Jack Chick

[lordsnooty]

Hi all,

I've just been reading some of the poorly-drawn evangelical comic strips of Jack Chick (http://www.chick.com/catalog/tractlist.asp).

I'm interested in what board members think of Mr. Chick.

Frankly, I'm not really expecting anyone to really speak up his kind of madness, but feel free to surprise me.

This is also related to the recent threads on cooercion and threats used to 'bring people to Christ'.

Paul

[spl_cadet]

Just about every Christian I've talked to thinks he's a nut. Those who don't are also the ones that, coincidentally, happen to think that Catholics are devil worshippers or whatnot.

[KingDavid8]

I wonder at times whether Mr. Chick is actually a Christian, or is a non-believer trying to poke fun at Christianity. A lot of it seems like bad parodies of Christian beliefs and seems to be designed to anger non-Christians, the very people such tracts should be reaching out for.

I also wonder which number is greater - those who have come to Jesus based on Chick tracts, or those who's hearts have been hardened towards Jesus based on Chick tracts.

In short, I'm not a fan.

David

[Nowhere357]

lordsnooty:

I'm interested in what board members think of Mr. Chick.
[/QUOTE]

Heh. The strips seem to function quite well as satire.

[juliod]

Jack Chick is the wind beneath my wings. :bow: But, then, I am an atheist.

I think it would be a great joke to purchase his 3000-tract set (with free display stand) and set it up some suburban "normal" church. Everyone would assume some other group in the congregation had installed it. With luck, you could break the church up with vicious recriminations on all sides. :rockon:

DanZ

[Em7add11]

Some of those Chick tracts gave me nightmares as a kid.

[The Laughing Man]

I like "Dark Dungeons," the one where Dungeons and Dragons leads a young woman to witchcraft and a friend of her's to commit suicide.

"NO, NOT BLACK LEAF! NO, NO! I'M GOING TO DIE!"

"Marcie, get out of here. YOU'RE DEAD! You don't exist anymore."

"It's my fault Black Leaf died. I can't face life alone! Marcie" (Marcie's suicide note)

[The Laughing Man]

Wait. I'm a "fundy!" What am I doing making fun of Jack Chick tracts? I should be mindlessly supporting his work and leaving piles of his tracts in bathrooms and assorted other places. :tongue:

(Edit still isn't working for me. Having trouble getting pages to load here, too. Maybe it's on my end.)

[Em7add11]

I like the one that "proves" rock music is just a front for the devil: http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0034/0034_01.asp

[Em7add11]

/ot Oops, I'm getting my forum tags confused. I can't edit either.

[Warcraft3]

Just about every Christian I've talked to thinks he's a nut. Those who don't are also the ones that, coincidentally, happen to think that Catholics are devil worshippers or whatnot.

You mean they arent? But I read it in this chick tract...........


Russ

[Jin-Roh]

:rofl:
Good one russ.

Yeah his comics are really dumb. I have met one person out of all the people I've meet on the net who supports Chick. He was a real wacko who thinks that Billy Graham is evil for some reason.

[spl_cadet]

Today @ 05:52 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=89404#post89404)
Jin-Roh:

:rofl:
Good one russ.

Yeah his comics are really dumb. I have met one person out of all the people I've meet on the net who supports Chick. He was a real wacko who thinks that Billy Graham is evil for some reason.

It's because Billy Graham recognizes that Catholics are Christians, participates in ecumenical meetings, and encourages Catholics at the altar calls to stay in their Church.

[Evangel]

he makes a good point every other article or so. kind of have to read through his bullcrap. those comics are so wrong their funny. of course its my fault he got brought up. but someone else mentioned him i believe. :ahem:

[Sheepdog]

oh, i like Jack Chick. if it wasn't for his bassackwards nonsense the world would be less amusing :whack:

[Bartholomew]

Today @ 09:11 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=89423#post89423)
spl_cadet:

It's because Billy Graham recognizes that Catholics are Christians, participates in ecumenical meetings, and encourages Catholics at the altar calls to stay in their Church.

No offense to Billy Graham, but if he encourages Catholics to stay in their Church he probably doesn't realize that Catholicism and Evangelicalism are either/or propositions--for they are different Gospels.

