MiddleMan

http://www.tektonics.com/exposed.html

An entire site devoted to the "other side." This is the best one can do to provide you with "someone looking over your shoulder" while your read Turkel's (that's his real name) work. Turkel rarely publishes links to those who rebut his writings so that's why this guy set up his site. It links to all the known links of people who have written articles against Turkel. Hope this helps.

GakuseiDon

I'm a would-be Christian apologist who admires Holding's energy, though his continual use of invective language is counter-productive IMO. His use of primary sources is good, though (at least IMHO), and he does carry on amicable debates with atheist opponents where he feels they know their stuff (e.g. Lowder).

Holding has said that he won't post links to articles that use his real name or give personal details, because of his former occupation as a librarian in a prison. Whether that is a reasonable stance or not, I don't see why that can't be respected. A lot of people post under net handles (including myself) so I don't see it as a problem, personally. If you check the "exposed" link, you'll note that many of Holding's critics tend to use his real name "Turkel". (At one stage, Farrell Till once published not only his real name, but his address and telephone number as well).

For what it's worth, here are articles culled from Holding's "New Stuff 2005" section where he links to his opponents webpages:

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nowayjose_CC3.html (A rebuttal to Robert Price)
http://www.tektonics.org/parody/feb05scr.html (A rebuttal to a "non-competent Christian wolf")
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/muslyduh.html (A rebuttal to a Muslim apologist)

MiddleMan

I wonder if the authors of the work Turkel is replying to in the three links you provided were notified by Turkel that responses to their work have been put on his website so they could have a chance to compose a rebuttal?

And, as an admirer of Turkel's work, do you have any insight as to why he so frequently insults those he disagrees with? For instance, the weblink to the Muslim apologist is labled "muslyduh." "Duh?" Why does he do that?

luvluv

Patcher:

Depending on what you mean by "respectable", there are lots of respectable apologists, philosophers of religion, and theologians.

Richard Swinburne is pretty well thought of, though his books are pretty difficult for people without a background in philosophy. Ditto Alvin Plantinga. I think William Alston, Thomas V. Morris, J.P. Moreland, Dallas Willard, Greg Boyd, William Hasker, Del Ratzsch, Peter Van Ingwagen, Robert Koons and others are also highly thought of generally speaking. In addition, while this will certainly be controversial, I think William Lane Craig has had his moments. And while I can't speak to Geisler's latest work (which looks pretty suspect to me at first glance) his Christian Apologetics is a pretty darn good book with some fairly sophisticated argumentation.

And with all due respect to Toto, Leadership University is a much more sophisticated site than the Christian Think Tank. Follow that link and search for some of the authors I've mentioned; most of them have some fascinating essays over there on a variety of subjects including epistemology, science, history, Christian theology, etc.

I can help you with book reccomendations if you're interested. Just send me a private message.

Vorkosigan

All of this, and many other things, such as Holding's nonprofit registrations and so forth, is public information. In fact I located them myself in a post here several years ago. There are also several articles about Holding's library days.

That said, I have no problem with him using a nom de plume. I do, though, with his invective and his refusal to link to others.

Vorkosigan

Toto

Patcher asked for my opinion, and I gave it.

Leadership University is sponsored by Campus Crusade for Christ, which also sponsors William Lane Craig as a debater. I have heard Craig speak, and I consider his approach intellectually dishonest, and as far as I can see, Campus Crusade for Christ is somewhere between a cult and a recruiting arm for the Republical Party.

MiddleMan

The more I reflect on this the more disturbing it is. It is not at all a difficult matter to find out that J.P. Holding is Robert Turkel of Florida. Any of his former inmates who had intentions on killing the librarian who levied the 10-cent-a-day fine against them when they got out of prison surely wouldn't have a difficult time tracking down Turkel. I'm not sure why the name "James Patrick Holding" is viewed as such a security device.

And, you're right, people do use pseudonyms (my first name is not "Middle" and my last name is not "Man" :Cheeky: ) and if that was the extent of the issue I suppose it wouldn't go much further. But Turkel is known not to respect the anonymity of others. Why should the same respect be extended to him? While I find it a bit hard to justify publishing the man's address and phone number, his name surely isn't beyond the bounds of decency.

luvluv

I guess the point is that my opinion is of vastly more weight than yours.

Let's not poison the well here. I seriously doubt that Richard Swinburne, for example, has any official connection with Campus Crusade for Christ. The essays there are good, solid, informative introductions to the best in Christian philsophy, theology, and apologetics. The fact that this site is run by CCC does not detract from that fact.

Toto

I am not poisoning the well, since I am not debating anything; I was asked for my opinion on apologists, and I gave it. You are entitled to yours, even though no one asked for it.

Please stay on topic for this thread, which is JP Holding, a/k/a Robert "No Link" Turkel, who, after extensive criticism, has now has actually posted one link to Robert Price.

Steven Carr

You clearly haven't read the article Holding wrote about Jeff Lowder (rhymes with Chowder), which was so childish, even Holding had to remove it, out of sheer embarrassment.