Menu Close

Tag: Christianity

Bruce, Do You Hate God?

Bruce Gerencser 5 Comments
hate god

On one level, this is a silly question. Since I do not think there is a God, if I hated God, I would be hating a nonexistent entity. This would be akin to hating Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy. However, I understand why religious people might think someone like me hates “their” God. I spend a lot of time writing things that are negative about God and Evangelical Christianity, so surely I must HATE God. Maybe some atheists do hate God, but I don’t. It is a non-issue for me.

As a writer, my focus is on religion — particularly Evangelical Christianity and the Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) church movement. Religion is the human attempt to answer what I call the “hard” questions of life. Where did we come from? What is the essence, the substance of life? Is there life after death? What gives life meaning and purpose? These are not easy to answer. I realize many atheists will say “no evidence”. . . end of discussion, but I think these kinds of questions are worthy of friendly, thoughtful, pointed discussion. The problem is many religious people can’t discuss these questions in a friendly manner. Thinking their God and belief system are equivalent to “truth,” Evangelicals condemn and marginalize anyone who thinks differently.

While I think evolution is the best answer to the “where did we come from” question, I am not at all satisfied with the answers science gives when dealing with the something rather than nothing question. Even Bill Nye, in his debate with creationist Ken Ham, admitted that, so far, science hasn’t answered the question of where the first particle came from. Of course, Ham, a man with cement in the place where his brain once sat, jumped up and down and said, TEACHER, TEACHER, I KNOW THE ANSWER!  IT’S FOUND IN THE B-I-B-L-E. Ham thinks the question is answered, whereas Nye is willing to say, We don’t know, but we continue to try and find the answer to this important question.

I am an atheist because the evidence tells me, at this present moment, that there is no God. As a man who spent fifty years in the Christian church and twenty-five years in the pastorate, I am well versed in the teachings of the Bible and the one, true, and holy Evangelical faith. There’s no possible argument an Evangelical could make that I have not heard. It is not evidence that I am lacking. I have weighed all the available evidence in the balance and found it wanting. I am convinced, based on the available evidence, that the Evangelical God is a work of fiction, and that Christianity is an admixture of myths, legends, oral traditions, and religious teachings. Maybe someday a deity of some sort will reveal itself to us. If so, I will consider this new evidence just like I have the evidence for the plethora of human religions. I doubt this will happen, so I am not going to spend any time worrying about it. In the meantime,  I remain agnostic on the God question and live my day-to-day life as an atheist. Reason, skepticism, humanism, family, friends, writing, good food and music, the Cincinnati Reds, and the Cincinnati Bengals are enough for me — no God needed.

My hatred is reserved for certain aspects of some religions. Since I live in the United States, my experience has primarily been with the Christian religion, especially the Evangelical form of Christianity. While I think the essence of Christianity can provide value and substance for some people — even in our modern, scientific world — I am convinced that twenty-first-century Christianity is so far afield from its original intent that it has ceased to be Christianity at all. How does the Christianity of today, in any of its various forms, remotely resemble the teachings of Jesus, the poor, itinerant do-gooder of first-century Palestine?

Part of the problem is that early in the history of the Christian church, the Christianity of Jesus was subjugated by the Christianity of Paul. The modern version of Christianity we see today is Paul’s version of it and not that of Jesus. It is doubtful, at least in my mind, that we can ever recover what Jesus wanted Christianity to be. We can’t even know if he wanted to start a new religion. Perhaps all he wanted was to reform Judaism.  We can’t appeal to the Bible because it has been corrupted by errors, corrections, additions, and outright fraudulent changes. At best, we might be able to peer within the pages of the Bible and get a general idea of who Jesus was and what he was all about. And we can do this regardless of whether we consider Jesus divine or not.

