Many Evangelicals wrongly believe that indoctrination and conditioning are tools used by cults to manipulate people into believing certain beliefs. Evangelical churches and preachers don’t indoctrinate and condition people. All they do is preach and teach THE truth, or so the thinking goes, anyway. Indoctrination and conditioning are what false religions do, and not the one true religion — Evangelical Christianity.
Take Dr. David Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen. Thiessen continues to steal my content and use it on his site. He refuses to provide his readers context when using my writing, and now he has stopped linking to my posts or mentioning my name or the name of this site. Why he does this is unknown. You would think Thiessen would want to be known as a fair, honest man. He knows how he should properly provide attribution, but he refuses to do so. If Thiessen lived in the United States, I could do something legally about his theft, but since he lives in the Philippines, I can’t touch him (and neither can American law enforcement).
As far as I know, Thiessen was raised in Evangelical Christianity, attended an Evangelical Bible college, and has spent his entire life defending the extremes of Fundamentalist Christianity. Whether he actually had a “ministry” or pastored a church is unknown. Thiessen claims to be a preacher, but provides no evidence that he actually is.
There was a time that I thought Thiessen could be reasoned with, but I now know that after seven decades of conditioning and indoctrination, there’s little chance that Thiessen will abandon his peculiar version of Christianity. And I mean it when I say “peculiar.” While I can see an Evangelical framework in his beliefs, it is evident, at least to me, that Thiessen has cobbled together his own version of Christianity. In particular, his many statements about Christian salvation reveal that Thiessen has a warped — sometimes heterodox — view of what is required to be a Christian. Of course, this is no surprise. Put a hundred Evangelicals in a room and ask them to theologically define words such as sin, salvation, and faith, and you will hear different definitions from each of them. Thus, Thiessen’s scrambled eggs beliefs are par for the course among Evangelicals.
Thiessen is upset that I continue to say that Evangelicals are indoctrinated and conditioned, so much so that he wrote a post about the matter. What follows is an excerpt of Thiessen’s post with my response below each paragraph. All spelling, grammar, punctuation, and irrationality in the original.
Thiessen writes (see how easy it is to provide attribution, Derrick?):
Unbelievers like to accuse Christians of doing this when they teach the Biblical doctrines of the Bible, including inerrancy.
….
Indoctrination is found everywhere outside of the truth.
Notice what Thiessen is saying here. Evangelical churches and pastors don’t indoctrinate people, but everyone else does. And with a wave of the hand, he dismisses all beliefs but his own.
Liberals, democrats, progressives, communists, and leftists all participate in indoctrination because they do not want their ideologies questioned. A few examples would be the blind acceptance of BLM, D.E.I., PC, cancel culture, and other favorite ideologies championed by those who do not like right and wrong, etc., unless they get to set those standards.
I am a liberal, Democrat, progressive, and a leftist. While I am not a communist, I am a socialist. I am also an atheist and a pacifist. Have I ever demanded that my beliefs (ideologies) not be questioned? Of course not. I am a skeptic and a rationalist; a seeker of knowledge and truth. Want to challenge my beliefs? That’s what the comment section is for. Or a critic could submit a guest post that I will gladly publish as long as it is not inflammatory.
Thiessen wrongly claims that I do not like right or wrong; that I demand everyone follow my moral standards. This, too, is untrue. As a humanist, I have a moral and ethical standard; one that is superior to Christianity in every way. How I authentically and morally live my life matters to me.
Indoctrination should not be a term used loosely by unbelievers. It can be turned around and used against them in everything they say and teach. When it is, it is then true. But when unbelievers use it against Christians, it is usually a wrong application of the term.
Note what Thiessen says. If he says unbelievers indoctrinate people, he is right, but when unbelievers say the same about Evangelical Christians, they are wrong. And his evidence for this irrational claim? None. It is just so because he says it is.
One cannot indoctrinate in the truth.
Sigh. According to Thiessen, Evangelicals can’t indoctrinate people because they have the truth. Thiessen never defines the word “truth,” but I think I can safely say that, for Thiessen, “truth” = his beliefs — a claim most atheists would never make.
Yes, cults do indoctrinate their members, but then, cults aren’t teaching the truth. They are teaching personal ideologies and beliefs that carry enough truth to con unwary and unknowing people.
