Over the weekend, an Australian Evangelical man by the name of Richard left the following comment on the post titled Dear Jesus. My response is indented and italicized.
I stumbled on to your website and man, I would have lost my faith ten times over!!.
What did you actually read on this site? Did you break anything when you stumbled? The Dear Jesus post primarily deals with the problem of evil and suffering, told from an intimate, personal perspective. If you want to understand my story in its entirety, please read the posts on the WHY? page.
I appreciate your recognition of the fact that I had a difficult and traumatic upbringing. One of your fellow Christian apologists, Mike Kuvakos, took a different approach, choosing instead to tell me, “get over it.”
That said, the primary reasons for my deconversion are intellectual, not emotional. Despite all the trauma mentioned in the Dear Jesus post, I remained a committed follower of Jesus Christian until age fifty. If past trauma was going to derail my faith, this would have happened years ago. Instead, I pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years, leaving the ministry in 2005, and leaving Christianity in 2008.
If asked to give the primary reasons I left Christianity, I typically say:
1) I no longer believed the Bible was inerrant and infallible
2) I no longer believed the central claims of Christianity were true
3) Christianity no longer made sense to me
Secondarily, I concluded that Christianity had no persuasive arguments for:
1) The problem of evil
2) The problem of suffering
3) The hiddenness of God
I lost my faith for many years (for lesser things) suffered violence and poverty, had nothing, lost everything. I was bitter with God for his failures , the hypocrisy of the pastors, the immorality of church leaders, the molesters and the thieves, but now I believe again. He reached out to me and brought me back.
I get it, God/Jesus/Christianity works for you. You find meaning, purpose, and direction in your faith. I, however, find the opposite. My life is better in every way post-Jesus. I have learned that I don’t need God/Jesus/faith to have meaning and purpose in my life. A good life is possible without Jesus. I humbly suggest you give it a try.
You see, we cannot run away, we will eventually go back, there is nothing else in this world that is better than Him, no matter how we see and rationalize the failures.
Running away implies that I am trying to avoid something — I’m not. You seem to think I am wrongly rationalizing what I consider faults and failures within the structure of Christianity. However, I have honestly and opening weighed Christianity in the balance and found it wanting. Do you think it was easy for me to walk away from Christianity; to walk away from the ministry; to walk away from that which I held precious and dear for fifty years? I can tell you this: divorcing Jesus was painful and traumatic — even to this day. Yet, after carefully studying and investigating the central claims of Christianity, I had no choice but to say that I no longer believed. You see, truth matters to me. I couldn’t go on believing things that I knew were lies.
I know he will call you back, you don’t have to go, He will come. As you, you will believe when He comes, I am sure he will. You are a man of truth and God will honour you.
Richard, how do you know your peculiar version of God will call me back to himself? Has God told you this? Or do you just “hope” God will reclaim me? I hope for all sorts of things: the Reds winning the World Series, the Bengals winning the Super Bowl, me winning $1,000,000 in a vax-a-million lotto, my unrelenting pain to miraculously disappear. I can hope for these things to happen, but facts, reason, logic, and probabilities tell me that there is little chance that any of these “hopes” will occur in 2021-2022. I didn’t say “no chance.” Our family has nine entries left in a vax-a-million lotto. Maybe, just maybe, one of us will hear, “winner, winner, chicken dinner.”
I “could” become a Christian again. Perhaps, my conclusions about God, Christianity, and the Bible will be overthrown by overwhelming evidence to the contrary. However, thirteen years in, no Christian has provided such evidence to me, yourself included. Thousands of Christian zealots have tried to win me back to Jesus, without success. Thus, I highly doubt that sufficient evidence is forthcoming, and I am sure I will remain an atheist until I die. And then? I will be a dead atheist. 🙂
Further, I could be a reprobate or an apostate — someone who has crossed the line of no return (Romans 1). Many Christian apologists believe there is no hope for me, that I have a sinful, darkened heart and have done despite unto the Spirit of grace (Hebrews 10:29). My advice to you is that you focus on low-hanging fruit — people more likely to buy what you are selling. I am not such a person.
It’s possible that you believe that God is letting me wander for a time, and someday he will draw me back to himself. Sure, that’s possible, I suppose. However, I don’t believe God exists. If, by chance, I am wrong, then God, the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit know exactly where I live. This three-headed supernatural Marvel superhero can stop by my house, email me, or send me a text. Why has it not done so? Instead of dealing with me directly, God sends the Richards of the world — thousands of them. Why is that? Why can’t God speak for himself?
Saved by Reason,
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.
No matter how many times I tell people that I am not a Christian, I have no interest in Christianity, and there is a less-than-zero chance that I will return to Christianity, some Evangelicals remain convinced that I am either a backslidden Christian or I harbor deep in my heart of hearts (wherever the hell that is) the desire to return to Christianity. Dealing with such people remains one of my biggest frustrations, mainly because they refuse to hear what I am saying and accept the telling of my story at face value.
Several years ago, one Evangelical man said that he just knew that I was still a Christian because I capitalized the words God and Bible in my writing. Other Evangelicals read my writing and see in it a man who still wants to believe in God and reclaim his faith. For the life of me, I can’t figure out what they think they see. I told one man that he misunderstood how and why I write. My use of Evangelical verbiage and argumentation often leads people to think I am still a Christian, when, in fact, all I am doing is using language that readers, both current and former Evangelicals, are familiar with. I have found that this approach is quite effective in reaching Evangelicals where they are. My use of common Evangelical words reflects not only my long, deep immersion in that culture, but also my desire to engage Evangelicals on their own turf. The fact that I mention particular Evangelical beliefs should not be construed by anyone as me wanting to return to Christianity. I don’t.
Some Evangelicals take a psychotherapy approach, divining from my writing that I have some sort of deeply hidden desire to still be a Christian. I know that many Evangelicals think they have the “supernatural” gift of discernment, but I am here to tell them, as I once heard an old-time preacher say, that their discerner is broke. When I mention that I can understand how someone might come to believe a deistic sort of God created the universe, Evangelicals read into it that I have some sort of longing to believe in God. I don’t. All I am saying is that I understand how someone might come to a different conclusion from mine.
I am not sure what more I can do to help Evangelicals understand that I am the proverbial horse who has left the barn — I ain’t coming back. Perhaps I concern myself too much with obtuse Evangelicals who refuse to accept things as they are. I get it. Bruce Gerencser returning to the fold would be a big story, and the Christians involved in my reclamation would be rewarded and praised for bringing such a hard case back to God. However, this is never going to happen. Even if I were inclined to reconsider some sort of religious belief, it most certainly would not be Evangelical Christianity. That ship sailed and fell off the end of the earth. Once free of the cult, why would I ever want to return?
When Christians share their conversion stories, I accept what they say at face value. I don’t believe, for a moment, that a God “saved” them or that they were “sinners” in need of “saving,” but I do accept that their stories are, to them, real and meaningful. I am not an atheist evangelist out to convert Evangelicals to atheism. In the thirteen years since I deconverted, I have, not one time, attempted to turn a Christian into an atheist. I have, however, engaged and talked with hundreds of Evangelicals who have questions and doubts about Christianity. I try to give them the facts their pastors often hide from them out of fear that, if they told the truth about the Bible, the pews would empty overnight. When asked, I share my story, much like Christians do during testimony time at their church. I am just one man with a story to tell. That my story resonates with thousands of people is not my fault. Perhaps Evangelical church leaders should take a close look at their beliefs and practices and how these things are causing people to abandon their churches, and, in many cases, their faith.
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.
Several years ago, I attended a sporting event for one of my grandchildren that brought me in close contact with a large group of Evangelicals. Over the course of ninety minutes, as I stood there photographing the game, I listened to these Evangelicals talk about their churches, other churches, summer missionary trips, and helping the poor, homeless, and downtrodden. I later told my son about my eavesdropping and how their discussions were very much like the discussions we would have had a decade or two ago. These Evangelicals spoke as if they and their churches were doing monumental works that were making tremendous differences in the lives of those they came in contact with. And from their seat in the pew, I’m quite sure it “seems” like they are doing things that matter, but when considered in a broader context, their mighty works for Jesus amount to little or nothing. Certainly, to the person given a meal or coat, their acts of charity made a difference, but when taken as a whole, the charitable works performed by Evangelicals are little more than a drop of rain in the ocean. Within the Evangelical bubble, these acts of compassion often become larger-than-life. Evangelical teenagers raise money to take mission trips to so-called third-world countries. While no one would say that nothing good comes from these mission trips, when the work done is compared to the money spent, it becomes quite clear that money spent on travel, meals, and entertainment would be better spent by locals instead of Evangelical do-gooders from afar. The returning teens and adults have wondrous testimonies to share, but rarely will anyone bother to consider if any real, lasting good was done.
