different from, or worse than, the sins of others (e.g. greed, fornication, gluttony, envy, lying, licentiousness, viewing pornography)? How and why have they somehow earned extra condemnations for their “sins” that other types of people — who by Christianity’s definition also are “sinners” — haven’t?

    Just wondering.

  49. Re: “What do we do with Biblical truth, or at least what we sincerely believe to be biblical truth …”

    Oh well then. If you’re truly sincere about it, then you must be right and we insolent folk who refuse to knuckle under to you must likewise be wrong. Correct?

    Well, hold on a second.

    That whole thing works only if “sincerity” equals “veracity.” Unfortunately, it doesn’t. Lots of people think all kinds of things — and are quite sincere about it — but that doesn’t grant their ideas any veracity.

    For instance: Throughout most of history, people sincerely believed they lived in a universe only a few thousand miles in diameter, with the earth at its center, and everything else revolving around it. We now know that not to be true. Yet, it was sincerely believed.

    So which notion do we go with? The heliocentric solar system (which is part of a vastly larger universe), which we know exists as such? Or the geocentric solar system, due to the sincerity with which people historically believed in it?

    By your reasoning — in which “sincerity” establishes “veracity” — you’re required to go with the geocentric model. As for me, and many others who’re more concerned with the reality of things rather than people’s “sincerity,” I’ll go with the heliocentric solar system.

    Yeah, I know. How arrogant of me to dismiss the “sincere beliefs” of uncountable humans of the past who genuinely believed in a geocentric universe. It’s simply awful that I so readily disparage their treasured “sincerity.” Well, boo freaking hoo. I don’t care about people or their “sincerity.” I only care about demonstrable reality.

  50. You’re right. I shouldn’t have called you a hater, just a homophobe. Anything about LBTG folks is your dog whistle.

    Having a phobia can be debilitating, but there is help available.

  51. I agree with you that there are many, many peripheral biblical issues (e.g., sprinkling or full immersion, pre- or mid- or post-trib, etc.) on which biblical scholars will disagree. However, the overwhelming majority of scholars who seek the most literal interpretation of scripture agree on the issues essential to eternal security.
    If two plus two is four, then it cannot also equal 3 or 5 or the square root of 7. If biblical Christianity is the one true faith, which Jesus plainly stated himself (John 14:6), then we must come to the most unpopular, but inevitable, conclusion that every other form of religious faith is a false faith. Jesus, perhaps the original “narrow-minded bigot”, said so in Matthew 7: 13-14. A false faith, which has caused the destruction of countless number of men’s souls, is not just some harmless pastime. Proverbs 16:25.
    I must quickly add that it is most unfortunate that some so-called Christians have used the preceding logic as an excuse to commit all sorts of hatred and intolerance. I submit that the majority of such are not Christians at all, but rather those who want to use the name of Christ to give weight to their unbiblical, ungodly, and sometimes murderous agenda. A true Christian loves people into heaven. He/she does not assume the attitude of the priest in Doonesbury who once asked “Where’s the Inquisition now that we need it?”
    Although we should strive to live peacefully with all men, let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that we “love” someone simply because we allow them to comfortably continue on their path that leads to eternal separation from God. The burden for lost souls that God put on Jack Chick would not allow him to make such a mistake (Proverbs 24: 11-12). Often the highest level of hate is simply apathy.
    I was too stubborn to listen to the “God-loves-you-and-so-do-I” soul winning approach. I needed something more compelling. Then, 40 years ago I found a copy of the tract “This was your life.” Thanks Jack

  52. 1 Corinthians 6:18
    New International Version
    Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.

  53. You know what, I’m not going to do this with you. People don’t dislike you because of your anti-gay feelings. It’s because you’re mean, arrogant, belittling and rude. I have very mixed feelings about Christianity, but I care more about Christian witness than you do. Behavior like yours drives people away. You should be ashamed of your behavior, or at least embarrassed, but I doubt it. You always have to have the last word, so go ahead. I’m done with you.

  54. Matthew 5:11 – New International Version
    “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.”
    Thank you for the blessing Left. May the Lord put you in my position one day so you can understand the blessings. Thank you.

  55. Re: “Flee from sexual immorality.”

    Not a relevant response to my question. This verse condemning “sexual immorality” condemns many behaviors, not just homosexual sex. The key word here in the original κοινη Greek is πορνεια (porneia) which covers many forms of “sexual immorality,” including marital infidelity.

    So again I must ask: Why are LGBT folks especially condemned as “sinners” despite the fact that all humans are — according to Christianity — “sinners”? Why are their “sins” so vastly worse than other types of “sins” (including adultery, which is included within 1 Cor 6:18 which you quoted)?

