Menu Close

Fundamentalist Tony Breeden Returns to Deconstructing My Life After a Four-Year Absence


On February 12, 2012, a man calling himself Preacher started an anonymous blog, How to Fall Down, so he could methodically deconstruct my past and present life. I did a bit of digital snooping, hoping to find out who this Preacher guy was, and it took me all of a few days to discover that it was the one and the only Reverend Tony Breeden. Breeden used to comment on a previous iteration of this blog until I banned him. Breeden’s deconstruction of my life lasted all of one month and thirteen posts.

Four years later, unable to get visions of me naked out of his mind, Breeden has decided to continue his voyeuristic peeking into my closet. While I don’t like his doing so, I know, as a public figure, that I must endure such inquiries into my life, beliefs, and motives. The difference between four years ago and now is that I no longer feel the need to correct those who view my life as a pornographic centerfold while they play with their Bible tool. Readers who have followed along with me over the years know the kind of man I am, as does my friends and family. That’s all that matters.

You can check out Breeden’s latest post here. I hope you will read it.


  1. Avatar
    Becky Wiren

    Well, he did a circle jerk with: the Bible is authenticated by Christ, who was resurrected according to the Bible so it’s all true…what? And he said other records existed of this fact. Except there are NO, ZERO, NOT ANY, records at the time that the resurrection supposedly happened. Wouldn’t you think Christians would have been so excited about Jesus that they would have been writing something down when it happened? And especially since some learned men were supposed to be followers? Instead…nothing.

  2. Avatar

    “Research has shown that children have this natural tendency to interpret features of the natural world things as if they have a purpose and this naturally leads to a belief in a Creator God, what has been termed “intuitive theism.”

    Hmpf…. I thought that was called magical thinking, and, yes children do this. They give everything agency including things, the moon etc, and it isn’t hard to believe that beliefs may have sprung from that in the past, perhaps even today.

    That doesn’t mean that magical thinking points to intuitive theism, it means that children do not yet distinguish between real living creatures, fantasy and inanimate things yet, because they haven’t reached that developmental stage yet. That’s what it means.

    Small example. When I was like two or three, thereabouts, a few trees in front of our house were dead and needed to get chopped off. This made me very upset and I screamed at my mother that she had to stop those men killing those trees; she didn’t and I probably learnt that even parents are not omnipotent. I also didn’t realize yet that although trees do grow, they do not have a consciousness like we do.

    I guess what he says: “thanks for the traffic,” goes two ways 😉 Although, who knows, perhaps most of his traffic comes from us evil atheists checking his website out, lol.

    • Avatar

      I’ve commented as well but, being diametrically opposed in position, actual debate isn’t possible. But it does help me hone my own views.

  3. Avatar

    I cant figure out what is worse, the article or his comments. He still never really answered the first question. Also the site he provided a link to for his science research seems like one of those sites that would only show evidence that validates their claims and withold evidence of opposing viewpoints entirely, sort of like what I did with one paper in college at the beginning of my career there(needless to say I ended switching sides on that issue a couple years later).
    Oh well he can continue to provide some much needed fodder for this blog all he wants. Goodness knows we need it

    • Avatar
      Michael Mock

      I think the article he linked to is legit, as far as it goes. Admittedly, it’s a bit hard to tell, because what he linked to is the abstract, but it appears to be a genuine article published in a genuine peer-reviewed journal, which he then attempts to treat as an absolute, incontrovertible Scientific Fact(tm) so that he doesn’t have to address any of the counter-points which people offered in the comments. (Or acknowledge that the study described in the article doesn’t really support the full weight of the conclusions that he’s trying to hang on it, for that matter.)

      The smug condescension that permeates his writing is really just lagniappe.

  4. Avatar
    Peggy Clancy

    Isn’t there a way to see the content of his blog without giving traffic to the blog? Something like “FreezePage”? I’d rather look at the content that way, if possible.

    • Avatar
      Bruce Gerencser

      I usually try to excerpt such articles. With Breeden, I just wanted him to know that I knew he had re-started his deconstruction of my life. I’m glad some regular readers took the time to “interact” with him. I gave up doing so. After eight years of dealing with Fundamentalists, I have no stomach for their inane circular reasoning and arguments that are always reduced to THE BIBLE SAYS.

  5. Avatar

    I spent some time reading his main blog. He is apparently a fundie Christian who is a young Earth creationist and a “Christian speculative fiction writer.” He has a number of rules he has to follow to keep in the crazy genre. He can’t write time travel stories in the past because “God” has locked him out of the garden of Eden period, because it’s “sacred”. And he can’t go forward because “God” knows the future and he doesn’t. He refers to an old universe as “evolutionist”. And he says he likes science. And somehow, he’s only just self published.

    I’m now going to spend the evening rebuilding my brain, as my science fiction section exploded.

    • Avatar

      I felt better after I’d posted a couple of comments. I did say that I wouldn’t follow up on my second, which I haven’t done. Like all fundamentalists he can’t logically address weaknesses in his argument when they are put to him. Hence he ignores responses, indulges in a certain amount of what I call semantic gymnastics, others call word salad, and goes back to what he first said, despite the fact (and it is fact) that you have already debunked it.

      I’m not sure if it’s frustrating or whether I really no longer care!

      • Avatar
        Bruce Gerencser

        Such discussions always conclude with appeals to faith and the Bible. Breeden’s arguments have a veneer of science, but underneath is a shit pile of Fundamentalist ignorance and circular reasoning. That’s why I didn’t argue with him. I was more concerned with keeping Breeden honest. His telling of our past history leaves a lot to be desired. It’s his story, so he can tell it any way he wants, but from my perspective he is a selective truth-teller. ?

      • Avatar

        Lol lol – rejects evolution but is pro Alien. This is hilarious. I want to see him debate Ken Ham! It would be brilliant.. 2 people arguing about subjects they can’t support with any proof.

        Whilst I am happy to accept that Aliens may exist I cant say either way as there is currently no substantial evidence.

        But we do have a fosil record, DNA etc to support evolution.
        He should at least acknowledge the hypocrisy of his position….but he won’t because he is blind.

Want to Respond to Bruce? Fire Away! If You Are a First Time Commenter, Please Read the Comment Policy Located at the Top of the Page.

Discover more from The Life and Times of Bruce Gerencser

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Bruce Gerencser