On the home front, Evangelical churches proudly speak of their ministries to those whom the Bible calls “the least of these.” Again, my purpose here is not to criticize Evangelicals for the good that they do, but I think is important to view their acts of charity in context and judge them according to overall church and ministry budgets. Jesus made clear in the Gospels that what Christians spend their money on shows what really matters to them. Matthew 6:19-21 states:
Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
While Evangelical churches have food pantries, clothing rooms, and ministries that help the poor and homeless, when the money spent on these programs is compared to the overall budgets, it becomes clear that what matters to Evangelicals the most is salaries, benefits, insurance, utilities, buildings, and programs geared towards keeping well-fed sheep comfortable, content, and happy. The overwhelming majority of budgeted money is spent within and not without the walls of the church. And this is fine if Evangelical churches are what I have long claimed they are — social clubs. However, most Evangelical churches, pastors, and congregants believe that the works they do in Jesus’ name are monumental in nature. So, because their works are often viewed as larger than life, it is fair for us to judge their actions in the larger context of how church offerings are spent. Churches are, by default, considered charitable, tax-exempt institutions. The difference, however, between churches and other charitable organizations is that churches are exempt from reporting requirements. When charitable groups are granted tax exemptions, we as taxpayers have a right to know whether they are actually spending most of their money on acts of charity. Most people likely think that religious institutions spend most of their money helping out the downtrodden, but the fact is very little money actually goes towards caring for the sick, feeding the hungry, paying rent and utility bills, or providing clothing and shelter to those in need. Over the years, I have touched on the issues raised in this post numerous times, often raising the hackles of offended Evangelicals. How dare you say that Evangelicals don’t do much for “the least of these.” Why, my church does ________________ .Fine, I say to them. Show me your church’s budget. Not the generic, one-page summary. I want to see the entire budget, complete with statements of income and expenditures. I want to see exactly how much money is taken in and the percentage of that money that is spent doing actual works of mercy and charity outside of the four walls of the church. I’ve yet to have a church or a pastor provide me with these documents. Why? Because they know, truth be told, that very little of their income actually goes towards helping those in need. The overwhelming majority of income keeps the machinery running. This is why it is laughable when Republican Evangelicals suggest that churches can take on meeting the needs of the poor. Cut taxes, they say, and let God’s people care for the sick, hungry, and impoverished. Imagine how much higher the poverty rate would be if it were left up to Evangelicals to take care of the welfare needs of others. They can’t even take care of their own, let alone those who live outside of their four walls.
Our local mall is in a steady state of decline, with store after store closing its doors or moving to cheaper locations. I told Polly that perhaps Evangelicals could get together and purchase the mall, turning it into a multi-denomination worship center. Every sect could have its own storefront. People visiting for the first time could choose from any of a number of ice cream flavors. Wouldn’t such a facility be a wonderful testimony to the unity that Christians are supposed to have? Expenses could be shared, and there would be no need to keep up one hundred separate buildings, each with its own pastor. Think of how much more money these churches would have to minister to the disadvantaged and marginalized. Yet, I know that having a one-stop church shopping center would never work. Why? Because every church thinks that they are special, and without them, bad things would happen in their communities. I have had more than a few Evangelicals argue that without churches, communities would become dens of iniquity and immorality. Churches are lighthouses in their communities, these Evangelical defenders say. I am convinced, however, that most churches could close their doors and no one outside of the membership would even notice. There are six churches within three miles or so of my home. These churches are filled with decent, kind, loving Midwestern farm folks, much like the people I mentioned at the start of this post. To them, their churches matter, but for those of us who sit outside of the church, we wonder what community good is being done by these churches? I suspect if these six nearby churches closed tomorrow, there would be no qualitative difference in the community in the weeks and months that follow.
For Evangelicals who stumble upon this post, I would ask them to be honest. Take a hard look at what your church does ministry-wise, and ask yourselves, are we doing anything that really matters? Are we doing anything outside of the four walls of our churches that justify us receiving a tax exemption and being financially supported by taxpayers?Well, indignant Evangelicals might say, our churches are focused on getting people saved. We don’t worry about temporal needs. Better to go to heaven hungry, than to hell with a full stomach. But even here, most Evangelical churches fail in their mission. Church baptismals are used to store Christmas decorations, with many churches rarely baptizing new converts. The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), the largest non-Catholic denomination in America — largely Evangelical — is known for its evangelistic efforts. Yet, most SBC churches baptize a few or no new converts. When new Evangelical churches are planted, most of their attendance growth comes, not from people getting saved, but by people leaving their churches and joining the new one. In nearby Defiance, there are several hot-to-trot Evangelical churches that are growing by leaps and bounds. Most of the people flooding into these churches come from nearby established congregations. We Americans are never satisfied with what we have. We are always looking for the latest and greatest whatever, and this applies to churches too. Bored Evangelicals seek out new thrills, using excuses such as “my needs are not being met” or “I’m not being fed” to justify their wanderlust. New churches grow, and established churches decline. While it seems that God is “moving “in these new churches, what’s really happening is that people are just changing pews.
While there certainly are a small number of churches that take seriously Christ’s command to minister to “the least of these,” most are social clubs that exist for the benefit of their membership. I don’t have a problem with this. People should be allowed to belong to whatever club they want. But I do object to taxpayer money being used to support these clubs. Churches should be required to fill out annual reporting forms that justify the tax exemption they receive. If most of their income is not being used for charitable means, then they should not be tax-exempt. Personally, I would like to see the Johnson amendment (please read The Johnson Amendment: I Agree With Donald Trump.) revoked. Churches and their ministers should be treated like any other business, with their income subject to taxation. Only congregations that can demonstrate that they exist for charitable purposes would be granted tax exemption. Like other charities, these churches would annually be required to justify their continued tax exemption. I suspect that less than ten percent of churches would qualify for tax exemption. Out of the almost three hundred churches in the Tri-County area where I live, I don’t know of one church that would qualify. No matter how many youth groups return from mission trips with stories of mighty works done for Jesus, and no matter how many “ministries” churches list on their website, the fact remains that most of the money collected goes toward making sure pastures are maintained and sheep are well fed.
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.
Yesterday, a Christian psychologist named Mike Kuvakos left the following comment on the post Dear Jesus. My response is indented and italicized.
Couple of questions arise. You didn’t mention whether you believe in God, you know, as an entity in himself and if not, why?
I have been writing for this blog iteration since December 2014 — 4,000+ posts (3.5 million words). You read all of two posts before leaving this comment. Had you bothered to click on the WHY? page, you might have learned a bit (okay, a lot) more about me. Instead, you read two posts.
I was in the Christian church for fifty years. I spent twenty-five years pastoring Evangelical churches in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. So, yes, I believed in God, specifically the Christian deity.
I’m your age and maturity does make you realize in the gifts of plants, trees, miraculous medicines developed from ecology that some kind of supreme being has a hand in the cycles in life. Or do you think these things just happen. I don’t think I could make a donation from that kind of viewpoint.
My age (an objective statement) and maturity (a subjective statement) have led me to far different conclusions about the universe, our planet, and our biological world from yours. I put my “faith” in science, not a fallible, contradictory ancient religious text. I am no scientist, and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn last night, but I trust the explanations for our world given by trained experts in the various scientific fields. In other words, I know what I don’t know. Unfortunately, religion often makes people think they are “experts,” when, in fact, they are not.
Science tells how our world began — no God needed. What happened before the Big Bang no one knows. Asserting that a God who exists outside of time and space created everything is not supported by the current understanding of the universe. Maybe there is some sort of divine creator, but we don’t know. You don’t know, and neither do I. So, we base our understanding of the universe on what evidence we do have. If you have evidence for the claim that your peculiar God created everything, please provide it. Quoting the Bible is not evidence.
Of course, things “just happen.” We are surrounded by randomness. Much of our lives are governed by chance and luck. That said, I suspect you mean something different by “just happen.” Please clarify.
You are a Christian, so you believe that “some kind of supreme being” created everything. One might argue that a deistic God of some sort created everything, but I have yet to see persuasive evidence for the claim that this creator God is the God of the Christian Bible.
