to the Lord Jesus Christ
|
| to the Lord Jesus Christ |
    
|
The Mr. Holding Series
It may interest some of you, though not all, to consider how the doctrine of the Trinity is defended by the article cited below. Brother Bob Payne came across it and forwarded it to me. In it, the supremely confident author of the article very ungraciously and sarcastically attacks both me personally and the tract that I wrote, titled, "Is Jesus God?" http://www.pastorjohnshouse.com/tracts/isjesus.htm I am responding to him, only because it might be helpful to you. Pastor John Here is the URL for the article: Whether you care to read it or not is entirely up to you. http://www.tektonics.org/af/clarkj01.html My comments are in blue. July 26, 2005
Dear Mister Holding:
A friend of mine sent me the URL for your web site article critical of my tract titled "Is Jesus God?" I am always happy to consider criticism of my work, and I thank you for yours.
Given the time, there is much that could be said in relation to the several positions that you take in your article, but to pick one, perhaps I could invite your attention to another of the articles on my web site, The Influence of the Doctrine of the Trinity on Translations of the Bible (see below for the URL). This work of mine deals with the matter of whether or not the Spirit of God is a person (a study based upon the biblical writers' original words), which issue is a crucial part of your criticism of my tract. When you find the time, you might be interested to read it and may possibly be enlightened by the irrefutable facts that are contained in it.
My hope is that, after all is said and done, Jesus will have made us one in his Spirit and light and that we both may stand before him blameless in the end. I am willing to be wrong and to change anything that Jesus allows me to see and to understand. And with that hope in my heart, I am
your non-Christian servant in Jesus Christ,
Pastor John Clark, Sr.
The URL for the Trinity Influence study:
July 26, 2005 Response from Mr. Holding... Well, Why not answer what is already written as opposed to trying to bring up something new? "Translations" had nothing to do with my conclusion. July 26, 2005
Dear Mr. Holding:
Greetings in the name of Jesus, our Lord.
I am disappointed that you would not consider the evidence that I offered you concerning the idea of the personhood of the Spirit of God. That response is precisely to the point that you raised; to wit, the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. If the Spirit is a person, then the orthodox Christian view of "the Godhead" must be correct. If not, then what I taught in the tract, "Is Jesus God?", will be seen in an entirely different light from the contrary one you presented on your web site.
I clicked on the hyperlink you implanted in your article concerning the personhood of the Spirit, questioning my ability, or my willingness, to challenge the evidence you present concerning the matter of the Spirit being a person. Specifically, here is what you wrote on your website: . . . With this we do not disagree, of course; we do disagree with John's assessment, "The Holy Spirit is not a person," and wonder if he can answer any of the questions here (http://www.tektonics.org/qt/quietthird.html)
about the Spirit doing quite personal things. . . .
My previous reply to you, so tersely rejected, was in response to your somewhat sarcastic challenge and it answered at least some of the questions you raised. I could answer much more fully, but we must start somewhere, must we not? I disagree with you, therefore, that I brought up "something new" in my letter to you. I was doing exactly what you suggested I had not the courage nor knowledge to do. But please understand that my reply was not in the spirit of debate (I will not do that). It was only to offer you sound and irrefutable biblical evidence from the Greek of the original authors, evidence which you failed to note in your article concerning the Spirit.
Since in that article you referred to the Greek personal pronoun, moi, ("to me") of Acts 13:2 as evidence of the Spirit being referred to as a person, I must assume that you already know that not once in the entirety of the New Testament writings is pneuma, the Spirit, referred to as "he" or "him" by the apostles. And yet you make no mention of that important biblical fact in your article. The Bible study to which I invited your attention, then, was not changing the subject; it dealt with that subject in complete detail and honesty, and I hoped that it might provoke in you at least a question or sincere comment.
Mr. Holding, if we are to develop into men who are truly good and wise, we must start our labor toward integrity by being honest with ourselves and those who listen to us. Part of that honesty is to admit to ourselves and to others when there exists biblical evidence that seems to contradict what we teach. I offered you such evidence concerning the Trinity, and you have refused to acknowledge it.
