Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Patcher · 03-10-2005, 10:44 AM

I ran across this on an apologetics site. I did a search on our boards for James Holding, but I must have done it wrong, because he surely is talked about here. Has anyone here debated him? If so, could I please have links?

Quote:

I suspect some of you who run Web pages out there have also heard from this character we're about to mention, at least in one of his named incarnations, so we're going to drop a bit of special attention on him here. Long ago when this ministry was part of another called The Christian Apologetics Bookshelf we received the following message:

I invite any good apologist, to join a mailing list called "MCAD" by sending a blank email to [email protected] and post a single evidence for the Bible...
If you won't, that will further convince me that the Bible can not be defended.
...and it was signed, "Huyamunn Masoud."

Well now - here was what I wrote back to this fellow:

...I invite you to tune into the following URL:

(At this point, I gave the old URL where my material used to be situated.)

....and refute even ONE CHAPTER of what you find there by me, James Patrick Holding. Send me the results as a text file or as an HTML file. If you're even 20% successful I'll join your little subscription list and thrash you like nobody's business. Just let me know when you get done and we'll work out terms of exchange of material.

That was written several years ago - and needless to say, our friend "Huey the Hot Air Balloon" has yet to respond in any way, shape or form. But I bring this up to make a few salient points regarding this fellow in particular, a certain class of skeptics in general - and to issue a challenge of my own.

First, I'd like to note the radical immaturity that our bud "Huey" displays - and which I satirized in my reply. He has set in advance his own interpretation of what our action (or rather, any lack thereof) would have to mean. It's not that we might not have time or interest in list-based discussions; it couldn't possibly be that we see no reason to dignify a skeptic's pipe dreams with a response - no, it has to be that we cannot defend our faith. Jeane Dixon would have paid vast sums for such precognitive abilities.

I've run across skeptics like this from time to time. Typically, there is no way to withdraw gracefully from any conversation with them, without it being assumed that your withdrawal means victory for their side. You have given up because you have lost - not because you have realized that you are beating a dead horse. The situation is rather analogous to the armored knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail who, having had his limbs shorn off, avers, "Tis' only a flesh wound!" Well, we can't say they don't have a positive attitude. Robert Schuller is a dilettante compared to this breed of skeptics with their rose-colored glasses. As one of our readers has said, in the skeptical world, if you stop beating a dead horse and walk away, it will eventually get up and tell everyone it crossed the finish line ahead of you.

And so, since "Huey" has declined to answer our challenge given personally, preferring (apparently) the relative safety of his closed circle on this list of his, we'll re-issue the challenge here, and as a special bonus make it open to everyone -- and thereby express a key theme of Tekton Apologetics Ministries. The challenge is simple: Pick up any essay of mine and refute it. Contact me for terms of exchange. And if I hear nothing, I'll guess I'll just have to assume that no one can respond to my material.

The clock is still ticking.

A few folks have answered this challenge -- you can see about all that throughout the site.

Julian · 03-10-2005, 10:58 AM

Not sure how the search works but I think that James Holding might be the same person as J.P. Holding, which is how I have always heard people refer to him. That might explain your search troubles.

Julian

Ebonmuse · 03-10-2005, 11:01 AM

http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/holding1.html

Patcher · 03-10-2005, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ebonmuse

http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/holding1.html

Thanks, Ebonmuse. I've read so much from the IIDB that I thought I'd google and read the other side now. But as I'm reading, I wish I had several of you over my shoulder to point out the problems with their arguments!

Toto · 03-10-2005, 11:21 AM

You will find a lot in the Infidels Library. JP Holding is the nom de guerre of Robert Turkel. He is also known as "No Link" because, unlike the II library, he refuses to provide links to the articles that he disputes. He has some bad habits - personal insults, rewriting his essays without notice, etc.

Farrel Till has a long history of debate with him.

Here are a few links: James Patrick Holding, the Want-to-be Apologist

Holding in the Apologists section of II

Happy reading.

Patcher · 03-10-2005, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

You will find a lot in the Infidels Library. JP Holding is the nom de guerre of Robert Turkel. He is also known as "No Link" because, unlike the II library, he refuses to provide links to the articles that he disputes. He has some bad habits - personal insults, rewriting his essays without notice, etc.

Farrel Till has a long history of debate with him.

Here are a few links: James Patrick Holding, the Want-to-be Apologist

Holding in the Apologists section of II

Happy reading.

Thanks, Toto. Here's a question: Are there any apologists out there that you respect? Any with any credibility?

rlogan · 03-10-2005, 11:52 AM

I don't know if Holding posts at Tweeb (Theology Web) anymore. It's been a long time since they booted me off there.

Toto · 03-10-2005, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patcher

Thanks, Toto. Here's a question: Are there any apologists out there that you respect? Any with any credibility?

I'm an atheist, and apologists are people who try to find justifications for Christianity, so I can't say that I find any of them credible. Holding-Turkel is particulary nasty, but many apologists are more well meaning, charitable, etc., even if I disagree with their arguments. If you want to read some of the better apologetics, you might try Christian Think Tank, which seems to combine a relatively sophisticated view of human psychology and a relatively literate view of the Bible.

Steven Carr · 03-10-2005, 12:07 PM

http://tektonics.com/quotes.htm contans excerpts from some of Holding's postings.

The following quotes of Holding illustrate a major theme in Holding's apologetics - namely , doo doo.....

'Suit yourself, but you look funny standing in a pile of doo doo."

"My dog made a better agrument (sic) in the yard this morning! I'll skip all the repeated doggy doo...."

"...nanny nanny boo boo, stick your head in doo doo."

Of course, Holding is as inconsistent as ever, and also said :-

"A wise person once said that foul language is the recourse of those whose arguments lack force otherwise."

Patcher · 03-10-2005, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

http://tektonics.com/quotes.htm contans excerpts from some of Holding's postings.

The following quotes of Holding illustrate a major theme in Holding's apologetics - namely , doo doo.....

'Suit yourself, but you look funny standing in a pile of doo doo."

"My dog made a better agrument (sic) in the yard this morning! I'll skip all the repeated doggy doo...."

"...nanny nanny boo boo, stick your head in doo doo."

Of course, Holding is as inconsistent as ever, and also said :-

"A wise person once said that foul language is the recourse of those whose arguments lack force otherwise."

Discredited indeed....

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-10-2005, 10:58 AM	#2
Julian Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Washington, DC (formerly Denmark) Posts: 3,789	Not sure how the search works but I think that James Holding might be the same person as J.P. Holding, which is how I have always heard people refer to him. That might explain your search troubles. Julian

03-10-2005, 11:01 AM	#3
Ebonmuse Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: - Posts: 722	http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/holding1.html

03-10-2005, 11:21 AM	#5
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	You will find a lot in the Infidels Library. JP Holding is the nom de guerre of Robert Turkel. He is also known as "No Link" because, unlike the II library, he refuses to provide links to the articles that he disputes. He has some bad habits - personal insults, rewriting his essays without notice, etc. Farrel Till has a long history of debate with him. Here are a few links: James Patrick Holding, the Want-to-be Apologist Holding in the Apologists section of II Happy reading.

03-10-2005, 11:52 AM	#7
rlogan Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Alaska Posts: 9,159	I don't know if Holding posts at Tweeb (Theology Web) anymore. It's been a long time since they booted me off there.

03-10-2005, 12:07 PM	#9
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	http://tektonics.com/quotes.htm contans excerpts from some of Holding's postings. The following quotes of Holding illustrate a major theme in Holding's apologetics - namely , doo doo..... 'Suit yourself, but you look funny standing in a pile of doo doo." "My dog made a better agrument (sic) in the yard this morning! I'll skip all the repeated doggy doo...." "...nanny nanny boo boo, stick your head in doo doo." Of course, Holding is as inconsistent as ever, and also said :- "A wise person once said that foul language is the recourse of those whose arguments lack force otherwise."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.