~Matt

[spl_cadet]

Technically so are Lutheranism and Evangecilsm (yes I butchered the spelling so sue me).

[lordsnooty]

Glad to see that Mr. Chick doesn't have any support! Hey, you guys aren't so bad after all! :teeth:

Paul

[Bartholomew]

Today @ 10:58 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=89511#post89511)
spl_cadet:

Technically so are Lutheranism and Evangecilsm (yes I butchered the spelling so sue me).

They both believe in the same justification. Catholics do not.

~Matt

[Bartholomew]

Today @ 11:00 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=89514#post89514)
lordsnooty:

Glad to see that Mr. Chick doesn't have any support! Hey, you guys aren't so bad after all! :teeth:

Paul

Yeah, he's...not-so-nice.

:eww:

[Sher]

Jack Chick?? Jack Chick?? :rofl:

[Freak]

Some of his tracts are accurate and he consistently shares the Gospel in them. Is there a problem with that?

Though I agree some of them are wacky.

[kiwimac]

Freak,

Which of Jack Chick's tracts are accurate?

Kiwimac

[spl_cadet]

Today @ 02:07 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=89736#post89736)
kiwimac:

Freak,

Which of Jack Chick's tracts are accurate?

Kiwimac

His general ones about salvation are accurate and pretty good imho. The others, aren't.

[Faramir]

Whenever I see a Chick track lying around, I make sure that I pick it up, read it for a good laugh :rofl:, and then put in the trash can where it belongs. :eww:

[Solly]

While I don't like JCs stuff as such, and some of them are so-o-o badly drawn, and s-o-o-o not the Gospel (like the love letter one, *yecch*), and there is the fact that there is a lot of hate literature in there, I do like the Bible Story ones, which are well drawn, and usually focus on prophecy about Christ. The one about Ruth I still have. They are well produced, and better than many a cartoon children's Bible.

Saying that, I wouldn't weep one tear if JC gave up tomorrow.

[FirstSunday33ad]

They are definitely simplistic and some are just bigotry, but others look like good overviews of certain questions.

I don't know - I've seen worse.

[Sheepdog]

He's a KJ Onlyist. in fact, i think the KJV mentions KJOism: "...the dumb ass speaking with man's voice..." (2Pet. 2:16)

[jpholding]

Chick has (had?) one decent pencil or charcoal artist who did the tract titled "Firestarter?"

Otherwise they make nice hankies.

[Jin-Roh]

Yeah. THere i just no getting through to the KJVonlyists. Even if you bring up the fact that the authors believed that it wasn't a perfect translation.

I'll read my "leaves-verses-out" NIV just to spite them.
:read:

[The Laughing Man]

This is pretty good:

Mystery Science Theater 3000 meet "Dark Dungeon" (http://www.fecundity.com/darkdung/)

:lol:

[DBoone]

There's only a few Chick Tracts that I'm familiar with, although I read alot of them when I was a kid. I tell you, I must've 'repented' after reading every single one of those tracts, but fear is a poor motivation so I quickly went back to my boyish sinful ways. It was only when I was touched by the love of Christ that the Gospel left any real impression on me. "The one who fears is not made perfect in love."

There is however one Chick Tract that does stand out in my mind and it's on their website. I've yet to have any intelligent rebuttals against it, on the subject of evidence for evolution:

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp

[lordsnooty]

Yesterday @ 11:38 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=90423#post90423)
DBoone:
There is however one Chick Tract that does stand out in my mind and it's on their website. I've yet to have any intelligent rebuttals against it, on the subject of evidence for evolution:
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp

This hateful excrement barely deserves rebuttal. But...

I'm no scientist, but here's two points for starters.

1) "Only the last one [principle of evolution] has been observed and can be called science. The first five are believed by faith."

First off, this list of concepts is bunk. Chick made it up himself. Badly.

Secondly, the principles of evolution are not 'believed by faith', they are conclusions drawn by a careful examination of the evidence. There is actually a difference (Gasp!).

2) "Most experts now agree that Lucy was only an unusual chimpanzee, not a missing link"

Oh dear! The reference given for this little gem reads thusly: "For details watch Video Seminar Part 7 by Dr. Kent Hovind". Kent Hovind - the famous diploma mill customer - is reviled even by creationists such as Socrates.