When I look at American Christianity, what do I see? I see power, hatred, and wealth. I see arrogance. I see religious machinery. I see everything but what I should see. Where is Jesus? Where are good works? Look at all the Republican candidates for president over the past two decades. Jesus lovers, the lot of them, all trying to see who has the biggest Evangelical dick. Their beliefs and policies would likely be condemned by the Jesus of Nazareth they purportedly worship. Millions of Christians considered voting for these men, thinking they were voting for God’s man. (Please see Why I Hate Jesus.) And that’s precisely what Evangelical voters did in 2016, electing “baby Christian” Donald Trump as president, and attempting to do it again in 2020. Eighty-two percent of voting white Evangelicals voted for Trump. By doing so, Evangelical Christians traded their souls for a bowl of pottage, choosing power and preferential treatment over morality, ethics, and decency.

It seems that most churches and pastors are focused on building a kingdom, not in Heaven, but here on earth. Why all the fancy, expensive buildings? Why all the programs designed to keep fat, lazy sheep fed and happy? Why does most church income go to maintain buildings, pay staff, and provide programs for people who are already Christians? What happened to outreach to the “least of these?” Where can I find a church where the poor, sick, homeless, and dying are given preferential treatment? If Jesus were alive today, do we really think he would go to an American Evangelical church? I don’t.

Even though I don’t believe in the Christian God — nor do I think the Bible is divine truth — I could see myself going to a church that took seriously the teachings of the man named Jesus. (And yes, I am aware that some of his teachings are contemptible.) I still have a heart filled with compassion for the poor, sick, and marginalized, and I suspect many of the readers of this blog do too. As atheists and agnostics, we don’t have many meaningful opportunities or outreaches to help others. Imagine the help we could lend to churches focused on helping others instead of building kingdoms in this life.

I wonder if there is any room in the world for itinerant atheist preachers? While I couldn’t preach the Christian gospel of salvation in Jesus Christ, I could preach a humanist gospel, a gospel that says salvation is found in the goodwill, mercy, and compassion we have for others. I could point to the teachings of Jesus, Buddha, and Bruce Almighty and show how the relevant parts of their teachings can help make us better human beings.

My hatred is reserved for any religion that is focused on power and wealth, and not people. For the most part, I despise Evangelical Christianity. To Evangelicals, words in a book are more important than loving their neighbors and helping the poor, the hungry, widows, orphans, prisoners, and the homeless. They prefer the narrowness of their religion to the wideness of human love, mercy, and compassion. They would rather concern themselves with abortion, same-sex marriage, immigration, gun rights, combatting socialism, refuting global warming, evolution, and getting Republicans elected, than trying to make a real difference in the lives of the “least of these.” Thinking evangelizing someone is more important than feeding and clothing them (better to go to Heaven with an empty belly, than Hell with a full one, the thinking goes), Evangelicals are viewed by non-Christians in the same light as door-knocking Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and siding salesmen.

My beef is not with God because I don’t think there is a God. My beef is not with Christians who are serious about loving and helping others. My disdain, and at times my anger, is reserved for those who have no regard for the plight of the poor and the sick, who only care about building a kingdom here on earth. No matter how much they talk about the future kingdom of God, their actions betray their true ambitions.

If churches took the teachings of Jesus seriously, they would merge, sell off the excess real estate, and use the money to help the poor, sick, and disadvantaged. If churches took the teachings of Jesus seriously, they’d fire all the professional Christians, forcing them to get real jobs. In doing so, these professional Christians would be forced to reengage with a world they lost connection with once they became gatekeepers and waitstaff at the local Evangelical churches.

If churches took the teachings of Jesus seriously, they’d stop programs that are little more than crack for religious junkies. These addicts bounce from church to church, program to program, service to service, hoping to get a Jesus Fix®. They are narcissists who have forgotten that what really matters is loving their spouses, children, family, and neighbors. They’ve traded the church for their common, dirty connection with the world. Sheltered from sinners, they listen to sermons that remind them of how wonderful it is in the church and how bad it is out there.