In that same spirit of sincerity, I forwarded the link to your rather caustic article against me and the tract I wrote to everyone on my mailing list. They are people who love God and who love the Spirit of truth. If they find any merit to your opinions, they will certainly let me know, but in a spirit of meekness and love. And if with their help and yours, I can be helped again to understand my Lord Jesus more perfectly, then I will, again, be a debtor to God for his blessing of others who love Him.
I wish you well and hope that at some point in the future, you will take advantage of the opportunity you have now to escape the snare of Christianity and be filled with the Spirit of comfort and light from Jesus. I remain
respectfully yours,
Pastor John Clark, Sr.
July 26, 2005 Note: The emails between Pastor John and Mr. Holding are written as a dialogue. Everything Pastor John wrote is in blue. Mr. Holding: Good grief, (quoting Pastor John's previous email) Since in that article you referred to the Greek personal pronoun, moi, ("to me") of Acts 13:2 as evidence of the Spirit being referred to as a person, I must assume that you already know that not once in the entirety of the New Testament writings is pneuma, the Spirit, referred to as "he" or "him" by the apostles. Mr. Holding (cont.): I also know that autos is used as self-referent and that the same argument is also used with reference to the Logos. That's why your alleged "important biblical fact" is in fact utterly meaningless. Old news: The Unitarians tried this on me once before. It is a failure as an argument. Pastor John:
But sir, you haven't even looked at the evidence I offered you. You refused to do so. Surely, you can see that your judgment is unjust on that basis alone. "The same argument"? I don't understand. How can I make the same argument with a noun that is masculine? And as for autos, the fact that several of its forms may be either masculine or neuter provides no foundation for any conclusion at all. I do not ever refer to those forms as evidence that the Spirit is, or is not, a person. You judge too quickly both me and what I am saying.
Mr. Holding (again quoting Pastor John's previous email): Mr. Holding, if we are to develop into men who are truly good and wise, we must start our labor toward integrity by being honest with ourselves and those who listen to us. Mr. Holding: Then please do me the favor [of sparing[ me anything but a detailed, direct reply to all that I write. Pastor John:
But sir, that is precisely what I did, and you refused to look at the detailed, direct evidence I provided you. I am at a loss as to what to do next. I wanted to communicate with you in a meaningful way.
Mr. Holding: I see no evidence that you are in any sense a respectable authority to be taken at word on matters such as the use of Greek; or that you have published in any journals and show any signs of a depth education.
Pastor John:
But, sir, you have refused to look at the evidence. How can you see it? Not that I claim any "respectable authority" in any area outside of my office in Christ, but if there were some "respectable authority" in my study that I wanted you to consider, how would you know it?
Mr. Holding: You have a lot to prove, and sound bites and the scuttling behind contrived verbiage is to no avail to those of us who do our homework.
Pastor John:
I really am not trying to prove anything. With my letter to you, I was merely responding to your suggestion that I was unable or unwilling to answer your contention that the Spirit of God is a person. I had hoped to have an intelligent and edifying conversation with you, even though I held no great hope of any conversion on your part. That kind of conversation is not happening, and that is a loss to both you and to me.
Can we not get past the harshness and agressive accusations and try to come to an agreement in Christ as partners in love and in faith?
Mr. Holding: You have some arguments about Greek? One of my contacts is one of the leading scholars on Koine Greek today. If you have the courage I'll tell you where to go to present them to him and others.
Pastor John:
I wouldn't lay claim to the virtue of courage, but I would be very grateful if there was a Greek scholar anywhere who would publicly judge the accuracy of the information presented in my study of pronouns related to the Spirit. If you know of any such scholar who would be willing to critique the facts that I present in my study, I would send it to him ASAP. He may disagree, as I am sure you would at first, with the conclusion I reach based upon those facts, but the facts can never be refuted by anyone with even an elementary level of knowledge of Greek grammar.
Mr. Holding, from your reticence to consider my work on Greek pronouns related to pneuma, and your apparent dependence upon "one of the leading scholars on Koine Greek today", I suspect that your personal knowledge of biblical Greek may not be as profound as your articles at first suggest. That's ok. I encourage you not to let that prevent you from looking at my study. Any first-year Greek student can easily understand the charts that I have provided, and their own text books would force them to agree with the facts contained in them.