Naturally, the claim made about Lucy being a chimpanzee is totally false. Scientists do not believe that Lucy was a chimp, but some have pointed out several similarities.

(Rummages around online)

Rebuttal 1 (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/bigdaddy.html)

Rebuttal 2 (http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/feedback/mar01.html)

Jack Chick is one of those people that almost makes me wish that hell exists, just so I could have the satisfaction of knowing that he was going to rot there.

Paul

[DBoone]

Okay Paul. Thanks for the rebuttal. I wish I knew enough about Creationism to counter your argument.

Incidentally I found this on a website:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint.html

and here's another take on the issue

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1261.asp

[hupertheos]

I :love: Chick tracts! My favourite is The Poor Little Witch, which would make a great X-File. Please don't get me wrong - I don't agree with the majority of what Chick says at all. But is it possible that despite the bigotry displayed therein, God still uses them to bring people to him? :wink:

I found this through the Christianity Today website: http://lamag.com/media.htm It makes interesting reading - especially the last paragraph! :wink:

[Sher]

Ya gotta love this face though

:lol:

[DBoone]

LOL... I know. It reminds me of many face to face conversations I've had with skeptics. Sure, it's exaggerated, but it's pretty accurate in depicting the emotional responses that I've encountered.

[MBU version 3.0]

05-06-2003 @ 10:42 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=89252#post89252)
KingDavid8:

I wonder at times whether Mr. Chick is actually a Christian, or is a non-believer trying to poke fun at Christianity. A lot of it seems like bad parodies of Christian beliefs and seems to be designed to anger non-Christians, the very people such tracts should be reaching out for.

I also wonder which number is greater - those who have come to Jesus based on Chick tracts, or those who's hearts have been hardened towards Jesus based on Chick tracts.

In short, I'm not a fan.

David

David,

I've had those exact thoughts. I have wondered seriously at times whether Jack Chick is intentionally doing a parody of Christianity - a more deceptive version of landoverbaptist.org, perhaps.

Probably not, but I can't help but wonder sometimes.

- Bud

[Ben Franklin]

Who knows what his true intention is ? For me, I just appreciate them for what ever I can get out of them: comedy, sympathy, salvation, etc... I think one of his effective tracts was an early one called "Happy Hour": it reached out to alcoholics and held a means of hope. Whether or not the Holy Spirit is enough to change an alcoholic's habits is another story !

[Sakarja]

This thread made me go to the Chick website and read a bunch of tracts again. I like many of them.

[spl_cadet]

:eek:

[Twinsfan1]

I've only see maybe ONE chick tract I would hand out, and that's the one about the little boy who has the abusive father. The little guy has no hope and has been kicked out by his old man. He sees a scrap of paper saying something about the love of God, and dies in peace, going to heaven.

One of the questions I have is this: if this guy is so into the love of God, how come he draws HATE so well?? :huh:

I mean, the facial expressions he draws on hateful people (especially those devil-worshiping Catholic priests and nuns :hrm: ) are scary. I wonder if maybe he's just a little TOO familiar with that particular emotion?

[Benedict]

I got my first exposure to Chick Tracts as a roleplayer. Let me tell you, for all the things that could be said to be wrong with many of his tracts, Dark Dungeons (along with a lot of other Fundamentalists' and others' misunderstandings) has had a devestating effect on one of my favorite hobbies: roleplaying (D&D in particular).

Roleplayers love to pull up Dark Dungeons ever 6 months to remind ourselves of our accomplishments. Time has spared our hobby from many of the ravages of the 80s and 90s and we no longer have to worry so much about Chick's influence but I remember reading (and writing) piles of information on why Dark Dungeons was a steaming pile. I also remember many people who came to my favorite D&D message boards seeking help with explaining the hobby to sincerely-concerned but misinformed parents and denouncing the false ideas against roleplaying.

Dark Dungeons was often good for a laugh but I am not at all happy with Mr. Chick's presentation of Catholicism (well, what he thinks of Catholicism). I have mixed feelings about his apparent paranoia and the falsehoods he presents as truth. I do not know if I should be profoundly sad that someone could be so paranoid and hateful or outraged that someone could so willingly misrepresent any faith (and it gets personal when it is my closely-held faith).

