Update January 30, 2018: see ending comments
-----------------
James Patrick Holding (formerly "Robert Turkel"), owner of tektonics.org and a Christian "apologist" is a closet-homosexual, which would, under New Testament principles, utterly invalidate him as a teacher. Unfortunately, Holding's homosexuality and his atheism make him worry about living in contradiction to the bible, about as much as Hitler worried about living in contradiction to the Book of Mormon. You have to
care about your stupidity, before you'll be motivated to correct it.
To Blogger.com: All assertions about Holding in this blog post are fact, not opinion, all of them were alleged against him in a libel lawsuit, and Mr. Holding never attempted to deny their truth. They are supported by quotes of his own words that are verifably referenced, and they are presented to educate the reader to steer clear of a person whom the author characterizes as the Benny Hinn of apologetics. Proving that a publicly known Christian is a hypocrite is hardly "hate language", and banning this post will only incite me to further publicize and disseminate its contents.
"You shall know them by their fruits..." (Matthew 7:16)
"Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment." (Jas. 3:1 NAU)
"But the things that proceed out of the mouth come
from the heart, and those defile the man. (Matt. 15:18 NAU)
Holding publicly professes
that the bible declares homosexuality to be a sin. See
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/lev18.php
http://www.tektonics.org/qt/romhom.php
http://www.tektonics.org/gk/gayjude.php
It is also clear that Holding/Turkel
views himself as a teacher of Christianity and the bible:
Mission Statement
Tekton Apologetics Ministries is committed to providing
scholarly answers to serious questions which are often
posed on major and minor elements of the Christian
faith. We believe in the importance of sound Christian
doctrine which is based on a careful exegetical
analysis of scriptures from the Holy Bible. We also
believe that it is important to incorporate the
findings of various theological and scientific
disciplines in order to properly assess the veracity of
scriptural evidences, and to carefully evaluate issues
which are relevant to the Church as a whole.
See his
more explicitly asserted goals to be such a teacher.
Jesus apparently thought the person who acted opposite to his professed
beliefs had no excuse, but deserved rebuke and to be classified as a
hypocrite:
41 "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?
42 "Or how can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite,
first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly
to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. (Lk. 6:41-42 NAU)
As long as Mr. Holding and his band of admirers and paying customers
continuing believing what Jesus said, they will not be able to escape
the very reasonable conclusion that, by reason of Mr. Holding's known
"fruits" which the internet and his critics are forever protecting from
destruction, Mr. Holding is a homosexual hypocrite (i.e., he is a
practicing homosexual
despite his public profession that he thinks such acts are sinful).
Other Christian apologists complain he uses too many homoerotic illustrations
Apologist Steve Hays had to warn Holding to cease and desist so many references to men's buttocks:
…As a flavor of the level at which Holding’s mind
operates, his latest thread is charmingly
headed: “Steve Hays needs to stop passing gas at his
betters.” This is a specimen of Defendant’s
recurrent obsessive-compulsive anal fixation.
…Defendant’s personal antagonism towards me is so
extreme that he will pounce on anything I
say simply because I was the one who said it. And by
being so utterly reactionary, he backs himself
into the most indefensible corners imaginable.
…This is not the first time that Defendant has
taken a personal interest in my backside. Defendant
would be well advised to resist his unsavory
attraction so many homoerotic illustrations.
Holding uses a female sock puppet:
While there is still a possibility that Holding didn't create that email account, its penis-centered spam is curiously consistent with Holding's other publicly posted comments, quoted later in this post, where he speaks like a sick juvenile delinquent about the penis of other men.
Holding comments in a way that ensures his reader's minds will have images of graphic homosexuality:
Holding
cannot comment on the gay movie “Broke-Back Mountain” without giving in to
his obviously sinful temptation to fill his readers’ allegedly pure
Christ-like minds with images of homosexual intercourse (i.e., he doesn’t
think biblical descriptions of the act are sufficient):
"Because nothing is a grater (sic) witness for
Christ than causing others to get an instant mental image
of Cowboy man-on-man backdoor action."
Holding writes fantasy fiction about people putting their heads up their butts:
Holding
in another Tektoonics webpage (and no doubt in the name of Jesus) writes
fantasy fiction that includes references to cartoon characters
shoving
their heads into their own buttocks:
Tektoons on the Trail
Wednessssdaysses, July 4, 2007
The Jeremiah Duh-Lemma
In a world we all know, Mattchu is once again busy
with his annual armpit inspection. It is the end
of the year and it is time to do his inventory of
fleas. As he does so, he hears footsteps behind him. He
tries to hide by curling himself up tightly into a
ball, with his head between his legs - so far indeed that
it seems that his head is tucked into his buttocks. But it is of no use.
Despite his best attempt, he is
detected at once. He peeks one eye out from between
his buttocks and groans. It is that stupid rabbit
thing again…posted by Sheila.
(since I began using this quote against Holding, he has removed it,
but I preserved the original, available by request)
Holding insults his critics by similarly saying they have stuck their heads up their asses:
On a theologyweb.com debate from 2008 that Holding's buddy John Sparks, owner of theologyweb,
conveniently deleted, Holding responded to me as follows:
....me: his rebuttal first if he is so confident of the stupidity of bible
skeptics, that he can accurately predict what evidence I will set forth
to substantiate my case.
