James Patrick Holding-Turkel sued for defamation
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-07-2015, 07:31 PM (This post was last modified: 06-07-2015 11:28 PM by DLJ.)
James Patrick Holding-Turkel sued for defamation

Do you think it’s about time that one of Christianity's most verbally abusive apologists was sued for defamation and other torts?

Most of you are probably familiar with James Patrick Holding, formerly known as Robert Turkel. He is a master's degree in library science, and a self-published internet apologist, who owns tektonics.org, and regularly comments/debates on Christian things over at theologyweb.com, where they give him his own sub-forum "tektonics".

You might also recognize Holding as having the unique trait of using insults and regularly belittling all who disagree with his arguments, especially the non-Christians who disagree with him.

Holding lauds the "Context Group" who approach bible scholarship from a sociological perspective. Years ago, when I gave co-founder Richard Rohrbough a sample of Holding's insults to me, Rohrbough specifically responded that Holding gives Christianity a bad name, and the Context Group scholars want nothing to do with him. http://bcharchive.org/2/thearchives/show...l?t=253929

I went to theologyweb a while back and posted the following argument: If apostle Paul is correct in Romans 7:7 that he would not have known coveting was sin, except the Mosaic law explicitly forbade it, then the bible-god must approve of sex within adult-child marriages, since the Mosaic Law nowhere prohibits such act, and it nowhere defines the mandatory minimum age a girl must reach before she can have divinely approved marital relations, hence, Christians have no biblical justification to say the ancient Israelites, or their God at the time of Moses, viewed such marital relations as sin. If we can know sin also by conscience, then Paul erred in saying the Mosaic law was the exclusive reason he was able to identify human actions as sin.

When twebbers resisted this argument, I quoted the Babylonian Talmud's commentary on Numbers 31:18 (i.e., authorizing adult men to have sex with three year old girls) to show that, regardless of their speculations that ANE peoples delayed sex until puberty, we can be sure that the ancient Jews, by their own admission, were an exception to that “rule”,
Link removed

The thread is more than 90 pages long, I start using the pro-pedophilia Talmud quotes at Link removed

Yup, you guessed it…I was hit with charges of "out of context!" but no supporting argument. That always works when you don't know shit, can't prove shit, but need to save face as you turn and run away.

Shortly after that debate got really heated, Holding posted to his own website an "internet predator alert", in which he accused me, falsely, of various and manifold immoralities and crimes, such as stalking. For most of June 2015, he allowed that article to stand publicly accessible without revealing my full legal name therein. He later included my real name in it, and the link now goes only to the updated version. Link removed

Holding lives in Florida. Florida criminal statute 836.02 requires that for any publication alleging that somebody engaged in an immorality, their full legal name must be included in said article or publication. http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/inde.../0836.html

So because Holding allowed his defamatory 'internet predator alert' to stand so long accusing me of immorality without including my real name (and other reasons) I intend to sue him for defamation, since his libel of me was a criminal act under Florida law.

And since he has falsely accused me of stalking, cyberstalking and signing up his email to receive subscriptions to gay porno and other things, he has falsely accused me of "crimes", which means I can recover "presumed" damages from the jury even if I don't prove actual damages. Imputation of a crime, where false, is "defamation per se" in the common-law of most states.

Apparently, my argument about the bible-god approving of pedophilia really pissed him off, because he started a new thread solely for the purpose of revealing my true identity and defaming me some more. Link removed

In that thread, he presents true facts about me in ways that are misleading. I will be suing him for those too. For example, he says it is for "everyone's safety" that he reveals that I am "mentally unstable", despite the fact that I have never been a threat to anybody on tweb and my emotional disorders, caused by childhood trauma, do not cause me to put people's safety in jeopardy, nor do they cause me to be mentally unstable. I do not even take any medication for them.

I drew up an offer to settle with him out of court, citing Matthew 5:25, 40, which Blomberg says requires Christians to be generous toward their legal opponent, more so than just the minimum amount of cooperation required by the letter of the law. When I emailed it to Holding, I cc'd established scholars Craig Blomberg and Daniel Wallace (Wallace favorably reviewed Holding's book 'Defining Inerrancy'.) I will send that email privately to anybody who wants to see it. It contains the links to the defamatory material. In that email I asked that Wallace and Blomberg do what they can to initiate the Matthew 18 process of moving Holding inevitably toward either repentance, or excommunication, since I don't know who Holding's local pastor is, and even if I did, Holding's flippant demeanor, unchanging for the last 20 years, suggests he respects local pastoral authority about as much as he respects the theological arguments of a gay witch.

Holding replied to said email with nothing more than "YAWN".

So I replied back, and this time, included Gary Habermas (Christianity's last word on resurrection apologetics) in the CC. The reason is that Habermas wrote the forward to Holding's self-published "Defending the Resurrection" book.

Habermas replied today that he didn't know these things about Holding and would have to research what I say before he can reply.

Holding could not resist telling his theologyweb minions about my recent emailed attempt to settle peaceably with him, and he defames me more in the process. See Post # 75 and after at Link removed

Some of Holding's theologyweb supporters question how I could possibly sue them too, as I threatened in my email, since I don't know their true identities.