I believe I may hold too much emotion inside to accurately and objectively evaluate any of his tracts for truth, only error. I have grown to laugh at a few of them but I still fear what influence they may still have considering the impact one silly, hysterical tract about D&D did.

[kiwimac]

Jack Chick could walk naked through a field of Truth, during the Truth mating season and he would still not be able to find any.

[fm93]

:argh: Why must you evoke such disturbing associations in our heads?

[Leonhard]

Jack Chick and all of his work is so ridiculously fundie that its impossible to do a caricature of it, without it being virtually indistinguishable from his original work.

[Leonhard]

Chick has (had?) one decent pencil or charcoal artist who did the tract titled "Firestarter?"

Otherwise they make nice hankies.

He... doesn't even draw them himself? Okay now I've officially lost the last remaining drop of respect I had for the guy.

[kiwimac]

:argh: Why must you evoke such disturbing associations in our heads?

It's a calling!

[Crow]

To me, a Chick tract is kinda like hearing someone let out a big loud rancid fart .

Yeah, it's gross and rude and crude and it stinks to high heavens.....but you still have to laugh.

[Jaecp]

When I first read "Dark Dungeons" in highschool a year or so after discovering D&D I thought it was a parody up until the stereotypical clean cut christian shows up to save the girl.

[ukchristian28]

I used to use Chick tracts in my younger days. I once gave "Hi There" to the paperboy with his Christmas tip:). I wouldn't use them now, because in my view they don't present an accurate picture of Hell (it's not literal fire). I also don' think their non-Reformed view is correct (although a lot of people on here won't oppose him for that). Even when I used Chick tracts I was very selective. The ones about the Roman Catholic Church starting Islam were just too wacky for words and I could never have considered using it. LOL!

[Kane]

...they don't present an accurate picture of Hell (it's not literal fire).

Just a question: what's an accurate picture of hell?

[abe3]

Thank you for your responses. I actually feel much better about Christianity knowing now that few support Jack Chic. He said that he got his idea for making the tracts from Mao Tse Tung. In addition to the tracts he also made comic books including Alberto. It was hideous propaganda against the Catholic church - all a true story! It made me fearful of Catholics as a child. Now it has been exposed as a fraud. This is just one of many links:

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2007/03/jack-chicks-lies-real-alberto-rivera.html

Anyhow, I am glad that most Christians do not buy into these tracts.

[37818]

I have a box of an assortment those tracks near my desk. While they can be fun and funny. They are NOT, in my view, very reliable witness. There are issues of teachings, among other things. So there they sit in the box near my desk. I think the person who bought them conclude they were unsuitable. Gave the whole box away to another believer, which in turn gave the to another, and were given to me by a family member who got them.

For the record, here is a sample sinners prayer,

WHAT TO PRAY
Dear God, I am a sinner and need forgiveness. I believe that Jesus Christ shed His precious blood and died for my sin. I am willing to turn from sin. I now invite Christ to come into my heart and life as my personal Savour.


ISBN 0-7589-03883-9

One of the problems is what the 'believer' is asked to do, "I am willing," "I invite," "into my heart," more than what Christ did, though mentioned. I challenge anyone to find scriptures supporting such.

Salvation is a gift which God does (John 1:12-13.) Not what we do or will.

[KingsGambit]

He peddles completely ridiculous nonsense about the Vatican seeking world domination or something. My first exposure to Chick was in high school, when I volunteered at a soup kitchen in Denver that was handing them out. I didn't get a really good vibe from the tracts, and when I learned more about Chick later, this was confirmed.

[Catholicity]

I knew people who read them like they were the gospel.....:doh:

[ukchristian28]

Just a question: what's an accurate picture of hell?

See this video and the article attached to it:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q5vGcpx1sY

http://www.tektonics.org/film/hellislike.html

[Kane]

See this video and the article attached to it:

http://www.tektonics.org/film/hellislike.html

Thank you for the video and the article. Here at work, I cannot watch the video. But I did read the article. I'm going to think more on this before I respond. In fact, I have a book at home called, "Four Views On Hell" written by four different Christian scholars who then, in turn, critique each others views. That should give more food for thought on this subject.