I don’t hate God. My hatred is reserved for evil done in the name of God. (Please see the Black Collar Crime series.) My hatred is reserved for those who value theological fealty, fidelity, and conformity more than they do people. Such thinking caused the burning of people at the stake and the slaughter of countless heretics. Given a chance here in America, Evangelicals with theocratic impulses would enact and enforce a Christian version of Sharia law. I hate all who dare attempt the subjugation and control others in the name of their God. Thinking they are oracles who have THE truth, they demand everyone else bow to their truth. Willing to use violence and the power of the state to force others to embrace their God and Holy Book, they cause deep hatred and resentment. Thinking they are being hated for their beliefs, what they are really being hated for is their unwillingness to allow others to have the same freedoms they demand for themselves.

As I look at American Christianity, I search in vain for one good reason that I would/should become a Christian. Maybe there is a group somewhere that takes the teaching of the socialist Jesus seriously, but so far all I see is ice cream. Various flavors, but all ice cream. (Please see But, Our Church is DIFFERENT!)

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Should Every Possible Effort be Made to Preserve and Save Human Life?

Bruce Gerencser 9 Comments
calvin and hobbes death

Fundamentalist Christian Jeff Maples believes ALL life matters, and it should be protected at ALL costs. Here’s what Maples said on The Dissenter website in 2019:

Critics have argued that reimplanting a fetus from an ectopic pregnancy is a procedure “not known to medical science” and would place obstetricians and gynecologists in a dire situation for not performing an “impossible procedure.” However, the bill does not require doctors to be successful in the procedure, rather take all measures at attempting to do so. This would, in effect, advance the science behind the practice making it more likely to save lives in the future. When dealing with human life, it is imperative that all measures be taken to preserve it — an unborn child deserves no less than a two-year-old child or an adult. That’s the whole point of the measure.

I wonder if Maples really believes all life matters. I wonder if he is a pacifist or anti-capital punishment? I wonder if Maples opposed President Trump’s barbaric immigration policies; policies that led to the deaths of adults and children alike? Something tells me he is not as pro-life as he says he is. Most Evangelicals are schizophrenic when it comes to matters of life and death. Typically, Evangelicals, and their counterparts in the Roman Catholic church, only think all life matters before birth. After birth, humans are on their own. Well, that is until it comes time to die. Then Evangelicals show up to protest and criminalize end-of-life attempts to lessen suffering and pain. Humans must suffer to the bitter end. According to Evangelicals and Catholics, euthanasia is humans playing God, and that must never happen. In their eyes, physician-assisted suicide is murder.

Maples believes that every effort should be made to preserve life. No matter the cost or the outcome, life must be preserved. I am sure that Maples believes his anti-death viewpoint is noble. It’s not. Maples and others like him see no qualitative difference between a fertilized egg and a thirteen-year-old; no difference between a thirteen-week-old fetus and its mother; no difference between a teenager with a full life ahead of her and a ninety-year-old man who is nearing death. Such thinking, of course, is absurd.

I do my best to have a consistent life ethic. That said, all life is not equal, nor should every effort be made to preserve life. There is a qualitative difference between a fertilized egg and its mother. The fertilized egg represents potential life. It cannot live outside of the womb. That’s why I support the unrestricted right to an abortion until viability. Once a fetus is viable, then the mother and medical professionals must consider its interests along with that of the mother. When it comes to choosing between the fetus and the mother, the choice, to me anyway, is clear: the mother. Granted, if the mother is gravely ill with cancer or some other terminal disease, then consideration should be given to saving the fetus. Such decisions are never easy, but one thing is for certain: we don’t need Evangelicals and Catholics, their God, or Republican politicians deciding what should be done.