All religions, by definition, are cults. From the cradle to the grave, Evangelicals are taught what to think, and not how to think. Sunday after Sunday, preachers reinforce core Evangelical beliefs, as do evangelists, youth pastors, Sunday school teachers, and missionaries.
It amazes me how unaware Thiessen is of the fallibility within his worldview. In his mind, his beliefs are superior to all others. Which is not surprising when you think your beliefs perfectly align with God’s revelation.
When a person teaches the truth, for example, the Bible is inerrant, creation only took 7/24 hour days, there was a global flood, and more biblical events, one is not indoctrinating but freeing people from indoctrination.
Notice Thiessen asserts (without evidence other than Bible proof texts) that his peculiar beliefs are true, and when he preaches them or writes about them, he is freeing people from indoctrination. His beliefs, by the way, are minority positions within Christendom. Most Christians believe differently from Thiessen, including many Evangelicals. This matters not. Thiessen is certain he is right; that his theological beliefs are straight from God. How he knows this is unknown.
Those who disagree with those and other biblical truths are indoctrinating anyone who will listen to them or are forced to listen to them. The Bible says we shall know the truth, and the truth shall set everyone free. This type of freedom is not indoctrination but the good news.
This little ditty explains Thiessen’s worldview: God said it (in the Bible), I believe it (when it is convenient for me), and that settles it for me (unless I have a different interpretation).
When Evangelicals such as Thiessen stupidly and ignorantly believe that the Bible = Truth, there’s not much that can be done to refute their beliefs. Once Evangelicals make faith claims, no honest, thoughtful discussion is possible.
Has the “truth” really set Evangelicals free? All we need to do is look at the behavior of Christians such as Thiessen, Revival Fires, Jaisen, John, and a cast of thousands, to see that, for all their talk about the transformational power of the gospel, their lives are no different from those of the unwashed, uncircumcised Philistines of the world. In fact, many non-believers live morally superior lives compared to the likes of Thiessen, Revival Fires, Jaisen, and John. I can confidently say that many of the unbelievers who read this blog are, in fact, outstanding unbelieving Christians.
Unbelievers like to assert that those truths are not true, but they have failed to prove their assertions true. The unbelievers like to say science has proven those biblical truths false, but science is based on assumptions and faulty physical evidence, and does not know the truth because it does not seek it.
Derrick, I once again challenge you to a public debate or a written Q&A about your assertions about unbelievers. I am not a scientist. I am smart enough to stay in my own lane, but I will gladly set up a debate between you and one of my science-literate friends. Time to put up or shut up, Derrick. You claim you have the “truth.” To that, I say, “Prove it.” I will offer you the opportunity to write a fact-based rebuttal article for this site. Factually and scientifically (not Biblically, because most readers of this site don’t give a shit about what a contradictory, errant ancient religious text says). And before Thiessen whines about me not posting his last guest article, I didn’t do so because of his transphobic statements. Two things will get you sent to Gerencser Hell: derogatory statements about LGBTQ people and personal attacks (both of me and the readers of this blog).
Most of science is run by unbelievers who have rejected the truth and seek something to replace it with, even if it is a far-fetched idea like evolutionary processes. Christians do not indoctrinate because they allow people to examine all the information before the latter make up their minds.
That most scientists are non-Evangelicals and more than a few of them are atheists, is evidence to Thiessen that they have rejected the “truth” (truth meaning Thiessen’s peculiar religious beliefs and practices) and have replaced it with science. This, of course, is absurd. More than a few unbelieving scientists read this blog. Perhaps they can explain to Thiessen why they are unbelievers. Will doing so change his mind? Of course not. Outside of some sort of “Come to Jesus” moment, Thiessen is beyond help. He knows what he knows, end of discussion.
Thiessen has said a lot of bat-shit crazy stuff over the years, but what he says in this paragraph takes the proverbial cake. Thiessen arrogantly states, “Christians do not indoctrinate because they allow people to examine all the information before the latter make up their minds.” Is he fucking kidding?
Do Evangelical churches and pastors provide congregants with all the information necessary to make up their minds about Christianity? Of course not. Most Evangelicals become Christians before their minds are mature enough to rationally examine the central claims of Christianity. Most Christians couldn’t define and explain core Christian beliefs if their lives depended on it.
Once people have the truth, they do not need to question it again. They have found it, and their search for truth is over. Only those who reject the truth demand that believers follow their example and continue questioning the Bible, etc.
