JoeWallack

JW:
Maybe Holding is related to Ahmadinejad. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5McSEU48Y8



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

DCHindley

I'm not getting the impression that Holding hates Jews like Ahmadinejad hates Jews. Holding espouses typically Christian replacement theology. Joe, you of all people should know how converts to Christianity are viewed by many Jews. Look at the vitriol directed at "Jews for Jesus" ("Messianic Jews") in general. They are viewed like we see Benedict Arnold in the US: someone who has gone over to an enemy who has done us wrong.

Ahmadinejad seems to hate Jews, not for their ethnic constitution (since he may also be ethnically Jewish), but for not being "believers" in the obvious superiority of Islam's understanding of God. Nutzies hated Jews for their perceived ethnic inferiority, a different thing entirely.

Christians look down at Jews as, at worst, "Christ killers" deserving punishment for the sins attributed to them in the NT gospels, but for the majority, as those not recognizing the obvious ethical superiority of Christian theology over Jewish theology. Whether they are willing to overlook that terrible ethical flaw in Jews does not change their perception that Christianity is, of course, better. Not only does it taste great, it is also less filling! They just don't understand why Jews don't want it both ways too.

DCH

Roger Pearse

There is something rather creepy, to me at least, crawling all over someone's family tree merely because of a religious disagreement. Yuk!

DCHindley

FWIW, the "North American Mission Board" is the domestic missions agency of the Southern Baptist Convention (claiming 40,000 churches and 16 million members worldwide).

Per this site:

The North American Mission Board assists Southern Baptists in their task of fulfilling the Great Commission in the United States, Canada and their territories through a national strategy for sharing Christ, starting churches and sending missionaries, in cooperation with Acts 1:8 Partners.*

DCH

*Woman’s Missionary Union & International Mission Board, all funded by their Cooperative Program (SBC member pledges).

DCHindley

Yeah, I suppose it is.

I don't disagree with him, or agree with him. Don't care if he's part Jewish (my step mom is "Jewish" through her mother, but is a practicing Christian, and I have more step brothers and step sisters and step aunts and step uncles than you can shake a stick at). Don't care if his parents divorced or not (mine did, when I was an adult though). Don't care if he is laid off from a state job (I've been laid off about a half dozen times myself, sometimes getting severance packages, but no pension, and currently have a state job myself, from which I do hope to retire someday). Don't care if he sells insurance, if that is what he does (I have spent the last 23 years working in the insurance industry, about 5 years of it as a self-employed "independent contractor" and not by choice, and have the highest respect for independent agents).

In some ways, I can actually emphasize with the guy. If he can supplement his income in order to make a reasonable living being an Internet apologist, more power to him. Unfortunately, he is so touchy about his background and family that it just seems to many that he has something to hide, so his opponents imagine the worst.

I was hoping to show he was just like everyone else, a little bit screwed up in his own unique way.

Amen!

DCH

KrisK10

Throwing in my two cents, I tend to side with Roger. I'm tired of trying to sift through the combative part of exchanges for the real arguments. IMHO, the best one can do is make their most rigorous argument available and let the chips fall where they may in terms of what other people conclude. In short, we can lay out our argument, agree to disagree, and let others make of it what they will. Once one has done that, it is time to ignore the other side unless they have something legitimate to add. I had my own exchange with JP Holding and decided to reply this way (also posted in the secular web kiosk here). All the best.

Kris K.

Zeluvia

Armadillos are quite cute.

Back off the innocent road kill.

BTW, I have no idea why you felt a need to tell people it was "safe" to ignore him. Maybe YOU are having issues ignoring him, I sure don't.

DCHindley

Why respond to his taunts?

He's just another screwed up individual (like pretty much everyone else in their own special way) who feels the need to rant and rave. It's like the bully at school who goads other kids to anger and then laughs at them. In his mind, he has won a victory over you evey time you respond in kind to his taunts.

So again, why give him the satisfaction?

DCH

NFLP

Well, with him it's not only a matter of religious disagreement. He's not a legitimate religious apologist. He's a cowardly bully who, from behind his computer's apron strings, delights in making and childishly poking at enemies. Ironically, in that regard, he seems to be his own worst enemy.

You know, this name thing has always seemed a little fishy. I recall hearing differing background stories in the beginning about need for a pseudonym, original name, name change by the family, original birth certificates, in-family adoption, name change forward, name change backward then forward, parents weren't married, parents were married...etc.

Now, DC, you bring another interesting possibility into the convoluted bizarreness.

Maybe Susan Turkel was his mother AND his sister.

I don't have any way to know...I'm just sayin.

lpetrich

The whole question of his name and his relatives aside, has anyone tried to catalogue his more juvenile comments?

Like calling Richard Carrier "Broken Vector"?

That could have some entertainment value, if nothing else.