As someone who knows that he is on the short side of life, I don’t want the Jeff Maples of the world butting their noses into my end-of-life decisions or those of my family. I know how I want the end of my life to play out, as do my wife and children. I don’t want Christian Fundamentalists getting between me and my God. “Huh? Bruce, you don’t have a God.” Well, I do when it comes to this discussion. If Christians want to wallow in needless pain and suffering at the end of their lives — all so their mythical God will give them an “attaboy” — that’s fine by me. However, my triune God — humanism, science, and reason — doesn’t demand that I suffer unnecessarily; when it is my time to die it is okay for me to say, “No más.” I expect my doctors, Polly, and my six children to honor my wishes. I have seen far too many people endlessly and needlessly suffer, all so Jesus would be honored and their families would know that they fought to the end. I have watched countless dying people go through unnecessary, painful procedures and treatments, all so their spouses and children could rest easy knowing that every possible thing was done to preserve their life.

Sadly, many people ignorantly think that longevity of life is all that matters; that enduring surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiation is worth it if it adds a few weeks or months at the end of their lives. Evangelicals speak of being ready to meet God. They sing songs about Heaven and preach sermons that suggest True Christians® yearn and long for eternal life in the sweet by and by. Yet, when it comes time to die, they are in no hurry to catch the next train to Glory.

Instead of focusing on the longevity of life, the focus should be on the quality of life.  Sure, it is human nature to want to live as long as possible. But some things are worse than death. Often, the treatment is worse than a terminal disease. Personally, I would choose to live three months and then die, than to suffer the horrible side effects of end-of-life treatments that would often only add weeks or a few months to my life.

When it comes to dying, God is an unnecessary middleman. He and his Bible-sotted disciples get in the way of what is best for the sick and dying. Demanding that life be preserved at all costs only causes unnecessary pain and suffering. I know of Evangelical families who refused to let their dying loved ones die with dignity. You see, in their minds, all that matters is playing by God’s rules. All that matters is pleasing God. If their loved one has to suffer, so be it. God comes first. God mustn’t be offended, even if he prolongs the misery of the dying. Quite frankly, when it comes time for me to die, I don’t want religious zealots anywhere near me. I don’t need or want their prayers or admonitions. I want to be surrounded by my family. I want to hear them say, “Dad, it’s okay to let go.”

I have made my wishes known to my wife and children. Polly and I have spent a considerable amount of time talking about the various end-of-life scenarios; about what we want or don’t want to be done in the various circumstances we might face in the future. Both of us believe that quality of life is more important than extending life. We reject Jeff Maples’ notion that our lives should be preserved at all costs. We know that one day we will physically reach the end of the line. Hopefully, not anytime soon, but who knows (certainly not God), right? Better to have these discussions now than to have them under pressure or when one or both of us might not have the mental acuity to make rational choices.

I have specifically made plans to end my life when the quality of my life is such that I no longer want to live. I have talked to my counselor extensively about this. She is aware of my end-of-life plan. Of course, she encourages me to live, but she always knows that I am in decline physically; that it’s becoming harder for me to rise above my physical challenges. Most days, I am not suicidal, but I am acutely aware of what is happening to me physically. No cure or magical procedure is on the horizon, so I am “content” to face the limitations of mortality.

Not talking about death is not an option. Pretending we will live forever only leads to heartache when the lie is exposed. The moment we are born, we begin marching toward the finish line. While I would love to live to threescore and ten or fourscore, (Psalm 90:10) I know that’s unlikely. Probabilities come into play. All the positive thinking in the world won’t change the odds. I am grateful to have lived longer than my mom and dad. But it would be foolish of me to ignore the realities staring me in the face. Pretending that I am going to live to be a hundred helps whom, exactly?  The Bible is right when it says, “Boast not thyself of to morrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth.” (Proverbs 27:1) Solomon was spot on when he wrote:

Then I commended mirth, because a man hath no better thing under the sun, than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry: for that shall abide with him of his labour the days of his life, which God giveth him under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 8:15)

I give the following advice on the ABOUT page:

You have one life. There is no heaven or hell. There is no afterlife. You have one life, it’s yours, and what you do with it is what matters most. Love and forgive those who matter to you and ignore those who add nothing to your life. Life is too short to spend time trying to make nice with those who will never make nice with you. Determine who are the people in your life that matter and give your time and devotion to them. Live each and every day to its fullest. You never know when death might come calling. Don’t waste time trying to be a jack of all trades, master of none. Find one or two things you like to do and do them well. Too many people spend way too much time doing things they will never be good at.

