Wednesday, December 12, 2018

my reply to James Patrick Holding's drama-queen babies

This is my reply to the fake-Christians who "support" Holding by getting involved in other people's gossip and drama, their comments which were posted to



Yep! That's the go-to strategy of a bunch of whiners with no real argument! they just slander you and hope that their own accusations directed towards your character will be enough evade the need to make a sound case to begin with! Fundy atheist strategy in a nutshell!
 Are you high on crack?  I've been trying, unsuccessfully, to get Holding to stop violating his own morals and to therefore "man up " and therefore contact me "one-on-one" about our issues, legal and biblical, since that is what he demands of me.  As I complained similarly in a prior post:
First, Holding is a hypocrite and liar, pure and simple.   In one of his videos that was obviously directed at nobody else but me, “Screwy Moments inScriptural Interpretation 15- Romans 7 and Sin”, starting at time-code 2:00, he says that If I have a problem with anything in his videos, I should deal with him, and “no one else”.

At time code 2:40, he taunts me saying that if I deal with my problem with his videos in any way other than with him personally, then I’d be showing I was too frightened to man up and deal with him “one-on-one”.  Ok, I recently sent a settlement offer to Holding by email and other methods to make sure he got it.  See here.

He never replied “one on one”.  He never “manned up”.  All he did was post more defamatory videos filled with misleading half-truths.

Since he qualified “one on one” with “no one else”, it’s pretty clear that he was asking me to avoid telling anybody else about my problems with his videos, and to simply contact him by direct correspondence.  And Holding is a hypocrite and a liar because his response to my most recent settlement offer was not direct private correspondence, but by cartoon youtube video obviously intended more to entertain his friends and the world than to seriously interact with myself. Only in Holding’s retarded mind does “upload a video for my friends to laugh at” constitute his engaging in "manning up", communicating “one on one” and involving “no one else”.

Like I said, Holding is a hypocrite and liar.  He does not expect from himself what he expects from others.  What the fuck else would a reasonable person take “one on one” to mean, if not direct reply?
 That's from my prior post which provides evidence that Holding perjured himself in court in his attempt to have his attorney-fees imposed on me.  See here.

Yet Holding is such a scumbag, he actually thinks his cartoon video-replies are a sufficient substitute for scholarly dialogue.  When he addresses "me" he always does it indirectly by posting a video and hoping I'll reply.  He has a pathological inability to conform to his own expressed morals and "man up" and resolve his issues with me "one on one".

Can you imagine how much worse Christian theology of today would be in (if that's even possible) if Christian scholars "resolved" their disagreements with each other by utilizing Holding's insulting libelous indirect babyish whiny method?

If you think I have no serious arguments against Christianity, I'll meet you in any online forum of your choice to debate you on any biblical subject of your choosing.  Put up or shut up.




I love these cartoons. They so point out so many things how people can misunderstand what God says.
 Then you shouldn't love them that much, because all of the name-calling bullshit involved in them goes directly against what Habermas, Licona, D.A. Carson and other Christian scholars consider to be basic New Testament ethics.   And I if I hadn't sued Holding, and forced him to disclose his private emails with such scholars, the world would probably never know the degree to which Holding's own personal Christian scholarly friends find his constantly insulting manner to be not just unbiblical, but clearly so.



my friend once told me that if you reach a point in a debate where your opponent stops givign actual arguments and instead starts flinging insults, it's because they don't have any more arguments.
5
Some people just skip the arguments too.
 What you missed, Holding, is that you have a 20-year history on the internet of flinging insults at ALL of your critics, including the Christian ones, whenever they refuse to back down after God has thundered his  ancedotes from Holding Heaven.




I heard it was called Sargon's Law, when an ideologue makes a character judgment about a person he's debating, that character judgment is true of the person himself.
@Alphlond really? that does not bode well of the fact that I tend to run into a lot of egotistical folks...
 it also doesn't bode well for Holding who doesn't realize he is looking in a mirror when he falsely accuses me of having a superiority complex and a narcissistic personality disorder.  There are no Christian scholars who support Holding's libelous filthy way of dealing with his critics, and the Context Group scholars accuse him of perverting their scholarship.  I'd say Holding has proven his irrelevancy to Christian scholarship plenty, that's precisely why Holding never says or does anything that has caused any Christian scholar to change their minds on any point of doctrine, or at least they don't wish to admit it publicly.


What got me was when he accused you of being a homosexual, especially over an accusation about an "anal fixation" since that doesn't even prove someone is gay. Also there's the fact you're married.
 Then apparently you haven't been keeping up on old or current events.  Holding has a 20-year demonstrable internet history of constantly using slurs that involve male buttocks, and other Christian apologists have noticed it to.  When the last one tried to pretend he was just kidding when labeling Holding that way, I shot him out of the sky and proved he was lying.


1
One of the articles I link to says: "What lies do BPs tell? Often they revolve around false claims of partner abuse, child abuse, perverse sexual behaviors, drug and substance abuse, mental illness, and criminal conduct. BPs tend to pick false accusations that are difficult to disprove. "
 Then apparently Holding has BP.  He accuses other of bestiality:
  JP Holding says:
Jeffy, you're such a dip! :D State of FL prisons don't offer Internet access on the prison compounds.  Speculation has it that you have intimate relations with farm animals. I guess that wasn't much fun because you're here posting comments. See? Isn't that great?  It's too bad you're reduced to this sort of babbling because not being able to answer actual arguments frustrates you so badly.
 Since the non-Christian amazon.com deleted this (apparently Holding sins in ways that even most infidels don't), it can only be found through the wayback machine and a couple of other websites.  Simply google the highlighted words as a single phrase in quotes.

What are the odds that the Christian scholars Holding is friends with (Licona, Habermas) would approve of THAT bullshit?

And of course, I document all of Holding's sadistic and gross insult-language in my First Amended Complaint in the federal case.


Perhaps you don't wonder anymore why, since my two libel lawsuits against Holding started becoming known, Licona and Habermas refuse to make any public comments in support of Holding anymore?


3
@MSOGameShow Not to mention the fact that a lot of closeted men are married, and many even have kids. Just because a man is married and has kids doesn't mean he isn't gay. But I have to agree with you here; I don't think there's any proof of Holding being gay or anything like that, and people are only making that statement because they have no argument against his beliefs.
Sorry, my charge that Holding is gay has much in support of it, and you are high on crack if you think I have no argument against his beliefs.  And most Christian scholars would say you aren't proving or defending anything with sarcastic rude insulting cartoon videos, which, like Holding's videos, very often don't even quote scholarly aauthority and simply present Holding's assertions about the sociology of ancient Israel as if his word was the end of the argument.

 

Im a bit new the controversy but what did u do to tick him off?
It's a 15 year story so far. I'll reveal it bit by bit.
 What's the matter?  Are you afraid that you might see more of a dark side to Holding than you wish, if you read my lawsuits against him? Ask Holding to email you the First Amended Complaints from the State case and the Federal case.  Find the libelous statement of his that you find to be the most irresponsible, and ask him whether he still believes that way about that alleged "fact".  Prepare to suffer "death by a thousand qualifications".


The context group? Is this a thing?
It was anyway. One of the main founders (Malina) is deceased, and Rohrbaugh is in his 90s and retired.
 Holding, your followers don't even know why "Context Group" is involved in our disputes? Holy shit.
Is your ministry just the nuts of bolts of modern Christan scholarship, or what?
at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

My reply to Bellator Christi's "Three Dangerous Forms of Modern Idolatry"

I received this in my email, but the page it was hosted on appears to have been removed  =====================  Bellator Christi Read on blo...