Dr. David Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen, is an Evangelical pastor who resides with his wife in the Philippines. Long-time readers of this blog know Thiessen well. His obsession with me can be seen on his blog, TheologyArcheology: A Site for the Glory of God. In 2023, Thiessen has already written two posts referencing me, adding to dozens of posts he wrote about me in 2022. Why he is so obsessed with me is unknown. All I know to do to is either ignore him (which I often do) or respond to him, answering and rebuffing his allegations, accusations, and lies.
Thiessen is also an author. He has several books for sale on Amazon, including God, Korea, and Me. The book should be titled, “Me and the Voice in My Head.” People who read Theissen’s books and blogs are perplexed by his frequent use of third-person pronouns. He never refers to himself as “I” or ‘me.” His refusal to use proper grammar often renders his writing painfully difficult to read, similar to trying to read comments and emails from people who refuse to use capitalization, punctuation, or paragraphs. Why does Thiessen write in this manner? Thanks to Troy, a long-time reader and friend, we finally know why.
In the introduction for God, Korea, and Me, Thiessen writes:
We take no credit for the work as we prayed that God would help us get it right when we put our content on those public forums and media outlets . . . Then we use the word we, ours, theirs, etc., simply because we do not like the words ‘I’, “My’, “Mine’, and other first person pronouns. Since we asked God to be with us and help us those first person pronouns are not really acceptable here or in any of our works.
Troy stated:
Sounds like he’s a bit like Gollum in the Lord of the Rings books/movies. Gollum has two distinct personalities, Dr. T does as well. He has anointed his own internal voice to be the almighty.
Yes, it does sound similar to Gollum, my favorite LOTR character. As most Evangelicals do, Thiessen thinks God, the Holy Spirit, lives inside of him, leading, guiding, and directing his life, speaking to him in his “heart” and through the pages of the inspired, inerrant, infallible Bible. Most Evangelicals know that there is a difference between them and God. They don’t confuse the created for the Creator. In Thiessen’s case, he believes he and God are one — the royal We. Knowing this explains why he writes the way he does. When Thiessen says the things he says, it is God speaking in and through him. That’s why Thiessen never admits he is wrong or never apologizes for his distortions and lies. To do so would be to admit God was wrong or a liar.
So, what are we to make of this?
The armchair psychologists among us will say that Thiessen is mentally ill. However, none of us is qualified to make such a diagnosis. We should leave that to the professionals, and I hope that Thiessen will seek out competent psychological help. What we do know is that Thiessen is a prime example of what happens when Evangelical dogma and practice permeate every aspect of a person’s life. From this perspective, I understand Theissen quite well, as I am sure many of you do too. I understand being all in, believing that my entire purpose in life was to serve God and follow the teachings of the Bible. I was in every way a True Believer® who followed the Lamb whithersoever he goeth (as the Bible says). In doing so, I lost all sense of self. My life was swallowed up by God, the church, and the ministry. Unlike Thiessen, however, I reached a place in my life where I realized I was wrong. Of course, Theissen will say, “yeah, and you became an atheist.” Sure, and maybe that’s what scares him. Thiessen wants or desperately “needs” God. He fears that a life without God isn’t worth living. Many Christians do. Much like drug addicts who need a “fix,” many Christians need a Jesus fix to keep going. Told their lives are hopeless, purposeless, and meaningless without Jesus, Evangelicals seek out hope, purpose, and meaning through their experiential relationship with a voice in their heads.
In Thiessen’s case, the voice in his head has overtaken his life to the degree that he thinks the voice and he are one and the same. To some degree, he lives in an alternate reality. How else do we explain his lies about his past, his fake names, and his hiding out in a foreign country? Thiessen moved to South Korea and later the Philippines so he could start over. Safe from his past, Theissen has reinvented himself. He could have gotten by with this had he not decided to write books and blog posts; had he not decided to publicly accuse and disparage atheists and Christians with whom he disagrees. Such behavior brings scrutiny, and that’s why we are where we are today.
I don’t have any ill-will toward Thiessen. His frequent lies about me and attacks on my character annoy me, but more often than not, I feel sorry for the man. He is not hurting me. People see his writing for what it is. But, I do genuinely worry that the path he is on will have a bad outcome. Again, I understand, as I once was on a similar path. The difference between us is, of course, that I realized the error of my way. This doesn’t mean I am special — I was lucky. Thiessen has much to overcome before he ever regains a sense of self. If or when that day comes, he will once again be an “I” and a “me.” This doesn’t mean he will be an unbeliever. It is possible to maintain some sort of faith in Christ and still have a healthy sense of self. As I have learned, the path to “I” is long, arduous, and painful. The onion of my life had to be peeled back one layer at a time. I hope Thiessen will seek out a secular counselor who can help him peel back the onion of his life so he can find the Derrick that was swallowed up by God, the church, and the Bible decades ago.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Connect with me on social media:
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.
Well, Dr. T does use first person pronouns, since we, us, and our are all first person plurals. To be correct, the good doctor (not of linguistics) should say that “we” don’t use singular pronouns.
Thiessen quickly responds, and it is a doozie. 🙂
https://theologyarchaeology.wordpress.com/2023/01/04/atheists-cant-call-christians-liars-either/
“ How can the atheist and other unbelievers claim anyone is lying? They do not have an objective definition for the term lying nor can apply it in fair and just ways. if they are using their own subjective definition for lying, then the arguments in the previous post apply.
