Showing posts with label demation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label demation. Show all posts

Friday, December 28, 2018

James Patrick Holding running scared? Yes, apparently

A few months ago, James Patrick Holding asserted that his tax issues related to his ministry work would be handled by third parties:
What's this going to take in terms of time and money? The B and E aspects of my mission will be developed each year, and I will tie fundraising into specific mission trips. As each set of trips is planned, we'll announce for specific fundraising needs that will cover the need for everything from travel to personnal expense. All of this will be done under the banner of Apologetics Afield, though again, the tax issues will be handled by selected third parties I align with. To meet the goals each year, I will set up a special fundraisers at the blog linked above. 
See here.

In another blog entry, Holding said anybody who makes a tax deductible donation will receive a receipt for this from the third party organization he works with:
All donations are tax-deductible, though as I noted in my ministry manifesto, I will now be working through third party organizations rather than one of my own. You will receive a receipt from that third party organization I am working with.

See here, it's the second-to-last paragraph.

Since Mr. Holding, even on his website and blogs announcing this shit, didn't disclose the name of this third-party organization he is working with, I decided to donate one dollar, in the hopes that I would get a receipt from this third-party and therefore obtain enough information to contact them and inform them about how Mr. Holding's past and current desire to engage in slander utterly disqualifies him from any teaching position in any Christian turch.

Well...tThe most fearsome spiritual warrior in God's army, James Patrick Holding, issued me a refund very quickly, and I still haven't gotten a receipt that identifies any third-party organization that Holding is working with.  Here's the emailed refund receipt:
service@paypal.com <service@paypal.com>
Wed, Dec 26, 5:56 PM (2 days ago)
Hello, Christian Doscher

Apologetics Afield refunded $1.00 USD from your purchase on December 26, 2018.
The money was refunded to your VISA x-0888. It may take a few days to appear on your statement.
Your refund summary
Transaction ID: 5LG45575Y4622714K    
December 26, 2018 17:55:00 PST
Total purchase amount     $1.00 USD
Amount refunded     $1.00 USD
 

Refund paid by
Apologetics Afield


Refund paid to
Christian Doscher
barryjoneswhat@gmail.com

Refund details
Refund to VISA x-0888
    $1.00 USD
        PayPal    
   
You'll notice who paid this refund:  "Apologetics Afield".  Not the "third-party".

So unless some fool wishes to trifle that maybe there's another third party out there who has the same exact name as Holding's Apologetics Afield corporation, it's pretty clear that it is Holding himself who paid the refund.

In other words, Mr. Holding was aware that I would find out the identity of the third party organization he works with, if he kept that dollar.  Therefore, Mr. Holding's refund is reasonably interpreted to signify that he didn't want me to know which third party organization he works with.

Gee...why would Mr. Holding fear my knowing something like that?  Could it be that he has, once again, successfully hoodwinked this third party, and he hasn't given them what I would give them...the level of detail regarding his many sins of slander that utterly disqualify him from teaching ministry?

Holding will, of course, boast that this is not the reason, but then let him supply me the name, website, email address and physical address of the third-party organization he works with, then we can confirm that his dogshit excuse is actually serious.  Since that won't be happening, at least not until I force to make such disclosure through the legal process, then no, Holding's denial isn't serious, its motivated by nothing but a narcissistic pathological need to constantly barge ahead and look good regardless of how much evidence there is that he is not good.

Unfortunately for Holding, all he is doing is increasing legal costs for himself. 

You see, this was my attempt to learn, in cheap fashion, the identity of other people Holding is likely to have communicated with regarding myself or regarding the the two prior libel lawsuits I filed against him.  And that's something that is obviously relevant to my planned future libel lawsuit against him.

Since he doesn't wish to do this the easy way, we'll do it the hard way, and I'll be asking him, in the discovery phase of the next lawsuit I file against him, to identity that third party organization.  After all, I've made enough noise on the internet about him that it is at least reasonably likely that they googled his name, they found my documentation of his many sins of slander, and like any good Christian church, were concerned and thus can be plausibly presumed to have had discussions with Holding that involved the subject of myself and my two prior lawsuits against him. 


And if Holding stupidly tries to tell the jury all I wanted to do in this was defame him to this third-party organization, I will confront him with the reason for this (i.e., I will confront him with my personal motivation  for wishing to get in contact with this Holding's third-party ministry partner...it is because

a) they are Christians who believe the bible is the word of God.
b) the bible makes abundantly clear that foul jesting, abusive speech and slander are sin,
c) the bible makes abundantly clear that any "brother" who engages in "reviling" or the like is to be shunned,
d) the good people of this third-party church deserve to know ALL of the gory details about Holding's past and present slanders,
e) lest they pretend that I falsely accuse Holding, they also deserve to know why it is that my past and future lawsuits against him were and will be legally and factually justified in full, that the courts who dismissed the last two lawsuits were in error to do so, and therefore, I am accusing Holding of disobeying Romans 13 by disobeying the secular civil laws, here, the laws asserting that libel is a civil injustice that is actionable for damages in court.
f) thus leaving this third party wondering what to believe, the simple evidence confirming all of this, or Holding's trifling excuses in his effort to "explain" everything away.
 
I sincerely believe that Mr. Holding's ceaseless slanders and foul jesting render him disqualified, under biblical criteria, from the office of Christian teacher.  If Holding is going to place my personal motives at issue, then I'll be testifying as to what exactly they were.

That's the fucked up situation you put yourself in when you

a) go around constantly slandering others, yet
b) you also want other Christian churches to think that you are free from the sin of slander

Jason Engwer doesn't appreciate the strong justification for skepticism found in John 7:5

Bart Ehrman, like thousands of other skeptics, uses Mark 3:21 and John 7:5 to argue that Jesus' virgin birth (VB) is fiction.  Jason Eng...