Again, if you will provide me with the name of a Greek scholar who wants to see the charts, I would be happy to forward the charts to him. In the meantime, I wish you well. Thank you for responding.
Your servant in Christ Jesus,
John Clark, Sr.
Others wrote Pastor John about his correspondence with Mr. Holding, the letters are posted with a number. Here is the first response from a reader. Number 1 July 26, 2005 Pastor John, I wish he [Mr. Holding] would respond seriously. I would like to hear what he had to say. I see that you are being very careful with your attitude...attitude is so important isn't it?! I really liked the paragraph about being honest with ourselves and being wise men. I wish he would respond...in the same attitude as yours. te.
Dear Token:
Mr. Holding is a very arrogant man, but "pride goes before destruction", and I want to be sure not to follow his lead. It is dangerous. He is the one hiding behind "erudite verbage" (a false accusation is a confession), but I don't want to be critical with him. He is ready for a fight, and I will not give him one by pointing out a fault like that. That is what the hateful, contentious Christian spirit wants us to do.
Thanks.
Pastor John
July 26, 2005 Mr. Holding (quoting from Pastor John's email): But sir, you haven't even looked at the evidence I offered you. You refused to do so. Mr. Holding: It's OLD news, John. It's been argued before. It is irrelevant.
Pastor John:
It is not old news at all, sir, and if you had shown me the courtesy of merely perusing the charts in the study I sent you, as I showed you the courtesy of reading the entire article you wrote, you would know that. You asked for a response; indeed, you demanded one, that is, if I had the nerve to respond to such a man of your caliber, but by all appearances, you cower before real answers to your challenges. It is not a good thing that you are doing, Mr. Holding. And your pretended indifference and indignation is beginning to appear to be a thin cover for cowardice and a lack of personal and scholarly integrity.
Mr. Holding (quoting from Pastor John's email): And as for autos, the fact that several of its forms may be either masculine or neuter provides no foundation for any conclusion at all. Mr. Holding: In other words, no negative conclusion at all; hence your argument as well is meaningless.
Pastor John:
Isn't that exactly what I said to you? "NO conclusion". Didn't you notice that? If you had honored my response to you as I honored your arrogant challenge to me, you would have already understood what my study on the Trinity said. This is not a scholarly response on your part.
Mr. Holding (quoting from Pastor John's email): To wit: But sir, that is precisely what I did, and you refused to look at the detailed, direct evidence I provided you. I am at a loss as to what to do next. I wanted to communicate with you in a meaningful way. Mr. Holding: Then do the whole thing and get back to me. I get 150+ emails a week and you might try to respect that you're not the only pebble on the beach. That said: The cry "you didn't look at the evidence" is the same one I hear from people who say things like that Jesus never existed, so please excuse me if that falls on deaf ears. Just work on it, because the case hardly stands or falls on the lack of referent to the Spirit as a "he". In fact, it is a worthless argument from silence; so put it in File 13. Try answering what I do say and not what I don't.
Pastor John:
What you said was that I probably did not have the guts or the facts to dare to respond to your criticism of the doctrine I teach. Now that I have done that, you stand back and hurl more insults at me. You behave as though to sincerely consider my reply is beneath you.
The Greek pronouns related to the Spirit are anything but a "worthless argument", as you must know. If there was one instance from any book in the New Testament referring to the Spirit as "he" or "him", you would be using it to the hilt as proof that the Spirit is a person. You certainly tried to do that with reference to Acts 13:2. Be honest with yourself, now. Didn't you do that?
You are not being honest with yourself, Mr. Holding. How can we ever attain to the knowledge of God if we are dishonest with ourselves? Please consider what I am saying. I am not attacking you; I am pleading with you. And please, don't try to impress me with how many emails you get. If you have the time to throw down the gauntlet and issue a challenge to me in front of the whole world on the world-wide internet, then shouldn't you receive my response with humility and integrity?
Mr. Holding (quoting from Pastor John's email): Can we not get past the harshness and aggressive accusations and try to come to an agreement in Christ as partners in love and in faith? Mr. Holding: No more so than John with the anti-christs of his day, I'm afraid... Mr. Holding (continuing to quote from Pastor John's email): I wouldn't lay claim to the virtue of courage, but I would be very grateful if there was a Greek scholar anywhere who would publicly judge the accuracy of the information presented in my study of pronouns related to the Spirit. If you know of any such scholar who would be willing to critique the facts that I present in my study, I would send it to him ASAP. Mr. Holding: He is online-contact only; I will send him whatever links you request.