They have constructed their own framework for what is truth and what is false and no one else knows what that framework is. Let alone operate by it. The accused is usually following either own standard for true and false or lies, thus they cannot be faulted for saying something an atheist deems t be a lie.
Often, the atheist will accuse a Christian of lying even though the Christian is repeating what they thought was the truth. That is wrong because the Christian is not knowingly lying . If they were told the truth, they would not present what is deemed to be false information.
….
The atheist and other unbelievers are often too lazy to do any of that hard work. Sometimes Christians are called liars simply because they misunderstand something and there was no intent to deceive.
These definitions should help you understand why Ananias and Sapphira were condemned to death for their lying. Their intent was to deceive and make a false representation. We know that the owners of the BG & MM website constantly lie (above definitions) about us.
We won’t do anything about it. The point here is that the atheist has no moral ground to stand on to accuse anyone of lying as they have no objective moral code that defines lying in a way that everyone understands.
If the Atheist uses the definitions given above, they are using Christian definitions of the term and not their own. Mr. Webster was a Christian converted in the Second Great Awakening.
In other words, the atheist cannot make any claims of other people lying especially when they do tell lies throughout their lives. They cannot call Christians hypocrites for lying when they fully practice that habit themselves.
….
One such case is their continual lying is saying that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit do not exist. Another would be saying that there is no salvation or heaven. Those lies fit the above definitions as they do mean to deceive others into thinking that the Bible is not true when it is.
We can call them liars on this issue because they have yet to produce any real, physical, verifiable, concrete evidence that the Bible is untrue, and God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, heaven and salvation do not exist.
All they present are personal and subjective denials. Unanswered prayers are not proof either, yet so many atheists throw their lives away because they did not get the answer they sought. Without an objective moral code and an objective secular definition of lying that everyone knows about, the atheist is restricted in who they can call liars and identify what are supposed lies.
We need to address one small thing and it is in the last line of the original quote. “a past that includes abandoning his family.” The owner of the BG website may fall into the category of believing something is the truth and repeats it as truth, but isn’t or he misunderstood what was said to him.
We are not going to call him a liar on that as we are giving him the benefit of the doubt on that statement. But one this is for sure, it is not the truth. We know the truth and we are not going to say anything on this topic.
But it is easy to believe lies as truth when they are presented in a manipulative manner with an intent to hurt others all the while masquerading as the truth. People do lie and they have their reasons for doing it, yet all the Christian can do is double-check to see if the information they receive is true.”
David,
Challenge accepted. You KNOW I have evidence to back up my claims—in your own words. I will work on a post that provides this evidence, putting an end to your lies and deceptions.
You need to stop, but you won’t.
Bruce
He is also projecting. It seems to me that it is his type of Christian that lies…about those they hate.
Mr Tee contradicts himself. I actually agree with him that in general when people say things with which I disagree in the contexts they do online, here for example, they aren’t lying, they are simply mistaken (or it maybe I’m wrong, I’m prepared to admit). Yet he then goes on to say that atheists are lying when they deny God, Jesus, and the bible! Sorry chum, but you can’t have it both ways. Either you concede that I am sincere in not accepting the ‘truth’ of those things, so not lying, or you lose the right to be offended when others call you a liar.
As for objective morality, there is no such thing. Given that morality is an invention of human societies, evolved over thousands of years, and varying from time to time and place to place, it is clear that there are no universally accepted standards of morality. Certainly there are generally deplored actions and behaviours that are common to most cultures, such as killing and stealing, but our cultures are now so complex that pretending there are objective standards underpinning every aspect of life is just plain delusional. If Tee can hold up something that clearly shows an objective standard by which I am bound then I challenge him to do so. Otherwise I’ll assume he’s just the same as all the others who blow the nonsense trumpet of objective morality, namely that objective morality is just his (subjective) opinion.
Bruce, I think your post is compassionate about Dr T. But he won’t see it that way.
Mr Tee uses pronouns that he feels best represent himself. I wonder how he feels about others who do the same – or does he feel that the right to choose one’s pronouns belong to him alone? (Or him and his “deity”).
Speaking of pronouns, he uses plural ones all the time to describe himself while writing. I am pretty sure he would get his panties in tightwad over a transgender person asking nicely to be called by the correct pronouns.
Edit- clearly did not read obstaclechicks post before posting but same sentinments.
Wait, his book is entitled “God, Korea, and Me” and he states he doesn’t use first-person personal pronouns like I, Me, Mine? I guess he made an exception just that one time.
Trenton—I was thinking the same thing about transgender people’a pronouns.
Tee’s use of first person plural pronouns sounds like one of the most fallacious forms of argument: “I’m not the only one who thinks this; therefore, I must be right.”
Well, I guess I see this a tad differently. If David’s prefers pronoun is we/our then I have no problem using we/our when referring to we.
I mean, sure it’s a little more difficult than using they/them, or he/him, or she/her like many prefer. And I doubt we would respect my own pronouns, but it’s no issue since I can turn the other cheek.
So, if we wants to use we/our then fine. I will use we/our because that is how we wants it.
Ugh, now I sound like Golum too.
David: “Since we asked God to be with us and help us those first person pronouns are not really acceptable here or in any of our works.”
Zoe: Arrogant assumption that God in fact did help and David’s words are one with God’s.