I'm not a Christian any longer, but it'd be interesting to re-consider the theology behind the concept of hell. Thanks for the prompt. :)

[The Pixie]

See this video and the article attached to it:

[video snipped]

http://www.tektonics.org/film/hellislike.html
The curious thing about this view of hell is it depends on a "shame culture" Outside such a culture (where we live), hell really is not so bad. Sure, you are away from God, but as an atheist I have never felt any different.

[Leonhard]

The curious thing about this view of hell is it depends on a "shame culture" Outside such a culture (where we live), hell really is not so bad. Sure, you are away from God, but as an atheist I have never felt any different.

Well... I know JP speculates that for us individualists, Hell would be a place of eternal boredom.

[Kane]

Well... I know JP speculates that for us individualists, Hell would be a place of eternal boredom.

Well, that could be true since the notion of hell is already quite boring.

[Leonhard]

Well, that could be true since the notion of hell is already quite boring.

I don't know about that, in fact I'm pretty much gonna disagree on this one. Try reading the Divine Comedy, the first third of which is a depiction of a very complex Hell filled with all sorts of creative punishments fitting to the various crimes each sinner was guilty of. Dante who wrote it, used it quite effectively as a platform to discuss questions of ethics and the notion of justice. Some of my favorite works of fiction makes very effective use of the notion of a hell. Perhaps it satisfies a cruel sense of justice in us. We need to feel that the bad guy didn't get away with it. Though I'm not sure how well this plays together with the notion of absolute forgiveness for all sins, after regeneration. You could still be a bastard like Newt Gingrich and divorce your wife while she's still in the hospital, and get to live in an eternal paradise.

Hell is not particularly well described in the bible. There is a lot of interpretive wiggle room for the imagination. Therefore its a place where all our fears can collect. The idea of it makes for a lot of pondering of 'What would the worst possible fate be? Would hell be like?'. Eternal boredom sounds pretty awful, though it would depend on what kind of boredom it is. Eternal hopelessness sounds unendurable, though that's exactly what you'd be forced to endure. No more justice, except that your sentence has been given. No more mercy, no more forgiveness, no more love shown by the one you rejected and were publicly rejected by.

I think that a lot of conceptions are Hell are pretty much nonsense. The idea of burning forever gets ridiculous very quickly on the face of it. The experience would either drive you completely insane and destroy your mind utterly (which is as good as dying) or you'd eventually get used to and ignore the pain. Pain also comes from damage done to a body. However if sinners are given an immortal body (what else could they given if Hell is everlasting?), then why feel pain since nothing would ever damage ones body again? Of course I guess God could just directly stimulate the nerve cells, but I'll leave to Christians to dream up divine tortures that would work on immortal bodies. While there's an initial fright at such a scenarios since they're horrible, they eventually become unreasonable.

Many Christians agree that Hell is not literal fire, but that its something worse. I think that's the consensus of this forum. The apologist Peter Kreeft will say that its a place where nothing happens, vs Heaven where everything good happens. Glenn People's will tell you its a place of utter destruction, where the sinner is annihilated entirely, some Christians respond that this is too good for the sinner, and some ironically that annihilation is too horrible. The Roman Catholic Church gives an image of a person in eternal mental agony over the rejection of God. C.S Lewis depicted various conceptions of Hell in his fictions, from The Great Divorce where its a hopeless, dull, and grey (literally) place, where saints try to reach the sinners in vain because the sinners won't ever respond lost as they are in their own sin. In his Space trilogy (and Screwtape Letters) he depicts a hell where the souls of sinners are continuously merging and splitting apart with other souls, stirred up by demons for their own amusement.