    Please explain … without appeals to scriptural passages that don’t actually raise the distinction you think they raise.

  56. I believe you are just as much part of the faith as they are.
    In my opinion, they are on the Broad Road.
    Spuddie — quick question totally unrelated — Was Patty Hearst ‘brainwashed’ or acting on her own conscience?

  57. 1 Corinthians 6:18

    New International Version

    Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.

  58. Little of column A, little of column B.

    IMO , Less conscience than some sense of excitement in a formerly humdrum existence.

    Did you know she did some acting in two films by John Waters in the. 90’s (Serial Mom and Cecil B. Demented).

  59. As I told you before … 1 Cor 6:18 is not relevant because it does not solely condemn LGBTs. It condemns all forms of sexual immorality, including heterosexual infidelity and fornication.

    Try again. For real, this time, and please be mature enough to pay attention to what’s being said to you. Answer the question I asked, or just admit you can’t or won’t.

  60. Why would it need to solely condemn homosexuals? That’s rather silly.

  61. I asked you why you and your ilk specifically condemn homosexuals as “sinners” whose “sins” are somehow much more horrific than anyone else’s, even though the Bible clearly states that all human beings are “sinners.” The verse you cited as an answer to my question does not — as I said twice and as you finally conceded — condemn homosexuals especially. It condemns all “sexual immorality,” which takes many forms, including heterosexual “immorality.”

    So where, exactly, does your Bible explicitly and clearly condemn homosexuality as a “sin” which is far worse than any other kind of “sin,” making homosexuals “sinners” of a much worse degree than any other kind of person? Please explain.

    Answer the question I asked, not the question you’d prefer I’d asked or the question you’ve been programmed to answer in place of the one I asked.

  62. The reason so much emphasis is placed on homosexual sin is because this world is denying such and precious people are being led to Hell – bluntly.
    These people think they are being accepted and are actually something good, when all it really is, is another filthy sin.
    When the tides turn and once again, homosexuality is recognized as a sin again, the emphasis on sin will turn elsewhere. Simple as that.

  63. Re: “The reason so much emphasis is placed on homosexual sin is because this world is denying such and precious people are being led to Hell – bluntly.”

    But they’re “being led to hell” via many different “sins,” not just homosexuality … according to Christianity, which states that “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” Right?

    Re: “These people think they are being accepted and are actually something good, when all it really is, is another filthy sin.”

    Yes, just as lots of supposedly-pious Christians ” think they are being accepted and are actually something good, when [their proud sanctimony] is another filthy sin”? Right? I mean, after all, didn’t your own Jesus say:

    “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’” (Mt 7:21-23)

    Somehow I think all you Christians who’re so worked up about gays just might end up hearing those words from your deity.

    Re: “When the tides turn and once again, homosexuality is recognized as a sin again, the emphasis on sin will turn elsewhere.”

    Ah. I see. So you admit your special hatred of homosexuals is merely an “obsession of the moment,” and eventually you’ll move on to kvetch and moan about something else. In other words, it’s not really a fixation of your deity (which would have no time limitation), but your own.

    I couldn’t have done a better job of proving my point, than you just did. Thanks! QED.

  64. It’s simply this: homosexuality is the one sin that they have no intention of committing.

    Or every intention of committing.

  65. I believe the words you are looking for in Ms. LUcky:
    Bland venom.

  66. But spud, you are also Poe-Ing in a very ironic manner. I am shaking my finger at you, or would be, if I weren’t typing.

  67. Yes, but also I am generating “no true Scotsman” repellent.

  68. if the comments about homosexuals bother you so much, perhaps you may want to stay off articles pertaining to their sin.

  69. Perhaps MK Ultra…..if you may accept such a theory. Seems plausible to me. Operation Artichoke as another example. Interesting tidbit about Hearst doing some ‘acting’ in life. Have you heard of an author Dave McGowan? He wrote a book — “Weird scenes inside the Canyon”. Cool read on vacation or something.

  70. We are in agreement. I’m glad you can admit words like ‘hate’ are subjective. Thanks for that.

  71. Don’t think MK Ultra is plausible. This is the US government we are talking about. Not exactly paragons of efficiency and competence. The problem with most conspiracy theories is they posit a government which is far better at its job than reality and history has ever demonstrated.

    I have heard of Dave McGowan. He strikes me as a more politicized version of Kenneth Anger (author of Hollywood Babylon). Someone who comes up with interesting stuff but nothing resembling credibility. Read “Weird Scenes”. It was goofy fun.

    “Weird scenes inside the Canyon” was referenced by fantasy/horror writer Kim Newman in his book Johnny Alucard (Anno Dracula Part 4). The novel also weaves in a bunch of references to horror films and detective films set in 1960’s-70’s California.