Apparently, they were unaware of the plethora of case law in which many courts have authorized pre-discovery "John Doe" subpoenas, in the case of anonymous defamatory internet speech, to be served on the ISP hosting the website containing said speech, who must then reveal to the Plaintiff the IP address and if possible, the real name and address of the person behind that IP and using the fictitious name to post their defamatory speech. A 2001 case set the precedent now recognized by most courts. Link removed

See also Link removed

For 20 years, Holding has been insulting everybody that he disagrees with, and in my opinion, his obstinate demeanor, unchecked due to ego, caused him to finally cross the line into actionable tort.

I trust that I have discharged whatever moral duty I had to avoid running Holding through the wringer of the courts. But because he reacts to a serious situation like an out of control toddler with a loaded shotgun, he has himself to thank for this situation escalating toward actual civil litigation. He has until June 8, 2015, to make me a reasonable settlement offer, or I take the possibility of settlement off the table.

What I find funny is that he does not dare try to challenge Blomberg's commentary on Matthew 5:25, 40, in which case, Holding is under mandatory biblical obligation, not to "try" to settle with me, but to "agree" with me on matters before I file suit. The only time the bible addresses what Christians should do when about to be sued, it calls for humility. I encourage the reader to go get membership at theologyweb and ask Holding some rather difficult questions.

What sucks is that he is obstinate toward this serious situation, which is capable of hurting his finances, despite the fact that, by his own admission, his finances were already hurt some time ago when his wife was fired from her 21-year job with Florida state. Link removed

Holding admits that after his wife was transferred to another position, she was then “unceremoniously fired”:

“So, we could be a bit particular about finding her a new position, and after much searching that could be its own story, we found her the current job…the one that today, she was unceremoniously fired from.” See Post # 62 Link removed

If I thought it would help, I would remind Holding that in the bible, family and nation devastation are routinely credited to God who is displeased with somebody's disobedience. I seriously doubt that Holding will entertain the possibility that these problems are coming his way because God found him disobedience and now seeks to ravage his life (god takes the same "delight" in causing suffering for disobedience, that he takes when causing obedient people to prosper, Deuteronomy 28:63, check the Hebrew and the Lxx, only sadists take "glee" or "delight" in their causing of pain and suffering).

Please comment. I don't need legal advice at all, but feel free to say what you will. I also encourage the free dissemination of this post to as many websites or emails as the reader pleases. There is no legally plausible defense Holding could argue to the Court to get this case dismissed, and because his wrongs constitute defamation per se (he accuses me of crimes falsely), the jury can still award damages to me even if I don't prove any.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2015, 11:32 PM
RE: James Patrick Holding-Turkel sued for defamation
Welcome to TTA.

We have a few rules here (not many) and one is about promotion of paedophilia. I know that you were not doing that but some of the content in the links was dangerously close.


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
09-07-2015, 01:42 PM
RE: James Patrick Holding-Turkel sued for defamation
Apparently James Patrick Holding fears he will lose the threatened defamation lawsuit. The "tektonics" sub-forum at theologyweb, where most of the defamation against me started in 2014, which sub-forum has always been publicly accessible since 2003, was removed, starting last night, from public access.

The only thing you get at the following link now, is a demand that you sign in:


What's interesting is that starting yesterday and back, had you searched google for "skepticbud" and "secret identity", the first hit you got was to Holding's tektonics forum post with that title.

Now when you search google for it, you only get one hit, to the theologyweb profile for "sparko", but if you try to click the link to that thread from there, you end up back at the sign-in screen.

The point being that, apparently, Holding did not just privatize or remove the thread, he put forth effort to get rid of it from google cache too. I'm happy about that, of course, but I have to wonder whether the blow to his intellect is causing him a nervous breakdown, since we all know that Holding couldn't get something wrong if he was paid a million dollars to get it wrong, he's such an incurable genius.

What's funny is that I cc'd him a copy of the police report I filed against him yesterday (for violations of Florida statute 836.02), and he immediately responded at tweb with mockery of the legal arguments I made therein. Suddenly, no more mockery, no more anything.

Apparently, the smartest apologist in the world needed less smart people to pull his head out of the clouds and make him start using his common sense.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-07-2015, 03:07 PM
RE: James Patrick Holding-Turkel sued for defamation
(06-07-2015 07:31 PM)barryjones Wrote:  You might also recognize Holding as having the unique trait of using insults and regularly belittling all who disagree with his arguments, especially the non-Christians who disagree with him.

This is hardly a unique trait, online.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
09-07-2015, 03:15 PM
RE: James Patrick Holding-Turkel sued for defamation
(09-07-2015 03:07 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(06-07-2015 07:31 PM)barryjones Wrote:  You might also recognize Holding as having the unique trait of using insults and regularly belittling all who disagree with his arguments, especially the non-Christians who disagree with him.

This is hardly a unique trait, online.

I was gonna say ... kind of a prerequisite of online religious trolling. Angel

Anyway ... welcome to the firum, BarryJones. Smile

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kim's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: