Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 05-24-2007, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Kesler

The Impossible Faith (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Quote:

A Thesis So Explosive, An Atheist Paid $5,000 for An Answer The Impossible Faith offers the proposition that Christianity could not have succeeded unless it had indisputable proof of the resurrection of Jesus. Had there not been such evidence, Christianity would have been an "impossible faith".

Quote:

Originally Posted by review by Todd M Pence

Self-promoting internet pseudo-apologist James Patrick Holding is well-known as the creator of the "Tektonics" web site, which hosts a number of his articles purporting to refute the works of well-known religious skeptics, freethinkers and atheists. These "refutations" take the form of short essays consisting of little more than Ad Hominem attacks against the author of the work. Holding typically begins such an essay by harping again and again how so-and-so isn't a certified Bible scholar with any divinity degrees, therefore we don't need to pay attention to anything they say in their work. Interestingly enough, Holding himself, a former prison librarian, has no relevant credentials in the field of Bible study.

Holding then finds two or three minor points of contention in works which contain hundreds of pages and cite hundreds more facts and examples in support of their thesis. After several instances of childish name-calling and accusing the author of non-existent fallacies fabricated by Holding himself (i.e. the "Argument From Outrage"), Holding concludes his "refutation" by telling his audience that they "needn't bother" reading the work in question. Of course, if the person does turn to the actual work itself, they will see for themselves how inadequately Holding has dealt with it. . . .

The Mormon Defenders: How Latter Day Saint Apologists Misinterpret the Bible (or via: amazon.co.uk)

diana · 05-25-2007, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Kesler

He has written two books.

Nice! The easier to refute. No need for a mirror site to preserve what he said there.

We had a conversation once the gist of which was that I didn't have the expertise to do any Biblical interpretation on my own. I remember thinking...and who the samhill are you, then?

I probably said something to that effect too, but I don't remember.

Good to see you're still about, John.

d

John Kesler · 05-25-2007, 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The Impossible Faith (or via: amazon.co.uk)
The Mormon Defenders: How Latter Day Saint Apologists Misinterpret the Bible (or via: amazon.co.uk)

It strikes me as amusingly ironic that if one purchases Holding's books via the links above, II gets some of the proceeds. :grin:

Quote:

Originally Posted by diana

We had a conversation once the gist of which was that I didn't have the expertise to do any Biblical interpretation on my own. I remember thinking...and who the samhill are you, then? I probably said something to that effect too, but I don't remember.

You can re-live the experience here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by diana

Good to see you're still about, John.

:wave:

diana · 05-25-2007, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Kesler

You can re-live the experience here.

And so I did. I think of that period as "The Dark Ages." I was working midshifts, never saw the sunlight, and had beaucoup time to carry on a conversation with a brick wall. It was the pre-master's period.

I don't recall rereading the bit where we were arguing about my lack of expertise, though. If that wasn't another thread, it was quietly removed, as happens on that board from time to time.

d

MiddleMan · 05-25-2007, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Kesler

You can re-live the experience here.

I don't get it. Why does Holding address diana as

"Ms. Di-Cast,"

"Dear Ms. Di-orama,"

"Dear Ms. Di-vestiture,"

"Ms Di-ameter,"

"Dear Ms. Di-alog,"

What started that? It seems extremely childish.

Toto · 05-25-2007, 12:34 PM

That's Holding's MO - make fun of other's names. It's a debating technique designed to throw the opponent off stride.

MiddleMan · 05-25-2007, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

That's Holding's MO - make fun of other's names. It's a debating technique designed to throw the opponent off stride.

Make fun of OTHER people's names? When he's hiding behind one? Oh, wait, that's right. He used it to hide from inmates who may have wanted to kill him for his religious views. No, wait. JPH really IS his name; but it was a birth name and somehow it was changed early on to RT.

He'd make a helluva What's My Line contestant.

But I find the making fun of other's names to really take a lot away from his argumentation. I realize that what he offers isn't new and has been seen and debated before (I'd be shocked to learn if he thinks he's coming up with anything that hasn't been done already over the last 2000 years. He'd have a helluva ego if he did), but at least the respectabilty for those arguments and civil discussion could ensue. It's too bad he seems to clearly recognize the weakness of his position, so much so, that he has to belittle and make fun of his opponents in order to draw attention away from this weakness.

Biff the unclean · 05-25-2007, 02:00 PM

I always thought that he would be thinner.

And have a chin.

diana · 05-25-2007, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MiddleMan

But I find the making fun of other's names to really take a lot away from his argumentation. I realize that what he offers isn't new and has been seen and debated before (I'd be shocked to learn if he thinks he's coming up with anything that hasn't been done already over the last 2000 years. He'd have a helluva ego if he did), but at least the respectabilty for those arguments and civil discussion could ensue. It's too bad he seems to clearly recognize the weakness of his position, so much so, that he has to belittle and make fun of his opponents in order to draw attention away from this weakness.

What amazes me is that he doesn't see such behavior as un-Christianly at all. And neither do those who follow him about fawning over him, all of whom are presumably Christian themselves.

Biff,

I wasn't surprised in the least by his appearance, although I was prepared to be. He has the slightly-overfed, smug, clean-cut fundamentalist look. :huh:

d

No Robots · 05-25-2007, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff the unclean

I always thought that he would be thinner.

And have a chin.

And Google images still comes up empty on "Biff the unclean". Sigh. I live in hope.

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

05-25-2007, 12:34 PM	#46
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	That's Holding's MO - make fun of other's names. It's a debating technique designed to throw the opponent off stride.

05-25-2007, 02:00 PM	#48
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	I always thought that he would be thinner. And have a chin.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.