Here’s the conclusion of the matter. It’s your life and you best get to living it. Someday, sooner than you think, it will be over. Don’t let your dying days be ones of regret over what might have been.

Do you think life should be preserved at all costs; that every effort should be made to preserve life? How do you come to terms with your mortality? Do you prefer longevity of life over quality of life? Please share your astute thoughts in the comment section. If you are so inclined, please share approximately how old you are. I am interested in how age affects our end-of-life viewpoints.

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

The Evangelical War on Books, Movies, and American Culture

Bruce Gerencser 7 Comments
banned books
Cartoon by Joe O’Mahoney

Who would have thought that banning books, defunding libraries, and closing them would be front-page news in 2023? Yet, here we are. Library books are under assault, primarily by Evangelical Christians. Once again, the media refuses to “see” that religion is what is motivating the war on books, particularly Evangelical Christianity; the same religion behind Trumpism, the January 6 insurrection, the reversal of Roe v. Wade, and the frontal assault on LGBTQ people. I am not suggesting that Evangelicals are the ONLY religious people behind the present culture war — conservative Catholics. Mormons, and a smattering of people from other groups play a part too — but without the support of Evangelicals, the culture wars die overnight.

I am sixty-six years old. I was part of the Evangelical church for fifty years, both as a member and a pastor. In 2008, I left Christianity, but I have continued to follow closely the machinations of Evangelicalism. For all of my adult life, Evangelicals have been waging a war against secularism, people who are different from them, and violators of their peculiar interpretations of the Bible’s moral code.

Evangelicalism is a fear-based religion. Taught to fear God, Evangelicals also fear anyone who is different from them socially or politically. Not known for their support of tolerance and diversity, Evangelicals want to live in a monoculture; one where everyone is a Christian who thinks and believes as they do. In recent years, some Evangelicals have been very clear about their objective: the establishment of a Christian theocracy; one where Jesus and the Bible (as interpreted by them) rule supreme.

Here in the United States, there was a time when Evangelicalism was a dominant force, both politically and socially. Those days are gone. Evangelical church attendance is in decline, and younger adults are exiting stage left in droves. Paranoia and fear are in the air, and instead of taking a hard look at themselves, Evangelicals blame American culture; especially mass media, public schools, secularism, atheism, humanism, liberals, progressives, Democrats, LGBTQ people, and anyone and anything else that doesn’t comport with their worldview. Of course, this behavior is not unusual for Evangelicals. Known for blaming the Devil for all sorts of things, Evangelicals are experts at pointing fingers and judging people they disagree with. That’s why many of the readers of this blog who have Evangelical backgrounds are estranged from their Evangelical parents and families. Their loved ones refuse to accept them as they are; refuse to play nice with anyone who doesn’t believe exactly as they do.

book banning 2
Cartoon by Grant Snider

American culture is changing. Secularism, humanism, atheism, and indifference toward organized religion are on the rise. Evangelicals feel threatened by the unwashed, uncircumcised Philistines of the world. In their minds, the Huns are at the gate. Never mind the fact that the Philistines and Huns just want to be left alone. They want the freedom to fuck whomever they want as long as it is a consenting adult relationship. They want the freedom to read what they want, watch what they want, and buy what they want. They want the freedom to marry whomever they want and seek out reproductive care. Simply put, they want Evangelicals to fuck off and leave them alone.