Anyone can send a manuscript via email to a professor. Your comment in your last email that Mr. Holding, because I know that there is much for me to learn in Christ, I listen to criticism carefully, and I welcome it. I have forwarded not only the URL of your sarcastic article against me but also every word of your responses to me to this point, unedited, to everyone on my mailing list. It may be that they will be able to see something other than what I see in your letters, but to this point, I have found your erudition and courage to be reserved more to the realm of cruel sarcasm than of true and loving knowledge of God. Your arrogant boldness seems to have withered with the appearance of an opponent, even though in my case, the opponent only wishes to be a friendly correspondent. Additionally, I will post on my website, http://www.pastorjohnshouse.com , the entire conversation we have had, so that others may judge for themselves the content of our correspondence.
I remain your willing servant in the Lord, but I cannot force you to put down your "front" of superiority and to receive what the Lord Jesus has blessed me with, for your good. It has never been my intention to arouse in you any anger or strife, and I do not know how to offer to you more humbly than I have what the Lord has given to me. So, I again wish you the best in your future. At the same time, as a servant of Christ, I feel compelled to warn you of the dangers of arrogance, dishonesty with yourself, and cruel sarcasm toward those whom you consider less wise than yourself. Wisdom belongs to God, not to us.
Feel free to write when you will; my heart's door will stay open to you. But I cannot continue corresponding with you in the same vein in which the past few emails have gone. Neither of us would be improved by it.
Your non-Christian servant of the Lord Jesus Christ
Pastor John Clark, Sr.
PS I have added a few comments that I already received from people who have read our correspondence to this point, the first one being from a sister in the Lord who asked me to forward it to you.
Number 2 July 26, 2005 Dear Sir, I am one of the people on Pastor John's email list. He has been sending your communication by email to the list, as he told you. I am very puzzled as to your belligerent attitude to his earnest reply. It seems to me, after reading your website article, that Pastor John, if anyone, should have the right to have the attitude that you have taken. Yet he has not. I do not know Greek at all, but I do know when someone is refusing to return an argument in an academic manner. My sincere request to you is to please answer his replies straightly. I would very much be interested in your responses. If you are satisfied with your email communications, then why not add them to your website at the end of the article. That way other people who visit that page can judge for themselves to validity of your arguments vs. Pastor John's. Thank you, J. Embry
Number 3 July 26, 2005 Bro. John: I went to Mr. Holding's website and tried to read some of what he had there. When I read this: "Tekton Apologetics Ministries is committed to providing scholarly answers . . . ." I knew that I probably didn't need to read any further. However, I tried. Like you said, I, too, am willing to be wrong and consider. Reading his website reminded me so much of where I was in 1988 - - confusion! . . . . I could not understand the big scholarly words, Bro. John. But I understand the tender Voice of my Savior. My prayer for the "scholars" is that they quit hiding behind the big words and just humble themselves before Jesus. Then they could just rest and receive from Jesus what they need. Love, Sister Sandy
Hi Sister Sandy!
I bet he would call me a pneumatomachianist! I'd call him "friend" and "brother" if he would just let Jesus open his heart.
jdc
Number 4 July 26, 2005 Hello there Pastor John, Amen! I was thinking that of the emails I have been reading about Mr. Holding and his article concerning what you wrote about "Is Jesus God?" His attitude in his review had nothing in its contents that would persuade me to his doctrine. There was no love of God in it toward anyone who is willing to learn, only words and sarcasm. He was only being an example of the god he serves (the god of Christianity). It was sad to me and quite pitiful. Thanks for the thought. What a wonderful prayer to pray. Amy
Dear Amy, The god of Christianity is a cold, cruel god, and how painful it is every time I meet a man who has been taken captive by that wicked spirit. Mr. Holding's spirit is a living testimony to that fact that God blessed us beyond measure when He called us out of Xty. How I praise Him for that mercy! I wish Mr. Holding could feel how much Jesus (and I) love him and want him to know the true God. But man, he has a big wall of pride around his heart. God can help him, though. Let's pray for that.