As far as donating, please, please, please donate. My family is starving, and I desperately need donations from people who show no interest in my writing. (That’s sarcasm, by the way.) Feel free to donate, or not. Whether you donate will not affect the content of my writing.
Also, I’m interested in reading some of your site’s content (I AM a Christian).
Please read Curiosity, A Missing Evangelical Trait. Reading only two posts tells me that you aren’t really that interested. And I AM an atheist. Not sure why you felt the need to capitalize “am.” Emphasis noted.
The biggest disagreement is that you really don’t provide a reason for your new found disbelief. I assume it’s all-the-above. I’m also a psychologist by trade and can tell you – that’s the dumbest reason in not believing in anything. You’ve had a tough time growing up. Join the list, friend.
Actually, I have provided numerous reasons for why I am an atheist. Again, please read the WHY? page. Seek, and ye shall find.
Newfound disbelief? Uh, I deconverted in November 2008 — almost thirteen years ago. Because of your laziness, you failed to learn anything about me. Had you bothered to investigate, you would never have said that the reason for my deconversion was “all of the above.” Do your homework, and then we will talk.
Thank you for your passive-aggressive comment: “you’ve had a tough time growing up. Join the list, friend.” In other words, “get over it.” Evidently, you missed the class lecture on empathy and understanding. You, my friend, are an asshole.
And as far as the Bengals are concerned, I’ve been a sports psychologist for many years and I can tell you with complete assuredness that there are several teams in sports who purposely lose (until the odds for these athletic teams get odds of 500 to 1 against their winning a Super Bowl in Vegas). Their owners acquire collegiate players who are notorious for willingly selling out their performances to wealthy owners like Robert Kraft of the Patriot’s who can buy off these cheating players and can make big extra money in betting in Las Vegas. You think these multi-million dollar salaries come from fans and TV? Look-up in the stands. You see anyone there totaling the 200-500 million dollar contracts? When they get three or four cornerbacks willing to make it look like they’re slipping and sliding while covering the opposition’s receivers the games are pretty well lost, wouldn’t you say? In the meantime – owners put down money bets you yourself couldn’t imagine. Or do you think that a genius like Joe Namath could really give a guarantee his team would win the Super Bowl years ago. There is a lot more involved in this than I told you but I don’t have the time.
For readers who may not understand what this commenter is saying, he is responding to me saying this in the Dear Jesus post:
“Always silent, Jesus. Why is that?
If you ever want to talk to me, you know where I live. Show up at my door, Jesus, and that will be a miracle I can believe in. Better yet, if you can help the Cincinnati Bengals win their last six games, well, I just might rethink your existence. Not going to happen, I know. The Bengals are going to bungle their way to an 0-16 record.
If you can’t help my football team win a few games, Jesus, what good are you? It’s not like I am asking you to feed the hungry, heal the sick, or put an end to violence and war. That would require you to give a shit, Jesus, and if there’s one thing I have learned over the past sixty-two years, it is this: you don’t give a shit about what happens on earth. We humans are on our own, and that’s fine with me.”
Why Kuvakos decided to educate me about American football, I have no idea. Not that I know anything about the subject, right? Sure glad Kuvakos stopped by to “educate” me.
God-Bless
Ah yes, always the “God bless” benediction.
And here’s mine . . .
A Sinner Saved by Reason,
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.
In 2017, U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan Russ Walker struck down an Alabama law that “enabled judges to put minors seeking abortions through a trial-like proceeding in which the fetus could get a lawyer and prosecutors could object to the pregnant girl’s wishes.” (CBS News)
Alabama legislators in 2014 changed the state’s process for girls who can’t or won’t get their parents’ permission for an abortion to obtain permission from a court instead. The new law empowered the judge to appoint a guardian ad litem “for the interests of the unborn child” and invited the local district attorney to call witnesses and question the girl to determine whether she’s mature enough to decide.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan Russ Walker sided Friday with the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama, writing that the law unconstitutionally and impermissibly imposes “an undue burden on a minor in Alabama who seeks an abortion through a judicial bypass,” and violates the girl’s privacy rights by enabling a prosecutor to call witnesses against her will.
Both the judge and the ACLU said they were aware of no other state with such a law.
Every state requiring parental consent for abortions involving minors must also have a “judicial bypass” procedure so that girls can get a judge’s approval in a way that is effective, confidential, and expeditious, the ACLU said.
The state had argued that the law was intended to allow a “meaningful” inquiry into the minor’s maturity and the process was still a “confidential, and expeditious option for a teenager who seeks an abortion without parental consent.”
The civil rights organization said it had the opposite effect, by enabling lawyers for the state or the fetus to subpoena the minor’s teacher, neighbor, relative or boyfriend to testify she’s too immature to choose an abortion, or that continuing the pregnancy would be in her best interest.
It is unclear how many such proceedings have happened since the law was enacted. Walker noted that a district attorney this summer opposed the abortion request of a 12-year-old girl who had been impregnated by a relative.
That Alabama legislators — most of whom worship the Evangelical Christian God — enacted such a draconian, anti-woman, anti-abortion law should surprise no one. Anti-abortionists will not rest until they have banned abortion, criminalized its practice, and granted personhood to human zygotes. In fact, most anti-abortionists object to abortion for any reason — including rape and incest. Some anti-abortionists even go so far as to oppose abortion even if the life of the mother is at stake, believing that God is the giver and taker of life, and if he wants the mother to live he will make it so.
Not only do anti-abortionists oppose abortion for any reason, an increasing number of them object to the sale and distribution of birth control, believing that God alone opens and closes the womb. These zealots, knowing that access to birth control reduces the need for abortion services, choose to let their peculiar interpretations of an ancient religious text trump what is best not only for women, but for the unwanted children they will bring into the world if they don’t have access to birth control.
Previously, I wrote that I no longer use the phrase pro-life to describe those who oppose abortion. The reason is simple. Anti-abortionists are only pro-life when it comes to the unborn. They will go to the ends of the earth to protect human zygotes and unborn fetuses, but once babies are born, anti-abortionists lose all interest in their welfare outside of throwing a few diapers and cans of formula the way of new mothers. Anti-abortionists are overwhelmingly Republican, supporting policies that harm countless people, including mothers and newborns. Anti-abortionists are overwhelmingly pro-war, pro-capital punishment, anti-euthanasia, anti-single payer/universal health care, and a host of other positions that should, in my mind, be inconsistent with people who hold a pro-life viewpoint. While I am sure that more than a few anti-abortionists are not as I describe here, the loudest voices in the movement support policies that are anti-family.
This is why it is impossible for those of us who support a woman’s right to an abortion to find common ground with anti-abortionists. Theologically driven, anti-abortionists will accept no compromise. Supporting abortion rights is, in the anti-abortionist’s mind, akin to supporting murder. I find it hard to work with people who think that, because of my views on abortion, I am a murderer. Even my support of morning-after drugs is viewed as advocating murder. In the eyes of anti-abortionists, the moment sperm and egg unite in the wombs of women, the results are human beings that should have the same constitutional and legal protections as I have. Insane! you say. Yes, but make no mistake about it, if anti-abortionists have their way, aborting a fetus will be considered premeditated murder, worthy, ironically, of the death penalty. Currently, anti-abortionists, as they continue their incremental assault on Roe v. Wade, are attempting to pass state laws that require burials for aborted or miscarried fetuses. According to the Guttmacher Institute, anti-abortionists continue to make it harder and harder for women to receive abortions. Currently:
Physician and Hospital Requirements: 38 states require an abortion to be performed by a licensed physician. 19 states require an abortion to be performed in a hospital after a specified point in the pregnancy, and 17 states require the involvement of a second physician after a specified point.
Gestational Limits: 43 states prohibit abortions after a specified point in pregnancy, with some exceptions provided. The allowable circumstances are generally when an abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.
“Partial-Birth” Abortion: 21 states have laws in effect that prohibit “partial-birth” abortion. 3 of these laws apply only to post-viability abortions.
Public Funding: 16 states use their own funds to pay for all or most medically necessary abortions for Medicaid enrollees in the state. 33 states and the District of Columbia prohibit the use of state funds except in those cases when federal funds are available: where the patient’s life is in danger or the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. In defiance of federal requirements, South Dakota limits funding to cases of life endangerment only.