    If you want an interesting and well researched work on hidden Hollywood, I suggest:
    “Hollywood Hex: An Illustrated History of Cursed Movies”

  72. Re: “if the comments about homosexuals bother you so much, perhaps you may want to stay off articles pertaining to their sin.”

    Maybe YOU should start answering my question.

    And no, don’t ask me what it was. I already asked you twice.

    Either you have an answer for me, or you don’t. Evasions (like the above) aren’t going to help you with it. You can get out of this only one of two ways, either by answering my question, or admitting either that you cannot or will not answer it.

    Since you haven’t been able to come close to an answer, I’ll assume you have none. Furthermore, your deflection tells me you haven’t the courage or maturity to make such a concession.

  73. Re: “Or every intention of committing.”

    No!!! You can’t possibly be accusing them of being closeted, self-hating gays. Why, that’s impossible!


  74. So you refuse to answer. Thanks for demonstrating — as though it were even necessary at this point — how cowardly and immature Christianists like yourself are.


  75. Oh…you were serious? That makes it even funnier…..:)

  76. I know you were serious. Which is all that matters. And you’ve proven my point. Thank you!

  77. First, why should we care what your god thinks? Why would anyone subject themselves to such a petty, child-like, war god?

  78. I asked why should I?

    Yahweh is an evil deity if you actually read the Bible. What type of person would worship such a monster? Murders millions, sets people up to fail constantly, allows slavery and genocide, even commanding it.

  79. a meaningless sacrifice really. An infinitely powerful being, coming to earth, having a good life until the end, dying and then coming back. Nothing was lost. He’s just as powerful as he was before. So nothing was really given up.

    And the whole “he died for you” makes no sense to begin with. Such a sacrifice should have never been required.

  80. I suggest that you read scripture. He was fully God, and He was fully man. He was whipped, beaten, spat upon, his beard pulled out. I suggest you have this done to yourself, if you feel it is so minimal then come back and tell us how it feels after you have died.

  81. I have read scripture, hell, analyzing it is one of the reasons I am an atheist.

    He was still god, he was still all powerful. Sorry, you cannot hurt a god. It was a meaningless sacrifice, and again, one that shouldn’t be needed.

    If you hurt me somehow, I can look at the motivation behind it, and all of the factors and determine if it is something I should forgive you for or not. I don’t have to beat the crap out of you in order to feel better. Or hell, I don’t have to have an innocent animal murdered to forgive you, or have a person sacrificed to forgive you.

    I can say “hey, it was a mistake, no big deal.”

    Your entire delusional belief system makes no sense.

  82. No….you cannot blame God for your sin.
    Come back after you have died and tell me how minimal it was.

  83. First, you’d have to show that sin actually exists (ie that your god is real, which your god definitely is fake).

    And I actually can use the Bible to blame god for the sins of man. Yahweh placed the tree in the garden knowing exactly what would happen beforehand. Could have done anything at all to prevent sin from ever existing. But decided to go with the way he decided from the get go.

    Me, not being a deity, would be a meaningful sacrifice if I died for others. However, Jesus was a god. It was meaningless.

  84. I know Yahweh is fake because many of the claims made in the Bible are flat out wrong.

    Garden of Eden, the creation myth, Noah’s flood, they never happened. Science has destroyed any of these myths. Hell, genetics disproves all three by showing common decent.

    Throughout the Bible you have an unchanging god, actually changing quite a bit. You have the problem the omnipotence problem where it becomes paradoxical in nature to be omnipotent (creating a stone too heavy he can’t lift, etc). Then you have the problem that free will (as many Christians love to pretend is real) and omnipotence are incompatible.

  85. That isn’t proof. Prove it please. You only gave me opinion.

  86. It isn’t an opinion that the creation myth is a myth. It isn’t opinion that the global flood never happened.

    This is backed up by the evidence. With genetics alone, we can trace lineages back, and they do not show the genetic bottlenecking that would occur from such a flood.

    The creation myth is all out of order. Having plants predating the sun, having the earth predating the sun, having birds predating land animals. You know, things which absolutely contradict science.

  87. Yes it is opinion. Jeepers, I would have thought that someone who wasn’t afraid of being whipped, spat upon, beaten, had his beard pulled out, was nailed upon a cross and dying – thinking it is only minimal stuff, would have had the answer right off the top of their head.
    All you’ve given me is opinion.

  88. again, opinion. When you have something concrete, get back to me, eh?

  89. So science is just an opinion?

    I’m sorry, I’m done with you. You aren’t interested in having a conversation, and you are acting like an idiot. If you want to act like an adult and have an adult conversation, let me know.

Leave a Comment