Pastor John
Number 5 July 26, 2005 Pastor John: After reading your response to Mr. Holding, it was obvious to see that there were two very different spirits at work here. I am so happy that you are influenced by the one that is humble and compassionate, and not the other that is sarcastic and proud. I hope that Mr. Holding can see and feel the difference. Thank you for being my pastor. Bob
Thank God for rescuing us both, Bob. I am no better than Mr. Holding, and except for the grace of God, I probably would have been much worse. I was inclined toward arrogant philosophical babblings when I was in college and impressed a lot of my fellow students with that kind of stuff. Thank God for the truth, and for the great love that comes with it.
As for Mr. Holding's spirit, it is pretty bad isn't it? How do we get the love of Jesus through that facade of superiority? God help us!
Pastor John
Number 6 July 26, 2005 John, I wonder if Mr. Holding would respond as he has if he knew that his peers were witnessing this “conversation”. I am really having trouble following what he writes. I could not believe that anyone could be so blind to the truth if I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes. Mr. Holding writes many words, but I am having trouble determining what he is trying to say. But, I get the sense that he is clutching at straw as he sinks in the mire of a self-perceived scholarly wisdom, and instead of asking for help, he throws straw in your face. Lord help him. I suppose that if Jesus were to stand before him and tell him a truth, he would accuse Jesus of being demon possessed. Could Mr. Holding be providing us a glimpse of what the Jewish leaders of Jesus’ day were like? MEH
Hi Mark:
Jesus spoke simply because he wanted to be understood. Any man sent from God is the same way. All the "hypostasis" and "homoiousias" jabber from men of Mr. Holding's persuasion is not meant to instruct; it is meant to impress. It is intended to make the hearers feel inferior, and those poor children of God who have not been taught the truth usually feel just that way. How many times have I witnessed them cowered by erudite fools who talk like that. Such talk is not of God.
Yes, this correspondence with Mr. Holding is a glimpse, albeit a very small one, of what it was like when the Lord tried to communicate with the hard-hearted elders of Israel. Mr. Holding, I was surprised to learn is a lightweight, much more bluster than substance, and apparently completely unable to conduct a serious and godly conversation when confronted with love and light. But then, isn't all of Christianity lightweight, really, when compared to the glory of the word of God? I can only hope that somewhere down the road, Jesus gets to him the way he got through my hard shell and touched me.
jdc
July 27, 2005 Response from Mr. Holding: (quoting Pastor John ) It is not old news at all, sir, Mr. Holding: It IS old news, and if you ever had done any study of the matter, you'd know it and not think you were Columbus discovering some New World. I've read literally thousands of books, periodical journals, and other materials from every side. Don't think to presume your superiority -- that's what the atheists do. Is that whose side you're on? Pastor John wrote: Isn't that exactly what I said to you? "NO conclusion". Didn't you notice that? Mr. Holding: Spare me the excuses -- I never drew a conclusion based on what you made an issue of in the first place! Pastor John wrote: What you said was that I probably did not have the guts or the facts to dare to answer your criticism of the doctrine I teach. Mr. Holding: Spare me, once again. The 4-5 links offered in my article completely undermine your arguments, such as they exist. Yeah, you are right: Your reply IS beneath me. I only gave you any attention at all because one of my readers asked to see you taken to task. I have a reputation for collecting the garbage, you might say. Pastor John wrote: The Greek pronouns related to the Spirit are anything but a "worthless argument", as you must know. Mr. Holding: I know they are worthless, your fruitless attempts at psychological bullying aside. :-) No, that was not what the use of Acts 13:2 was about. You may consider a course in remedial reading since psychological manipulation doesn't work. Pastor John wrote: If you have the time to throw down the gauntlet and issue a challenge to me in front of the whole world on the world-wide internet, then shouldn't you receive my response with humility and integrity? Mr. Holding: Only if it requires it....which it does not. You do little but deceive and mislead, I'd like to think in ignorance given the level of your research. Pastor John wrote: Anyone can send a manuscript via email to a professor. Your comment in your last email that "One of my contacts is one of the leading scholars on Koine Greek today" stretched the truth just a bit, didn't it? Mr. Holding: Not at all, my bullying muchacho. He just doesn't like (as many scholars) any Tom, Dick and Harry sending him emails. Very well, I'll send him your link. I can see his hearty laugh forming even now. Nevertheless you justify not giving you any direct contact by this: Pastor John wrote: I have forwarded not only the URL of your sarcastic article against me but also every word of your responses to me to this point, unedited, to everyone on my mailing list. Mr. Holding: Ah, a cyberspammer! Somehow that's not surprising. Nice to see you have a brainwashed handful; the response that called the detailed material on hypostasis "jabber" speaks for itself, and for yourself as a collector and controller of persons with insecurities. Jim Jones Jr. as it were. I'll look for the day when you pass out the Kool Aid in some South American country....Jim Jones was good at laying on the baloney too, you know. :-D
Dear Mr. Holding:
OK, I surrender. I will not make any more attempts at a conversation.