Coverage by Private Insurance: 12 states restrict coverage of abortion in private insurance plans, most often limiting coverage only to when the patient’s life would be endangered if the pregnancy were carried to term. Most states allow the purchase of additional abortion coverage at an additional cost.
Refusal: 45 states allow individual health care providers to refuse to participate in an abortion. 42 states allow institutions to refuse to perform abortions, 16 of which limit refusal to private or religious institutions.
State-Mandated Counseling: 18 states mandate that individuals be given counseling before an abortion that includes information on at least one of the following: the purported link between abortion and breast cancer (5 states), the ability of a fetus to feel pain (13 states) or long-term mental health consequences for the patient (8 states).
Waiting Periods: 25 states require a person seeking an abortion to wait a specified period of time, usually 24 hours, between when they receive counseling and the procedure is performed. Twelve of these states have laws that effectively require the patient make two separate trips to the clinic to obtain the procedure.
Parental Involvement: 37 states require some type of parental involvement in a minor’s decision to have an abortion. Twenty-seven states require one or both parents to consent to the procedure, while 10 require that one or both parents be notified.
Here in Ohio, most abortions are banned after twenty weeks. As of January 2021, Ohio law requires:
A patient must receive state-directed counseling that includes information designed to discourage the patient from having an abortion, and then wait 24 hours before the procedure is provided. Counseling must be provided in person and must take place before the waiting period begins, thereby necessitating two trips to the facility.
Health plans offered in the state’s health exchange under the Affordable Care Act can only cover abortion in cases of life endangerment, or in cases of rape or incest.
Abortion is covered in insurance policies for public employees only in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest.
Medication abortion must be provided using the FDA protocol.
The parent of a minor must consent before an abortion is provided.
Public funding is available for abortion only in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest.
Most patients will undergo an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion, since the provider must test for a fetal heartbeat. The patient will be offered the option to view the image.
An abortion may be performed at 20 or more weeks postfertilization (22 weeks after the last menstrual period) only in cases of life endangerment or severely compromised health. This law is based on the assertion, which is inconsistent with scientific evidence and has been rejected by the medical community, that a fetus can feel pain at that point in pregnancy.
The state requires abortion clinics to meet unnecessary and burdensome standards related to their physical plant, equipment and staffing.
Since 2011, Ohio Republican governors John Kasich and Mike DeWine have signed into law scores of anti-abortion laws, resulting in the closure of most of Ohio’s abortion clinics. Nine remain. Showing that they will not be satisfied until ALL abortion is outlawed, Ohio anti-abortionists are attempting to pass a fetal heartbeat bill that, if enacted, will effectively ban all abortions in Ohio.
Adopting a scorched earth policy where no quarter will be given, anti-abortionists despise anyone who dares to deviate from their extremist views. Those of us who support a woman’s right to choose have no hope of finding ways to meaningfully work with anti-abortionists to reduce the number of abortions. So, we go it alone, advocating for easy, free access to birth control and comprehensive sex education in public schools. Realizing that there will always be unwanted/accidental pregnancies — for whatever reason — we believe that access to morning-after drugs is essential.
Dark is the hour for those of us who support a woman’s right to choose, but we must not give in or lose hope. We must continue to fight, pushing back at every turn, until the gains made by anti-abortionists are overturned — either through legislatures or the judicial system.
Recently, according to the Guttmacher Institute, the U.S. Supreme Court [announced it] will hear a case to decide whether states can ban at least some abortions before fetal viability—directly challenging its decision in Roe v. Wade. The announcement to hear the case on a 15-week Mississippi abortion ban comes as abortion rights are already under unrelenting assault around the country, with states on pace to enact a record number of abortion restrictions this year.
My dear friend Zoe wrote a short post today about child-friendly faith. Zoe rightly questioned whether teaching children there is a Hell and that they will spend eternity being tortured by God for believing the wrong things is a child-friendly faith. Most Christian sects teach that there is a Heaven to gain and a Hell to shun; that the only way to avoid eternal punishment and damnation is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31) — trusting that he will forgive your sins, save you, and give you a home in Heaven after you die. Even the uber-liberal Episcopal Church, in its Thirty-Nine Articles of Faith, officially believes there is a Hell, and the only way to avoid Hell is to repent of your sins and put your faith in Jesus.
Evangelicals are what I call the Hell Party. Either believe (and do) the right things or you will go to H-e-l-l. While it is true that preaching on Hell is less frequent today, Evangelicals still believe that Hell is a real place, and that non-Christians will spend eternity there after they die.
We believe in the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, in His virgin birth, in His sinless life, in His miracles, in His vicarious and atoning death through His shed blood, in His bodily resurrection, in His ascension to the right hand of the Father, and in His personal return in power and glory.
We believe that for the salvation of lost and sinful people, regeneration by the Holy Spirit is absolutely essential.
….
We believe in the resurrection of both the saved and the lost; they that are saved unto the resurrection of life and they that are lost unto the resurrection of damnation.
Evangelicals believe that humans are sinners by nature; spiritually broken, sick, and diseased the moment they come into this world. Through preaching, along with children’s church programs, junior church, Sunday school, and youth group, Evangelical children are frequently reminded of the fact that they are sinners headed for Hell unless they put their child-like faith in Jesus. From birth to death, Evangelical church attendees are told that Hell awaits those who refuse the saving grace freely offered by Jesus (Calvinists reserve salvation for only the elect). As an Evangelical pastor for twenty-five years, I preached countless sermons on Hell. My churches’ junior churches and Sunday schools were staffed by people who understood the importance of scaring the Hell out of children. We believed that the sooner we reached children with the gospel, the better. It was not uncommon for church children to make professions of faith while they were still in kindergarten or primary school. The longer salvation was delayed, the greater opportunity Satan had to get his hooks into them.
One church I pastored, Somerset Baptist Church, had a large bus ministry. Every week, scores of children were bused to the church so trained workers could evangelize them. Hundreds of children made professions of faith — often repeating the act one or more times. In 2020, I wrote a post titled Should Parents Choose a Religion for Their Children?Here’s an excerpt from this post:
In the type of Baptist churches in which my wife and I grew up, children are sent to Sunday school and children’s church so they can be exposed to the church’s teachings on Heaven, Hell, Jesus, salvation, death, and God’s judgment. Children are often emotionally and mentally coerced into asking Jesus into their hearts. Children’s church teachers will often ask their young pupils: do you want to go to Hell when you die? or how many of you want to go to Heaven when you die? What young, immature and impressionable child doesn’t want to avoid the flames of Hell or enjoy the wonders of Heaven?
In many ways, Evangelicals who evangelize children are like door-to-door salesmen selling their customers on the importance of owning their product and the danger of putting off a buying decision to another day. Years ago, I sold Kirby vacuüm cleaners. I would praise the virtues of the grossly overpriced vacuum, trying to get prospective customers to see how much better their lives would be if their households owned a Kirby. If the positive approach failed to work, I’d resort to the methods meant to show them how poorly their current vacuüm was working. I’d even go so far as to use my demo Kirby vacuüm to sweep the prospective customer’s bed, showing them all the dead skin and “mites” the mighty Kirby removed from their bed. The goal was always to get the customer to make an impulsive decision. And this is exactly what happens in many Evangelical churches. Uninformed children are wowed with the wonders of Heaven and threatened with the horrors of sin and Hell. Most children who are exposed to these kinds of sales techniques will “choose” to get saved.
Once children are saved, their parents and churches continue to indoctrinate them in their sect’s particular teachings. Remember, these children do not have the rational capacity to make this choice, nor have they been exposed to alternative religions. Are confirmed, initiated, or saved children really making an informed decision to believe the central tenets of Christianity? Of course not. They lack the requisite intellectual skills necessary to make such a decision. Wouldn’t it be better to expose children to a variety of religions, along with humanism and atheism, and allow them to make a reasoned choice of which to follow when they are old enough to do so?
I have many regrets from my days as an Evangelical pastor, especially how my preaching psychologically harmed people. No amount of saying “I’m sorry” will change the fact that my words harmed children and adults alike. Children, in particular, were emotionally scarred by my sermons on original sin, God’s wrath and judgment, and Hell. You see, church children believed that I loved them, and I only wanted what was best for them. And, from an Evangelical perspective, I did. However, years later, I know that berating children over their “sins” and threatening them with God’s judgment and Hell if they didn’t pray the sinner’s prayer is child abuse. I have had enough conversations with adults who were children in one of the churches I pastored to know that I caused them harm. All I know to do is profusely apologize and use my writing to expose what really goes on within the four walls of Evangelical churches.