The questions and the search stop when one has found the truth. One only humiliates and embarrasses oneself by always questioning the truth, then rejecting it for a false gospel or false scientific information.
According to Thiessen, once Evangelicals know the “truth,” there’s no need for them to ask questions or search further. This is common thinking among Evangelicals. Once you know the “truth,” you have been set free.
One is not indoctrinated when they embrace the truth. The truth is God’s objective truth, not the unbelieving world’s idea of truth, nor is it his, her, my, or their truth. The truth stands alone, and it is for everyone to find and receive.
Thiessen says truth stands alone. He provides no evidence for this claim other than his own opinions. If the Bible = truth, then why are there so many errant, contradictory claims within its pages?
Plus, the truth never changes, which is why so many Christians have found peace of mind when they come to Christ. The unbelieving world is never at peace because its scientific and other ideologies keep failing and changing.
The truth remains the same from day one to day last. This is why the Bible is so important. It has never changed and brings not only the truth but peace. People may like science because it is always changing; however, that constant change does not bring peace of mind because no one knows when science will actually find and report the truth.
To Derrick, I say, comprehensively define “truth.” Don’t tell me to read your blog. Write a blog post that sets forth “truth” so we all can know what to believe. Pretend I want to know your version of “truth,” Derrick. What would you say to me? You attack and condemn instead of presenting your brand of Christianity in its best possible light.
Thiessen doesn’t like change, and that is one of the reasons he is so set in his beliefs. Fundamentalists are known for bullheaded certainty (as I was, at one time). As you can see, Thiessen doesn’t know much about the scientific method either. Science is about hypotheses, theories, evidence, and probabilities, and not absolute truth. None of us has absolute truth. The best any of us can do is to examine the relevant evidence and come to a rational conclusion. Thiessen doesn’t do this. He knows he is right, so there’s no need for him to examine evidence or rationally re-investigate his beliefs and practices.
Who can believe or accept what science says when it is always changing? Unbelievers use the thousands of denominations as stumbling blocks to belief in Jesus, yet they embrace the thousands of different scientific ideas that contradict or disagree with each other.
The fact that there are tens of thousands of Christian sects, each with their own beliefs, is an indictment of Thiessen’s claim that the Bible = truth. Instead of addressing and explaining these contradictory claims, Thiessen plays the whataboutism game. Science has competing views, so why can’t Christianity? The problem,of course, is that science never claims to be big T truth as Thiessen claims for his beliefs.
And in closing, I ask Thiessen to list a hundred of the thousands of scientific ideas that allegedly contradict each other. I suspect he is being hyperbolic. Sure, there are competing scientific beliefs, but thousands of contradictory beliefs? That’s unlikely.
Bruce Gerencser, 68, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 47 years. He and his wife have six grown children and sixteen 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.
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.
As if I have nothing better to do with my time I recently visited Tee’s site and read this nonsensical post. I might say that I also cringed at another post which purported to provide absolute proof of the resurrection of Jesus, which was dreadful from beginning to end. I wondered if you’d write about any of these posts and here you are!
It’s always difficult to know how to unravel his writings because they are not based in reason, in the sense that we understand reason. I like your point by point analysis, which certainly destroys any credibility there may appear to be in his writing, showing that he is able to string words together but that being readable is a far cry from providing a sound and logical case. His constant repetition of the phrase ‘atheists and unbelievers’ is to my mind provocative. He would, no doubt, argue that it’s simply an accurate label, but I consider it something of a term of disparagement, in the sense that in his mind he is dismissing his interlocutor via the term. And his dismissal of science because it’s always changing is precisely the opposite of what gives science credibility and the only route to actual truth that exists. It’s untrue anyway to say that science changes. It doesn’t, it evolves as new discoveries are made. At one time it was considered that train travel was impossible because air would be sucked out of carriages at speeds over 30mph. That was shown to be wrong but, in fact, the calculations that underscored the hypothesis were very relevant in other aspects of science and applied physics.
The frustration of course is that Tee himself is so lacking in education and, dare I say, humility that he has no understanding of the fact that he has been thoroughly debunked, not once but over and over.
I don’t even bother with him anymore. His dishonesty and ignorance have reached a point where they bore me. He will continue to shirk from showing any form of responsibility and accountability, and if he agrees to your challenge I will be astonished. Even if he does, he will doggedly stick to his agenda, no matter how much his arguments get dismantled. He’s too arrogant and too indoctrinated to admit to any sort of mistake.