Holding's followers constantly shower him with praise for his for "apologetics" at his ridiculous Looney Tune YouTube apologetics channel. Apparently, they would shower praise on a pastor who committed adultery every day of life, because they think that as long as he is smarter than them in apologetics, this trumps the biblical requirement that he abstain from sin.
Here's how I respond to them (link to video is here). Since my comments never show up unless I myself am logged into my Google account, I have to assume that Holding is routinely deleting my comments. Rest assured, Holding will be held accountable for all of his actions toward me.
Text:
The bible requires you to disassociate yourself from any Christian brother who is a "reviler":
11 But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler-- not even to eat with such a one.
12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church?
13 But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES. (1 Cor. 5:11-13 NAU)
If you would see a serious problem with a Christian brother who committed any of the other sins Paul lists there, why don't you see a serious problem with Christians who routinely commit his listed sin of "reviler"?
Holding's history of "reviling" everybody he disagrees with is undeniable, and I am currently suing James Patrick Holding for Defamation/Libel, and my 534-page Complaint extensively documents exactly how reviling, hateful, spiteful and downright disgusting Mr. Holding's speech toward others has been consistently since 1998.
You can download that complaint for free at https://turchisrong.blogspot.com/2020/06/james-patrick-holding-has-committed.html
I suggest you start on page 486, "tenth act of perjury". Holding lied under oath, stating in answer to an Interrogatory that he had never deliberately intended to insult anybody.
I use up about 30 pages to show that Holding knew he was lying when he gave that answer, and thus he committed "perjury".
When Holding tells you the accusations in my complaint are false, ask him why he doesn't counter-sue me for abuse of process.
You might also ask him what happened to his aggressively mouthy nature. If he seriously thinks God's requirements upon him are more important to obey than any earthly authority, then why isn't he obeying God's command to keep insulting me? When faced with a conflict between godly and earthly authority, true Christians always choose to obey God and willingly suffer the consequences the earthly rulers impose (Acts 5:29), right?
If Holding is so sure Christians should be imitating the honor/shame riposte of ancient Jews, why isn't he equally sure that they should obey God when faced with a conflict between the rules of God and the rules of earthly authorities, the way Peter did in Acts 5:29?