Of course, Evangelicals cannot and will not do that, and that is why they are trying to ban library books they consider “inappropriate” — mainly books which are LGBTQ-friendly, critical of Christianity, or which portray Whites in a less than flattering light. Evangelicals don’t want people to have the freedom to read ANY book that offends their sensibilities. We see similar behavior from Evangelicals when it comes to television programming. Evangelicals are determined to become the arbiters of what all of us can read and see. Instead of not checking out certain books or changing the channel, Evangelicals expect all of us to obey their interpretations of the Bible — even though they don’t do so themselves.

I am sure some of my critics will say, “Bruce, you were an IFB preacher. You homeschooled your six children. I bet you controlled what books they could read!” Welp, I hate to disappoint you, but Polly and I allowed our children to read whatever they wanted. Five of our children learned to read at an early age, and by the time they were in sixth grade, they were getting books from the adult part of the library. I remember one librarian quizzing me about our children perusing the adult sections of the library. She thought they should be reading “age-appropriate” books. I explained to her that our children were advanced readers, and they had our permission to check out whatever they wanted. It was not uncommon to see our children coming home with 12-15 library books at a time. Remember, we didn’t have a TV for twenty years. Did we look at the books they brought home? Sure. Were there a couple of occasions when we said one of them couldn’t read a certain book? Sure. Outside of that, our children were free to read to their heart’s content. (I am delighted to see these same reading habits in most of my grandchildren today.)

banned books 3
Cartoon by Bill Barnes and Gene Ambaum

Books are not the problem; fear and closedmindedness are. Religious Fundamentalists fear the “world.” They are afraid if their children are exposed to the real world, that they might start to have questions and doubts about Mom and Dad’s Christian worldview. That’s why so many Evangelical parents either homeschool their children or send them to private Christian schools. Most Evangelicals aren’t countercultural, as Jesus was, they are anti-culture. That’s why they are waging war against American culture, one book and one movie at a time. Their goal is to return the United States to the “good” old days of the 1950s; a time when heterosexual married women were barefoot and pregnant, keepers of the home, and on-demand sex machines; a time when LGBTQ people were closeted; a time when Blacks knew their place; a time when most families went to church on Sundays and showed, at least, outward respect for the Christian God and the Bible; a time when abortion and birth control were illegal; a time when stores were closed on Sundays and Wednesday nights; a time when public school teachers read the Bible to students and led them in prayer; a time when churches, preachers, and the Bible were respected by even unbelievers.

Evangelicals are free to party as if it’s 1953. Have at it. People are free to live any way they want, as long as doing so is legal and doesn’t infringe on the rights of others. Most Americans want to party as if it is 2023. Evangelicals are free to retreat to their houses of faith and the privacy of their homes; free to live their lives according to the dictates of the Bible. However, the rest of us demand the same freedoms to do otherwise. And when you try to turn the United States into a theocratic state, we will push back. When you try to institutionalize hate, bigotry, misogyny, and homophobia, we will use the ballot box to fight back.

I don’t know how many years I have left; probably not many. My body tells me every day that time is running out. While some of the present Evangelical assaults on freedom and democracy seem overwhelming — looking at you Ohio, Texas, and Florida — we must not give in or give up. Evangelicalism has a demographic problem. Their core is aging, and as they die off, these Evangelical culture warriors are not being replaced. We must continue to fight and push back, even when it seems there is no hope. We must have the future of our children and grandchildren in front of us. They deserve a better tomorrow, one not dominated and controlled by religious Fundamentalism.

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Is it Really “Stunning” That a Majority of Americans Believe Jesus Resurrected from the Dead?

Bruce Gerencser 4 Comments
resurrection of jesus

A recent headline on Charisma News said, “Stunning Proportion of Americans Believe Bible Accounts of Jesus’ Resurrection Accurate.” According to a recent Lifeway survey:

Two-thirds of U.S. adults (66%) say the biblical accounts of the physical resurrection of Jesus are completely accurate. They believe this event actually occurred, according to the 2022 State of Theology study. Fewer than a quarter (23%) disagree, and 11% say they’re not sure.