Sid, Toy Story
Let me be clear, teaching children they are broken (sinners) and in need of fixing (salvation) lest they are consigned to Sid’s Toy Shop (Hell) is child abuse. There is nothing child-friendly about such preaching and teaching. Why does such abuse continue, you ask? Most church children have parents who were raised in Evangelical churches. They, too, were psychologically abused by pastors, evangelists, Sunday school teachers, and youth leaders. What do we know about abuse? Adults who were abused tend to abuse their children. If parents came of age hearing sermons about original sin, Hell, and salvation through Christ alone, their children experiencing these same things doesn’t seem wrong or abusive. Thus, the abuse cycle continues generation after generation.
A child-friendly faith is one that that doesn’t teach children they are broken; that doesn’t threaten them with God’s judgment; that doesn’t put the fear of God into them by warning them that they will burn in Hell (or be annihilated) if they don’t believe the right things.
While it is naïve to expect Christian parents to keep their children away from their tribe’s religion, society should require them to not unduly indoctrinate their children. That we don’t reflects the fact that we give Christianity a pass on almost everything when it comes to children. We allow Christian parents to pull their children out of public schools so they can be indoctrinated by evangelists, posing as teachers of knowledge, for their particular sect’s beliefs. We also allow Christian parents to homeschool their children. Millions of American children are homeschooled or attend Christian private (and parochial) schools. These children are taught reason-defying myths such as the virgin birth of Jesus, the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, and wine and crackers miraculously turning into Jesus’ blood and flesh once they are prayed over. They are regularly reminded that they are sinful, broken humans in need of forgiveness and salvation, and that Heaven awaits them if they believe, and Hell awaits if they don’t. These types of teachings do incalculable emotional harm to children, often resulting in low self-esteem or psychological problems.
Worse yet, these children are taught lies about the natural world they are very much a part of. Many Evangelical homeschool parents and private schools teach children that the earth is 6,023 years old, evolution is a lie, and the teaching of the Bible accurately reflects the one and only way to understand the world. While parents and teachers will most likely teach their wards science, they often teach a Christianized version that repudiates biological evolution. They also, thanks to a literalistic reading of the Bible, reject most of what cosmology, archaeology, and geology tell us about the age of the earth and the universe. As a result, children who have embraced this kind of indoctrination are crippled intellectually. Ask any secular college or university professor how difficult it is to reason with children who have been indoctrinated with Fundamentalist Christian beliefs. The intransigence of these students is heartbreaking. Stunted intellectually, they often go through life ignoring vast swaths of human knowledge because it does not fit the narrow confines of what they were taught as a child. Of course, this is EXACTLY what Christian churches and their leaders desire: intellectually-neutered people who continue to look to them for answers.
How did the preaching and teaching you heard at church as a child affect you later in life? Did you lack self-esteem? Were you afraid of God? Did your fear going to Hell? Please leave your thoughts in the comment section.
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.
One of the proofs given by Evangelicals for the existence of the Christian God is that they “feel” Him in their lives. Countless Evangelicals have said, I KNOW my God is real because He lives in my heart! Among Charismatics and Pentecostals, this “feeling” God is taken to extremes, resulting in speaking in tongues, bodily contortions, and all sorts of physical phenomena. Even among Baptists — especially South of the Mason-Dixon Line, God’s presence can be evidenced by those “feeling” God running the aisles, standing on pews, waving towels/hankies, raising hands, and shouting AMEN!
I have been asked numerous times whether I ever “felt” God in my life. Such questioners want to know if what I had was a head salvation, one rooted in the intellect, and not the “heart.” Never mind the fact that humans do not have “hearts” in the sense that Evangelicals use the word. The Bible, in fact, says, as a man THINKS in his HEART so is he. Biblically speaking, the heart is the mind, the intellect, and not the blood-pumping organ. Who hasn’t heard a sermon about missing heaven by eighteen inches — the distance between the human brain and heart. That said, when asked if I ever “felt” God, the answer is an emphatic, no-doubt-about-it YES!
Let me give several examples of when I “felt” God.
One of my favorite get-alone-with-God places was the auditorium of Somerset Baptist Church in Mt. Perry, Ohio. Somerset Baptist was a rural church, and I would, on many occasions over the twelve years I pastored the church, sit in the quiet, empty auditorium and speak out loud to God. On more than a few occasions, I “felt” not only God’s presence, but also God speaking to me.
Another occasion of “feeling” God also took place at Somerset Baptist in November of 1993. Several months prior, Pat Horner and Community Baptist Church in Elmendorf, Texas, extended to me an invitation to become the co-pastor of Community Baptist. After praying over the matter, I decided God wanted me to stay in Somerset. In November, I was kneeling in my office praying when all of a sudden, I “felt” God’s overwhelming presence. God said to me, I want you to become co-pastor of Community Baptist Church. I began to weep uncontrollably, telling God that I would do whatever it was He wanted me to do. The rest of this story can be found in the series I am a Publican and a Heathen.
Music has played a part in my “feeling” God. Hearing songs such as I Can Only Imagine by MercyMe, Because of Who You Are, Use Me Here, Nails in Your Hands by Everybodyduck, and Who am I, Praise You in This Storm, and Voice of Truth by Casting Crowns, often elicited deep feelings of God’s presence. There were times that I was so overwhelmed by God’s presence that I was weeping uncontrollably and had to pull the car off on the berm until my tears subsided.
I also “felt” God when certain hymns were sung. In particular, singing It is Well With My Soul often resulted in me “feeling” God. It should not be surprising, then, that many Evangelicals “feel” God while engaged in singing praise and worship music. The lyrics and music are deliberately crafted to bring worshipers into the “presence” of God. I have personally witnessed and experienced all sorts of emotional experiences during praise and worship sessions. It was as if God personally showed up and was in the midst of the congregation.
Let me give one more example of “feeling” God. Over the course of twenty-five years in the ministry, I preached 4,000+ sermons. There were numerous occasions while I was preaching that I “felt” God, and I could see that others “felt” God too. I have been in services where the presence of God was so thick that you could cut it with a knife. I have seen countless people “feel” God as He took my words and used them for His honor and glory. Or so I thought, anyway.
I know for certain that I have “felt” God and that “feeling” Him was a regular part of my life as a Christian, both before and during my time in the ministry. How, then, do I square this fact with what I now know to be true — that there is no God? Early in the deconversion process, this question troubled me. I knew that I had “felt” God. I knew for certain that God had visibly and deeply moved me emotionally. Based on these experiences, how could I now say that these intimate connections with God were not what I claimed they were?
Were these experiences real? Of course, they were. I grew up in a religious culture where it was common for people to “feel” God and to have Him speak to them through prayer, Scripture, and the preaching of the Word. God was everywhere, and those who sought Him would find Him. I read numerous books authored by Christian mystics going all the way back to the Puritan era. I desired more than anything to be filled with and empowered by the Holy Spirit. Any honest evaluation of my Evangelical upbringing will conclude that “feeling” God was very much a part of what it meant to be Christian. While salvation rested not on subjective feelings, but the objective words of God, “feeling” God was a reminder that you were God’s child and he was always with you.
Understanding “feeling” God became clearer to me when I examined other emotional experiences in my life. Watching my grandchildren play can, at times, elicit similar feelings, as can making love and having an intimate, quiet night on the town with Polly. Several years ago, Polly and I watched our youngest son graduate from Northwest State Community College and our youngest daughter graduate from Bowling Green State University. As I watched each of them walk the aisle and receive their diplomas, I was overwhelmed emotionally, my mind flooded with gratitude and joy over their accomplishments — accomplishments that would NOT have happened had I remained an Evangelical pastor.
I have similar feelings watching certain movies. The same can be said for sporting events. Years ago, I stopped by a high school track meet to take some photographs. One of the events had a runner who was definitely not as good as the rest of the competitors. I watched as she got farther and farther behind until she was half a track behind everyone else. Yet, while everyone else was cheering the winners, I found myself deeply moved emotionally over the last-place finisher’s determination and grit.
I now know that “feeling” God is as real as other emotional experiences I have had in my life. God need not be real for me to “feel” Him/Her/It. Practitioners of non-Christian religions can share similar experiences of “feeling” their God or being overwhelmed emotionally. Feeling such things are a part of our DNA. Sadly, Evangelicals think that their “feeling” God is objectively true, and all others are false; that there is a BIG difference between “feeling” God and the emotional experiences humans have through relationships and interactions with the natural world. Who among us can look at the star-filled skies and not feel a sense of awe and wonder. Must we believe in God to have such feelings? Of course not. All of us have the capacity to feel, no God needed.