Personally I find C.S Lewis hells a bit odd. Especially the idea that people in Hell are voluntarily staying there. And in the Great Divorce people just stop acting like real people for unexplained reasons. I don't (and this might be my pride speaking) find myself an unreasonable person. If I recognized that I was in Hell, why wouldn't I then ask for God's forgiveness? Have I lost eighty IQ points making the transition from living to dead? I guess being brainless for a while would do that to a person, though apparently not to the saints. Did God maliciously make me stupid? That sounds rather unkind and unreasonable of him. What's the motivating factor for doing that if he's loving and good? And it would ruin the whole "Hell is locked on the inside" view, since it would be God that made it impossible for a guy like me to get out. Did I get stupid in process? How and why? It just doesn't make sense to me.

It was one of the hardest things to justify when I a Christian. I knew of defenses, I knew of conceptions of morality and goodness where it made sense. I could string words together in the fashion of traditional Christian theology to defend Hell. However I never quite could make the connections and feel comfortable with the defenses. I could trust that such defenses existed, but I didn't know any well enough, and I'm still not sure there's any good explanation for why a good God (who is worthy of being called good, and isn't merely defined as being good) who would send people to such a place for doing what they couldn't not do, for doing what they had always done (I didn't believe in an original sinless state). Sprinkling out forgiveness here and there like crumbs to a few pigeons on accident or malicious choice. It was a hard thing to live with that's for sure.

On the other hand I don't think a Christianity without a Hell would be very strong. It would take a lot of force out of evangelism, and it would make it much easier for Christians to explore other religions. People struggling with doubt wouldn't have the fear of Hell to force them back into belief.

And what about a large part of the heavy rock movement? The mythology of Hell has inspired a lot of art both by Christians and non-Christians, and I kinda find the mythos pretty cool myself.

So its anything but a boring concept.

[DuraGizer]

He... doesn't even draw them himself? Okay now I've officially lost the last remaining drop of respect I had for the guy.

If the art is cartoony, he drew it. If it isn't, he didn't.

[37818]

If you have any of Jack Chick's tracks. They can be suitable for those unblievers who are careless about spiritual things. Since correct crossing the t and dotting the i are not going to make any difference to their unwillingness to take any serious thought in spritual matters.

[caudex]

It's been suggested that Jack Chick is more interested in his sales figures than actually saving souls. I wouldn't expect members of this forum to have a particularly good view of him, as his approach to evangelising is about as far from apologetics as you can get. His focus is almost entirely presuppositional: he has no justification for his premises, so his arguments can be ignored. He starts from the assumptions that God exists and that you will be tortured in a lake of fire after death if you don't accept Jesus, and proceeds from there. This may work on those who are vulnerable to emotional appeals, but to anyone else his tracts are more hilarious than anything.

[Kane]

So its anything but a boring concept.

Thank you very much for such an excellent explanation of your position.

My flippant comment about hell being boring was not to deride the impact such a fiction has had on literature, art, historical conventions, etc. It was a purely subjective comment birthed of my own personal feelings about the subject overall.

I have read Dante's comedy. Inferno was horrific but mind-bending. Purgatorio had a soporific effect on me. Paradiso had all the shine one would expect from the subject matter being treated; but in the end, to me, it dragged me along instead of inspiring me, or compelling me onward.

Kreeft has an interesting take on most things, actually. I remember enjoying his vision of things a little more than most theologians when I was a Christian. Like you, I think Lewis's vision of hell was, well, awkward at best. I'll defer to your criticisms of Lewis here because they are expressed more adequately than my sleepless, coffee-addled brain can deal with at the moment.

Peoples, along with John Sanders and Gregory Boyd, both subscribe to an annihilationist view of hell, which I think, if you're going to have a hell, makes the most sense. Oddly though, having such a view of hell really means that there isn't a hell and that your days as a shackled and stained sinner will come to an abrupt end. Permanently. Which, really, renders the notion of hell rather pointless. And, by implication, if hell really isn't, then the fire-insurance that drives a lot of people to make an emotional conversion to Christianity puts the very idea of heaven at risk: if you can simply die and be done with it, why not enjoy life now and forget about eternal prostrations and genuflections?

[37818]

Peoples, along with John Sanders and Gregory Boyd, both subscribe to an annihilationist view of hell, which I think, if you're going to have a hell, makes the most sense.

The annihilationist position makes no good sense at all from the stand point of Christ being forsaken and suffering on the cross, and in so doing completed the atonement before He physically died on the cross.

. . . Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. . . . When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the spirit.




. .