Because I do want to understand correctly what you are saying, and because you said above that I had misunderstood you, I did re-read your article on the personhood of the holy Spirit to see if I was mistaken about your usage of Acts 13 to show that the Spirit is a person. It still looks to me as if that is what you were doing. The relevant section is copied below.
If your "contact" has any comments about the facts of Greek grammar contained in my study of pronouns related to pneuma, or if he finds any error in it, I would welcome the information. If, however, he is as caustic as you are toward people, I had just as soon that we all just let this be the end of our commucnication.
This following is the section of your article in which you are using Acts 13:2 to make it appear that the Spirit is a person. You wrote on your website: "Is it possible to lie to or test, to disobey or to grieve, an impersonal force? (See also Acts 16:16, Eph. 4:30) Or: John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. Acts 13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. . . . . Luke and Darth's "Force" didn't have anything to say, but the Spirit does, and even uses personal pronouns (Acts 13:2). . . . " [And in the next paragraph, you wrote] ". . . . The Spirit is indeed the quiet member of the Trinity in terms of the reports we have; he was not incarnated among men and converses with them even now only inwardly. But he clearly does speak, and that's not what an impersonal force does."
Now, Mr. Holding, even if you will not admit it, that section in your writing is clearly an attempt on your part to use a Greek pronoun (moi) from Acts 13:2 to argue that the Spirit of God is a person. You are not being honest with yourself.
Beyond that, there is nothing else to be said.
Farewell,
Pastor John
Number 7 July 27, 2005 John, Without having read Holding's article, I think you did the right thing. you invited him to research what you have already researched--exhaustively---re: the irrefutable evidence in "The Influence. . .", so the ball is in his court now. you needn't try to chnage his mind or even defend your position. most likely, he doesn't even have the Spirit of God to proivide the humility and meekness to take in the information Jesus has revealed to you. love, Brad
Number 8 July 27, 2005 Thank you for sending your response to Mr. Holding. After reading his article, I was left with such a terrible feeling. I needed to read your response to get rid of some of it. Whew! Thank God for kindness and reasonableness. What wonderful weapons! I'm going to go use mine. Donna
Number 9 July 27, 2005 Good morning Bro. John, I just finished reading the article you sent a link to. My first impression about Mr. Holding? He is a very arrogant man looking for a fight with anyone who doesn't believe what he believes. From looking at his website briefly, the first thing I noticed that led me to believe that (after reading the article) is the picture of the chicken in his challenge to critics area. You just know he's looking to slam someone by that little picture. What about "Satire Central" at the bottom of his home page, or the foolish photos of what he says are him behind the pulpit? It is very true, that you can find whatever you are looking for in Christianity. Where is Jesus in any of that? It reminds me of a line from a good song - "They call it my Spirit, but I wouldn't go near it; they think I will, but I won't". In every paragragh in the article he wrote, he was looking to publicly humiliate, belittle and intimidate you. What a sad man he is. The man of God that I know will not give in to that foolishness, and I thank Jesus for that. He reminds me of how my youngest brother used to be; always miserable, slamming people just to make himself feel like he was something. I sure am glad that he grew out of it. He is a better man today because he did. Mr. Holding is nothing in my eyes but a big christian bully. He reminds me of those radio talk shows where the host is always looking to slam someone that calls in for what they think or believe, and people actually like that kind of thing. I sure am grateful that Jesus has taken us past all of that. You can't even be mad at someone like that. They are just lost and confused like we all were, thinking that we knew something. It took a touch from Jesus to let us know that we really didn't know anything, and still don't without him. I thank God for the love and mercy that He has shown us. I hope that I always remember that, because that is the only difference between any of us and a very sad man like Mr. Holding. I choose Jesus! That is where I place my hope. Bro. Darren