Did you “feel” God as a Christian? How do you explain these experiences now that you no longer believe in God? Please share your thoughts in the comment section.
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.
Most Evangelicals believe that the earth was created 6,023 years ago, and the first two human beings on the planet were Adam and Eve.
Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel. It is assumed that Adam and Eve also had daughters who are not mentioned in the Bible. The reason this is assumed is that Cain and Abel had wives and children. The question then that must be asked is this: where did Cain and Abel‘s wives come from? Since there were no people on earth before Adam and Eve, the only answer is that Cain and Abel‘s wives were their sisters.
The Bible is clear: incest is a sin. If God is a moral being, absolute perfection, explain why he used incest to propagate the human race. Doesn’t this mean that God broke his own moral commandments? If God is against homosexuality, fornication, and adultery — sins which lead to eternal damnation and Hell — as Evangelicals say he is, why would God ever condone or use incest as a means to advance his purpose and plan?
When Evangelicals are asked about why God used incest to propagate the human race, they typically give one of three answers:
Mystery — we just don’t know.
God’s ways are not our ways, and God‘s thoughts are not our thoughts.
God used incest for a time, and once the human race was growing, he banned incest, calling it a grievous sin (only to allow it again after the Flood for a time with Noah’s family).
God had not yet given the command against incest (or rape, adultery, fornication, bestiality, etc).
Answering the question, “why is incest wrong?” Christian Fundamentalist “Dr.” David Tee (known in real life as David Thiessen) wrote:
Because God decided to make it wrong at the right time when genetic deformities will arise and ruin his creation. This may seem like a flippant answer but it is not. God was protecting his creation from the ills that come from inbreeding.
To illustrate this sexual harassment was recently made illegal but all those who practiced sexual harassment prior to that event did nothing legally wrong. You cannot judge or condemn people (or God) based upon actions after the fact. In other words, the people who did sexual harassment when it was legal, did not commit illegal or wrongful acts. They are still innocent people even though eventually the act was declared illegal.
Tee states, “this may seem like a flippant answer.” Ya, think? Either incest is immoral, or it’s not. Either God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent or he’s not. Supposedly, God is sovereign. He knows everything from beginning to end. If this is so, wouldn’t have God known that there would be genetic birth defects? Couldn’t God have manipulated human DNA to eliminate this problem? Or better yet, couldn’t he have created numerous families, each with unique DNA? Instead, the moral architect of the universe used behavior he says is sinful to propagate the human race.
When you believe the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, and infallible word of God, such questions pose all sorts of problems for you. When you believe the Bible should be read literally, and that the history and science found within its pages are true, you are forced to defend incest and all sorts of immoral behavior. When you believe God’s moral law is absolute, incest committed by Cain and Abel proves to be an insurmountable problem.
I was an Evangelical pastor for 25 years. The incest question bothered me the entire time I spent in the ministry. I could not square incest in the book of Genesis with God‘s commands other places in the Bible. I concluded this was a mystery, and that someday, in Heaven, God would reveal his reasoning for permitting incest for a time. This is a common hermeneutic used by Evangelicals to not answer hard questions.
Are you a former Evangelical? How did you answer the incest question? Please leave your thoughts in the comment section.
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.
There is no such thing as “Christianity” — as in a singular group encompassing all Christians. The Bible says that there is ONE Lord, ONE faith, and ONE baptism, yet Christians have spent the last two thousand years trying to prove that their peculiar beliefs are the one, and only one, TRUE CHRISTIANITY®. Every Evangelical sect, every Evangelical pastor, every Evangelical church member thinks their beliefs are right. This kind of thinking is fueled by believing that the Bible is an inspired, inerrant, infallible book, written through human instrumentality by God himself. It should come as no surprise that many Evangelicals, believing that they hold in their hands the very words of God, are cock-sure that what they believe is exactly what God meant when he had holy men of old write the this or that passage of Scripture. Armed with certainty, Evangelicals have no place for doubt. Doubt is of the devil! preachers say. I’m standing on the promises of God. Praise Jesus! Just remember, it was SATAN who said to Adam and Eve, yea hath God said (yes, he spoke in King James English). God has spoken, end of story.
If, as Evangelicals say, God has inerrantly and infallibly spoken, why is it, then, that Evangelicals have such varied and contradictory beliefs? If two thousand years after the purported resurrection of Jesus from the dead, all Christians had the same theological beliefs, I might at least pause to consider whether the claims of Christianity are true. However, there are countless Christianities, each with its own beliefs. Worse yet, there are countless Jesuses, with every Christian molding and shaping a Jesus in his or her own image. (Please read Does the Bible Contain Multiple Plans of Salvation? and Is There Only One Plan of Salvation?) Christians can’t even agree on the basics: salvation, baptism, and communion. If Christians can’t reach a consensus about what constitutes the one true faith, why should anyone pay attention to them?
Let me illustrate this by answering the quandary: Why Pentecostals speak in tongues, and Baptists don’t.
First, the Baptists. I grew up in the Baptist church, so I am quite familiar with how Baptists view speaking in tongues. SPEAKING IN TONGUES IS SATANIC, STRAIGHT FROM THE PIT OF HELL! There, end of discussion. I was taught, and later taught others, that speaking in tongues was a temporary sign gift given to Jesus’ disciples so they could spread the good news of the gospel to the ends of the earth. Once the canon of Scripture was completed, the need for tongues went away. Evidently, once Christians of the fourth century had read all sixty-six books of the King James Bible for their reading pleasure, God no longer used tongues to speak to people.
On the other hand, the Pentecostals believe that speaking in tongues is very much for today; that it is normal for Spirit-filled Christians to speak in unknown languages. Several sects go even so far as to say that one of the evidences of salvation is speaking in tongues. Don’t speak in tongues? You aren’t saved! Upon hearing I was a Baptist preacher,one Pentecostal man told me that Baptists wouldn’t know the Holy Spirit if he met them in the middle of the road. In other words, Baptists were blind to work and power of the H-o-l-y Ghost.
Years ago, I got into a heated discussion with a Pentecostal preacher over speaking in tongues. I gave him all the standard Baptist arguments, and he gave me all the classic Pentecostal arguments. Back and forth we went, neither of us winning the day. I am sure after we parted company, each of us believed that we had been victorious. Ha! I showed him!
Such conflicts as the one mentioned above are quite common. Why do Pentecostals believe in speaking in tongues, but Baptists don’t? Both sides use the Bible as proof for their beliefs. GOD HATH SPOKEN, both sides say. If God has indeed spoken, why the contradictory beliefs? God seems quite schizophrenic, telling the Baptists one thing and the Pentecostals something different. Surely, if God and the Bible are as Evangelicals claim they are, there would only be one truth, not many.
The only way to adequately answer this question is to carefully examine the matter from a tribal and sociological perspective. (Please read Why Most Americans are Christian.) Look at the religious environments people grow up in and you will have a good idea why they believe as they do. Look at their tribal and social influences, and it becomes clear that Pentecostals speak in tongues and Baptists don’t because these were the beliefs they were exposed to. They believe what they do because they couldn’t believe otherwise. While not a hard and fast rule, most often Baptists beget Baptists and Pentecostals beget Pentecostals. While Evangelical adults certainly can and do change churches, they often look for churches of “like” faith. When people change churches, they most often seek that which is familiar to them. Not always, of course. Sometimes, Baptists do become Pentecostal tongues-speakers, and Pentecostals can become starched, English-only Baptists. These, however, are exceptions to the rule.
Perhaps Christians will one day figure out exactly what is the one true faith. I doubt it, but as someone who believes in probabilities, it is possible, say .000001 percent, that God’s chosen ones will finally figure out exactly what it takes to be a member of their club. Until then, buy some popcorn, pull up a seat, and enjoy the show.
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.
Over the years as we have followed God’s call to work with Christian pastors in our limited fashion, we have come across a lot of different people. Many of those people are like Mr. Bruce Gerencser a deconverted Christian or former pastor who used to believe the Bible (Or however he describes himself).
We are sad that he is sick but that is life and we all suffer at one point in time or another. We have known Mr. Gerencer for many years and never see eye to eye like the owner of Muskrat Musing.