----Holding: Actually, no, I can't predict anything you might say; I
can't see your arguments with your head stuck in the way up your bum.
Your answers would come from plain-English, decontextualized readings
you picked up in Fundyville, and there's no telling what sort of
contorted rationalizations you may come up with. Something like what
John Goddard produces, I expect.
....me: and places a very extreme burden on my shoulders in the debate, at least in your opinion, does it not?
----Holding: Not really, since you don't care about the facts in the
first place. Not much "burden" involved in pulling claims out of your
bum while you ignore scholarship, after all.
(since Holding has, after I exposed it, deleted the particular Tektoon cartoon dialogue he invented which said somebody's head was up their ass, it is rational to suppose that today, Holding no longer approves of this filthy language, thus raising the legitimate question: if he thought his filthy language was consistent with his Christian walk back when writing that dogshit, what motivated him to remove it? Does he admit now that his earlier view was wrong? Gee, his getting sued for libel and my explosive exposing him as an obnoxious bastard far more than anybody else ever did, wouldn't have contributed to that motivation, would it? No, of course not. Holding is like the child who gets a black eye during a fight, and when somebody says "hurts doesn't it!" he says "no", seriously wanting others to believe him
while his eye twitches involuntarily from the pain.
Holding is unable to resist making unnecessary and childishly shameful reference to the penis
Holding characterizes his opponents' arguments as their exposing their giant penises in a public and shamefully childish way:demeans his opponents by
accusing them of having giant penises and committing the crime of exposing their genitals to the public in a rather crude way:
"And you? You’re nothing but a sanctimonious ant with delusions of your own grandeur; you’re nothing but a modern day Hugh waving your swollen member around and knocking people over with it or else disgusting everyone by pointing to it and shouting to everyone to look at it."
Holding, putting unnecessarily sexualized images into his reader's minds:
"In your arrogance you missed it; you were so busy waving your giant pee-pee around that you bonked yourself on the head with it and didn’t even notice."
Holding characterizes his opponents as "farting":
Holding
clearly desires to be viewed by others as spiritually mature, but he tells
people to stop “farting” when he disagrees with their arguments.
A guy named “Jimbo” had asked what
evidence Holding would accept as showing a true contradiction in the
bible.
Holding sneered:
"It's simple, Jimmyboy: Any problem that
doesn't find a reasonable solution rooted in contextual
scholarship. Now go fart elsewhere. The adults are
trying to have a conversation."
Holding likes to characterize his rebuttals as
his "spanking" other men:
Interesting that he had to spank you much as I did about keeping in
mind the societal context...
Holding cannot suppress his desire to put visuals of him spanking other man, into the heads of his followers:
Tors reminds me of Farrell Till. Especially the mile-long rants. (Can you imagine if TektonTV had been around while I was still spanking Till?)
Update: July 9, 2017:
Holding,
consistently with his homosexual interest in other mens' asses, already
documented here, just cannot resist causing his Christian followers to
get filthy mental pictures. He has recently posted a video that says
any atheist work that gets wrong the Tactian reference to Jesus, is not
worthy to be used to wipe one's ass with
(video at 0:45 ff)
Update: July 27, 2017:
In a 2008 debate I had with Holding, which Theologyweb tried to suppress,
which remains preserved by wayback, Holding shows once again how much he likes the idea of him spanking other men:
Me: Maybe the schoolyard bullies were correct after all, and we should
resort to our kindergarten understanding: the kid who insults and bullies the
most, is faster, stronger, smarter and better than us?
Holding: In this case, that would be wise. The case here,
however, is one of a bully -- YOU -- being paddled by the principal -- ME.
Holding wants to be known by a slang name for gay men:
Holding
did a live debate with atheist Richard Carrier in 2011, which was
recorded, and at the beginning where the moderator introduces him, Holding
attempts a bit of humor that ended up betraying his homosexual tendencies:
Moderator:
I’m gonna come over here to Mr. Holding who said we could call him
“J.P.”, is that ok?
Holding: Nah, I’ve changed my mind.
Moderator: Ok, what would you like?
Holding: Mary (audience laughter), that was your joke.
Moderator:
And you realize that even though we are going to be, people on both
sides, we’re on the same team when you make me look stupid right? (audience
laughter)
"Mary" is a
slang term for a gay man. Of all the female names Holding could have chosen for a
joke, what are the odds that it was by
sheer
coincidence that he happened to pick the one that is slang for a homosexual
man? And what idiot would just pop off in front of a crowd in a live setting that he suddenly wants to be referred to by a female name?
Holding bluntly admits he would be willing to
kill women and children during war raids, and refused to qualify such admission when he later chose to “explain” this shocking admission: question:
Question: "Would you go on war raids with specific orders to kill women and children?"
Holding: "Yup. Pass me my Hackenstabber 3 Iron, boy."
"All the answer Brooks deserved for his non-argument "preaching".
What do you think of a "Christian" apologist whose conduct would unnecessarily and voluntarily turn a G-rated discussion into something you have to filter from your child's internet activity?
See also http://the-anointed-one.com/hold.htm