Number 10 July 28, 2005 Hi John. These conversations have been very instructive for me. We have met a lot of proud or arrogant sounding people on the internet over the years, but I do think that this fellow is one of the most abrasive. I think he is so scared, so afraid of being "found out"... you just can't help but love him. Like a little child, you can just feel him hiding his spiritual condition behind his arrogance and insults toward you. Because he really does not have answers at all and cannot bear the thought of being exposed. I wonder how many of God's children Mr. Holding is inspiring to be as "confident" and as "abrasive" as he is... thinking that this is a place they should want to be in God. Maybe Mr. Holding will one day have a great fall or trial, and God will allow him to learn the need for kindness, a soft answer, and a humble attitude. I do hope God touches his heart one day... that would be wonderful. This has inspired me to seek after the gentle Spirit of God all the more, the one that does not strive, and can be taught and helped by all those who have something for me. Gary
Dear Brother Gary:
When Paul said that "the man of God must not strive", he meant that the man of God must not have a belligerent, arrogant attitude such as Mr. Holding has. Any sincere and humble person would be repulsed by the hateful, sarcastic spirit he has. If his doctrine is what had caused him to have that ungodly attitude, I thank God for saving me from believing it. Doesn't it make you wonder why he and others like him think that talking to people the way he does pleases God?
Btw, did you know that the Lord made my father burn his gospel tracts in a bonfire a few years after he began writing them because they had a harsh tone in them toward those who did not see the truth? From what he and my mother told me, there was a pretty large pile of gospel tracts that went up in flames in their back yard, but then, better for those hateful tracts to be cast into that earthly fire than for him to be cast into the fire of God's judgment.
No one who has learned truth from God is made arrogant by it. No one who acceptably serves the living God is hateful toward those who are astray. Remember what Hebrews says about God's ministers? God encompasses them "with infirmity" so that they may "have compassion on [not sarcasm toward] the ignorant, and on them who are out of the way." If Mr. Holding knew God, he would be gentle with those whom he judges as being "out of the way". If we would serve Christ acceptably, we must always remember that it is God's gentleness that makes a man great (Ps. 18:35).
I don't think I have ever been quite as sarcastic and cruel toward those whom I felt were wrong as Mr. Holding is, but I know that I could easily have become that cruel if I had not had the correction and guidance that God gave me, through those who were over me in the Lord. Brother Gary, you had some of that sharpness toward people when I first met you, but you have listened and learned that the way of Jesus is the way of love and of mercy. And he will make us even gentler and wiser still, if we will humble ourselves and listen to his voice.
Pray that he will do that for us, and for Mr. Holding. That foolish man is not so tough that the love of Jesus can't melt his heart yet. He doesn't frighten Jesus at all.
jdc
August 4, 2005
Hey there.
One last note on the Mr. Holding with whom I tried to have a reasonable conversation a week or so ago.
Mr. Holding directed me to a web site he apparently is a big part of, where he nominated me as "July screwball of the month". The site is:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=56580&page=18&pp=16
So, I went there just to see what it was. He had posted at least some of our correspondence, some of what I and Sister Sandy had written was prominent. But what struck me is the following introduction that he wrote about my responses to his material: I emphasize the words that were most stunning to me.
Mr. Holding wrote at the website: "Meanwhile, I have been getting deliveries of nuts and fruit from the Jim Jones wannabe I wrote about at http://www.tektonics.org/af/clarkj01.html No responses to any of my material of course, so I dismissed him pretty quickly . . . ." No response to his material, so he "dismissed me"? I guess he did do that, but I felt as if he had run away when I wanted to play. I was interested to hear the reaction to my trinity study that he promised was forthcoming from his "contact" (one of the leading Greek scholars of our time, he said). But I doubt he really has any such friend.
Oh, well.
Praise ye the Lord.
Pastor John
End of the Mr. Holding Series |