The impression we got from reading his content, is that he thinks his eyes were opened to the truth and that he received the truth, which is why he downgraded the Bible and left his pastorate, career, and calling.
There is a lot of content in his article that should be refuted and we will bypass the Dr. Ehrman quotes for this article. The gist of the content is that Mr. Gerenscer thinks he has the truth, and all the fundamentalists and Christians he hates do not.
That is impossible as Jesus said he was the truth and he did not say the Bible was in error or had any errors in it. He told s if things were not true, he would have told us and we have received no divine scripture that corrects the biblical content.
….
At best, he points to works written by secular authors or scientists and claims that they have the truth over God’s writers. But how can that be when Jesus said the Christian is to be the light unto a dark world.
It is not the secular world or secular science that has the truth. If they did, Jesus would not have been needed nor would we need him to die on the cross. We would go to the person leading those secular people instead.
….
He is very misguided and deceived as it is not the Christian, their faith, the Bible, or Jesus that are harming those people who refuse to repent of their sins. The person harming those people is the one who traps them in those sinful activities and fights to keep them from being converted-the devil.
The Christian is showing the love when they try to rescue those unbelievers from that trap while Mr. Gerenscer and people like him are showing their hatred towards those people by helping evil keep its hold on them.
….
Mr. Gerenscer, and people like him, listened to those who do not believe over God. The people who infect young minds with falsehoods are those who stop believing God and accept the words of unbelievers who were not at the event they are trashing.
….
Mr. Gerenscer moves on to social issues and claims there are proof texts prohibiting certain preferences etc. Those are not proof texts but God’s communication on how he feels about certain things.
Yes, many believers get the verses wrong and apply them in a wrong fashion but that is due more to immaturity and bad instruction. Not to errors in the Bible. If God did not say those words, then we do not have God’s view of those social activities or preferences.
In other words, Mr. Gerenscer and others like him, want to live life their way and be god declaring what is right or wrong, good or evil, moral or immoral. They do not want to humble themselves and accept God as their God and live by his rules.
….
You cannot solve problems if you are going to leave the answers at home or in your car but then Mr. Gerenscer does not want to solve problems, especially God’s way. He wants people to remain in their sins because he has determined that God and his word are wrong (according to his limited thinking).
If people are going to trash me publicly, I wish they would at least spell my last name correctly. How hard can it be, right? GERENCSER.
I “love” Tee’s passive-aggressive comment about me being sick. What Tee is saying is this: everyone is sick now and again. Quit talking about it, wimp. As you shall see in a moment, Tee thinks I am “weak.” Besides, what does the fact that I suffer from gastroparesis, fibromyalgia, and osteoarthritis have anything to do with inerrancy? Of course, Tee said very little about the subject of my post: the inerrancy of the Bible. Instead, he went after me as a person. Tee can’t square my story with his theology or personal experiences, so he attacks my character instead. Sadly, this is common behavior by Christian Fundamentalists. Instead of critiquing my writing, they zero in what they believe are character flaws/failures. Tis the price paid for being a public figure, I suppose. Such behavior only drives people farther away from Christianity. One of the reasons I publish the stuff people say about me is that it shows readers the ugly underbelly of Evangelical Christianity. And, it’s fun.
Tee wasn’t done with me. Today, he wrote post titled, We Call Them Quitters. While Tee used plural pronouns in the article’s title, the body of the text reveals that the title should have been, I Call Bruce Gerencser a Quitter. The post is excerpted below. My response is indented and italicized.
In our last article, we wrote about one man who turned away from Christ and left his faith. He actually represents all the people who have done the exact same thing since Christ was here.
Tee believes in original sin and the substitutionary death of Jesus. Simply put, when Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden 6,023 years ago, humanity sinned. We had no choice in the matter. We don’t become sinners — we are sinners. Of course, since Tee believes we are created in the image of God, that means that God either gave us our sin natures, or God himself is a sinner, and we are just like Daddy.
When the virgin-born, sinless son of God, Jesus, was executed on a Roman cross, he died to provide atonement for human sin. We deserved to be executed (why? Jesus is one who did what he did, not me) but Jesus died in our place. His Father hates sin and those who do it. If the All-Father (tell me you get the reference) had his way (you mean God can’t have his way?) all of us would end up in Hell for eternity. Jesus, the mediator between God and man, stood between humanity and his angry Father, dying on the cross on our behalf (unless you are a Calvinist — then Jesus just died for the elect. Non-elect need not apply). Even today, Jesus sits at the right hand of his Father, interceding on our behalf. This makes me think that Jesus’ Father needs to take anger management classes. Blaming billions of humans for what Adam and Eve did doesn’t seem just or fair. Regardless, that’s the plan the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit — the “we are not three gods, just one” deity — cooked up from before the foundation of the world.
Much like Adam and Eve and Jesus, I too represent a group of people: those who turned away from Jesus Christ and Christianity. I, Bruce, Gerencser, am the substitutionary Christian-turned-unbeliever. Not just Christians who are now atheists or agnostics, ALL Christians-turned-unbelievers. Awesome, right?
We are not singling him out as he just parrots the same words all the rest of the former Christians say and nothing is new coming out of his mouth or from his keyboard.
Hell, David, at least be honest. You most certainly are singling me out.
The Bible talks about running the race, fighting the good fight, and keep on doing it till the end. But Mr. Generscer and the people like him, have decided that they know better than God and quit the race, etc.
We do not support their moves, call them intelligent, or think they have something to offer. Instead, we call them quitters. They could not handle the fight, strive to the end, and did not take the right precautions to protect their faith.
Generscer? That’s a new one.
According to Tee, I am a quitter. Instead of running the race set before me, wearing a faith condom, and persevering to the end, I just up and quit. Instead of trying to understand the complexities of my story, Tee reduces my life to that of a quitter.
I attended Midwestern Baptist College, an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) institution, in the 1970s. Dr. Tom Malone (who had a doctorate from an accredited university, Wayne State University), president of Midwestern and pastor of a nearby megachurch, Emmanuel Baptist Church, frequently railed against quitters in his sermons. Quitting was viewed as a cardinal sin, a sign of weakness. I heard this theme repeated over and over again at IFB Bible conferences and pastor’s meetings. Good Christians never quit. The fact that my six-month pregnant wife and I, recently unemployed, left Midwestern after three years was proof to Malone, our professors, and classmates that we were weak. I vividly remember a close friend of mine telling me as we were packing up the U-Haul to leave, “If you quit, God will NEVER use you.”
Seven years later, Malone was preaching at a Bible conference at the Newark Baptist Temple in Newark, Ohio. The church was pastored at the time by Polly’s uncle, James Dennis. Her father, Lee, was the church’s assistant pastor. At the time, I was pastoring Somerset Baptist Church in Mt. Perry, Ohio. In the mid-80s, the church grew quickly, reaching 200 in attendance — quite a feat for a country church. Hundreds of people were saved through my preaching. By all accounts, I was an up-and-coming pastor.
My father-in-law told Malone about my exploits for Jesus. Seeing that I was sitting in the pews, Malone called me out by name and then said, “If Bruce had stayed any longer at Midwestern, we would have ruined him.” Everyone laughed. I thought, “I wonder what those people who called me a quitter think now?”
I have quit all sorts of things over the years. I suspect most of us have done the same. No big deal, right? Tee, however, is using the word “quitter” as a slur. People who “quit” Christianity are weak, unlike Mr. Tee, the True Christian®.
When you look at their websites, there is a common theme to them. We won’t quote from Mr. Gerenscer’s site, we will just link to his commenting rules page as that is where you find this common element found among all those who have left the faith.
Now we are to one of the reasons Tee’s feathers are ruffled, why he has written two posts about me in recent days. Tee doesn’t like the commenting rules for this site. He doesn’t like that I don’t let him and other Evangelical zealots publicly masturbate (it’s a metaphor, David)) in the comment section. Tee wants the right to whip out his Bible Dick whenever he wants on this site. Me telling him to put it away, zip up his pants, and move on down the road is an affront to all that is holy and true.
The commenting policy was crafted due to me spending the past thirteen years dealing with the David Tees of the world. For those who have not read the comment policy, here’s what it says:
— begin comment policy —
All commenters are expected to use a functioning email address. The use of a fake or non-functioning email address will result in your comment being deleted.
Pseudonyms are permitted. Please use one, and only one, pseudonym when commenting on this blog. People using more than one will have their comments deleted.
All first-time comments and comments with more than one HTML link are moderated. Depending on the time of day, It might take hours for me to approve your comment.
Before commenting, please read the ABOUT page to acquaint yourself with my background. You might also want to read the Dear Evangelical page and the WHY page
The following type of comments will not be approved:
Preachy/sermonizing comment
Bible verse-quoting comment
Evangelizing comment
I am praying for you comment
You are going to hell comment
You never were saved comment
You never were a Christian comment
Any comment that is a personal attack on me personally, my family, or the readers of this blog
Any comment that is not on point with what the post is about
Any comment that denigrates abuse victims
I write about issues that might not be child-friendly. Please be aware of this. I also use profanity from time to time, and I allow the use of profanity in the comment section.
The Life and Times of Bruce Gerencser is not a democracy where visitors have a right to say whatever they want. This is my personal blog and I reserve the right to approve or disapprove any comment. When a comment or a commenter is abusive towards the community of people who read this blog, I reserve the right to ban the commenter.
If you can be respectful, decent, and thoughtful, your comment will always be approved. Unfortunately, there are many people — Evangelical/Fundamentalist/IFB/Conservative Catholic Christians in particular — who have a hard time playing well with others. Using a passive-aggressive approach in the comment section will not be tolerated and will result in a permanent ban.
This blog is also not a place for hardcore atheists to preach the gospel of atheism. While I am an atheist, some of the people who read this blog are not. Frank, honest, open, and passionate discussion about religion, Christianity, and Evangelicalism is encouraged and welcome. However, I do expect atheists not to attack, badger, or denigrate people who still believe in God. If you are respectful, decent, and thoughtful, you will be fine.
Generally, I will post one comment from a preachy, Bible-quoting, evangelizing Evangelical. If this describes you, please make sure you say all you need to say in your comment. By all means, say whatever it is you think “God” is leading you to say, but understand that no further comments will be approved once you have said your piece.
My writing is direct and pointed, and so is my response to comments. Please do not confuse my directness and pointedness with me attacking you or your religion. This is a grown-up blog, so cries that I offended you or “attacked” your religion will fall on deaf ears.
If you can play by these rules, I hope you will become a part of our community and join the discussion.
If you have further questions about the commenting policy, please use the contact form to email me.
— end of comment policy —
I determined long ago that my target group was Christians (primarily Evangelicals) who had questions or doubts about their faith and people who had already left Christianity. This blog is for them, not Evangelical apologists. That said, EVERY Evangelical commenter is given one opportunity to say whatever it is they believe God is laying upon their heart. If they show that they can play well with others, I will approve further comments. If I have learned anything over the years, I have learned that most Evangelicals are pathologically unable to play well with others. Give them the opportunity to comment, and they will show their true colors. When Evangelical commenters DEMAND further access to the comment section, I typically tell them to fuck off and to start their own blogs. Such people can start a blog in five minutes. Then they are free to critique my writing, deconstruct my life, or attack my character. Go for it!
As you read those rules, you will see that he, and others like him, act worse than they claim God acts. They are little dictators who demand that their readers and commenters follow their rules exactly or they will be excluded from public viewing.
I act worse than God? Really? I don’t believe I have ever committed genocide or slaughtered the whole human race, save eight. I am, in every way, a better person than God. All one needs to do is read the Bible to see that Richards Dawkins was right when he said:
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
They hate God for excluding sin from his paradise, yet their own little world comes with worse rules than what God has set up. Violate them in a minute way and you are gone.
Sorry, David, I don’t hate God. You know this. I have told you this before, dude. One has to believe God exists to hate him. I don’t. I don’t hate mythical beings. Doing so is a colossal waste of time. Do you hate Santa Claus?
Again, Tee’s post is about him not being allowed to comment on this site or not being permitted to say whatever he wants. (He is not presently banned.) Imagine me going to an Evangelical church and demanding that they let me speak. I want to share with them the Gospel of Bruce Almighty. Do you know of any church that would let me preach to them the unsearchable riches of Bruce? Of course not. So it is with this blog. I want to be a help to people who have questions and doubts or have left Christianity. I use the comment policy to protect the people that matter to me. Well, that and the fact that I haven’t heard an original thought from Evangelical zealots in years. I’m bored, people.
What this tells you is that those who have left the faith have nothing to offer anyone, especially their former Christian counterparts. If they had such a better way, why is it not present in their rules and their conduct?
Huh?
I can say this much, thousands of people read my writing every day. So much for not having anything to offer anyone. I would be glad to compare traffic numbers with Tee. I suspect we will find out who it is that really has nothing to offer anyone. Size matters, David.
If they found something better than God why is it not permeating their words and actions showing the believer there is something better than God and his ways? When you read their content and comments, all we are seeing in them is more of the sin that Jesus is trying to save everyone from.
There is nothing in these people’s words or actions that show the world that they have found something no one else has. They just glorify sin and revel in it. That is not worth giving up eternal life.
Another common element you will see in their words and actions is hatred. They hate God, Jesus, and those that follow them. They hate other people who cling to their Christian faith, they hate hearing other people’s points of view if it is religious in nature.
Yep, this blog is all about sinning. Wait until you see the photos of me doing my Santa striptease act. I wish I could do more sinning. I am too sick to do so. Of course, I am being sarcastic. Well, not about the sinning part. I suspect that my life would measure up quite well with that of Saint Tee and his merry band of critics. Tee can’t bear that I am happy post-Jesus. Nope, in his mind, I sit around all day raging against God, the Bible, and True Christians®. Sure, dude, sure. I’m going to the zoo tomorrow with my youngest daughter’s family. And Sunday, Polly and I are going out on a date. I don’t have much time to hate on Hey-Zeus.
Sorry, David, you have concocted a picture of my life in your mind that is not true. That Bruce Gerencser does not exist.
Oh, our pingback from the other post was never approved, which backs up our point (we checked several times). Then they hate it when people disagree with them or try to bring them back to the faith, which Peter has said is impossible.
Ah, now we arrive at the real reason Tee is upset at me. I allegedly didn’t approve a pingback. What is a pingback, you ask? WP Beginner describes it this way:
“Pingback allows you to notify other bloggers that you have linked to their article on your website. Although there are some minor technical differences, a trackback is basically the same thing as a pingback.”
I approve ALL ALL ALL legitimate pingbacks. I have received no pingback from either of Tee’s posts. It must be my fault, right? What else could have gone wrong? As long-time bloggers know, the pingback system is not infallible. Just like the Bible. . .
Here’s the irony of Tee’s complaint. I have mentioned several of his posts over the years. I have pingback enabled on this site. That means Tee has received pingbacks from this blog. Where are they, David? Not one pingback from this site is shown on your posts. Why is that? Hypocrite. (Update: Several pingbacks have now miraculously appeared on Tee’s blog.)
What Tee wants is attention, and outside of this post, I will not give it to him. Per the comment policy, I will grant him one comment on this post. Let ‘er rip, big boy.
We are not and do not try to preach to Mr. Gerenscer and others like him as that would be a waste of time. We just point out the errors in their thinking to protect believers.
Those people have nothing to offer you but like the evil they follow, they will try and rob you of eternal life with Jesus. You have to take care to protect your faith as no matter what level in life the unbeliever enjoys, they have nothing over God to offer you.
Their education and experiences are used against them to ruin their faith and they are no trying to do to you what was done to them. At best ignore them and point out their fallacies to others so you can win souls for Christ instead of losing yours to Christ’s enemy.
….
The unbeliever has nothing to offer you even if they are the greatest scientist, teacher, leader, athlete, and so on in the world. Just do not be fooled by their fake claims of being a Christian.
I am just one man with a story to tell. That people find my story helpful or compelling is not my fault. Perhaps, the real question is WHY my story resonates with people. (Look in the mirror, David.) I am content to write and leave it at that. I have received thousands and thousands of emails, comments, and social media messages from professing Christians over the years — some of whom still read this blog. Not one time I have ever tried to deconvert someone. My goal has never been to make atheist converts. Helping people had always been my objective. I leave it to readers to determine whether I have done so.
I suspect Tee’s real issue with me is that he sees my congregation growing. He sees my words influencing and helping others. He reads stories about people who praise me for helping them in the deconversion process. Thus, Tee feels the need to demonize me and attack my character (and the readers of this blog). He simply can’t stand losing.
And dammit, my last name is spelled Gerencser. Get it right! 🙂
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.