The percentage that affirms the bodily resurrection of Jesus as described in the Bible is unchanged since 2018 and within two percentage points of where it has been since the first State of Theology in 2014.

Jesus’ Easter resurrection is more accepted in the Midwest (70%) and South (70%). But majorities in both the West (62%) and Northeast (60%) also affirm it.

Younger Americans are the least likely age group to say they believe in a historical resurrection. Still, 58% of those 18-34 accept it as fact.

Self-identified evangelicals (90%) and Black Protestants (89%) are more likely to affirm Jesus’ resurrection than Catholics (79%) and mainline Protestants (74%).

Are these results “stunning,” as Charisma News alleges? Of course not. Sixty-three percent of Americans self-identify as Christian, whereas only thirty-one percent of the world does. Americans are twice as likely to be Christian as the rest of the world. In some parts of the United States — particularly rural and southern America — non-Christians are few and far in between. In fact, in some regions, it is social and economic suicide to not at least give the appearance that you worship the risen Jesus.

While the United States is a secular state, practically speaking we are a Christian nation. Almost ninety percent of congresspeople self-identify as Christians. I am sixty-six years old. Dwight Eisenhower was president when I was born, and Joe Biden is president today. Between the two, Republican and Democratic presidents have come and gone. Yet, all of them have one thing in common: they professed to be Christians.

Christian churches dot street corners and rural roads in America. I live in rural northwest Ohio. I have spent most of my life living in rural Ohio communities; communities dominated by Christianity. If I were inclined to attend church — and I am not — I have the choice of over three hundred Christian churches within thirty or so minutes from my home. Whatever your desired flavor of Christianity, there’s a church sure to meet your needs.

Thus, it is not “stunning” that Americans believe a crucified man named Jesus resurrected from the dead. As Charisma News — the master clickbaiters that they are — often does, they distorted Lifeway’s study to give a false impression of American beliefs. Desperate to counter the increasing secularizing of the United States and the rapid rise of the NONES, Charisma News is willing to lie to paint a false picture of American religious beliefs.

Sure, two-thirds of Americans believe the Biblical accounts of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead are completely accurate. What Charisma News fails to tell their overwhelmingly Evangelical readers is this:

Most Americans believe Jesus rose from the dead on the first Easter Sunday. They’re just not sure it matters much.

….

Despite accepting the biblical accounts of Jesus’ resurrection, many Americans have conflicting thoughts about the Bible and seem to see little connection between Jesus rising again and their daily lives.

In 2022, for the first time in the history of the State of Theology study, a majority of Americans (53%) say the Bible, like all sacred writings, contains helpful accounts of ancient myths but is not literally true. And 40%, the highest percentage yet, say modern science disproves the Bible.

A growing percentage, up to a high of 32%, says God is unconcerned with their day-to-day decisions. And 3 in 5 (60%) say religious belief is a matter of personal opinion, not objective truth.

Lifeway’s study revealed that ninety percent of American Evangelicals believe Jesus resurrected from the dead, just as recorded in the Bible. However, previous studies have also shown that Evangelicals really don’t know their Bibles very well; that many Evangelicals are an inch deep and a mile wide when it comes to what the Bible actually teaches. Quiz Evangelicals on what the Bible actually says about the resurrection of Jesus and its theological implications, many Evangelicals will hem and haw before confidently saying, with a wave of their hands, “I know what I know, there’s no doubt about it, Jesus died for me on the cross of Calvary and resurrected from the dead three days later. Praise God!”

Here is what is stunning. The resurrection of Jesus is central to Christianity. Not the cross, the resurrection. Jesus’ execution was quite human. His resurrection, however, was a supernatural event. Over one hundred billion people have come and gone on planet Earth, and they all have one thing in common: they are all d-e-a-d. While the Bible records other resurrections, these raised from the dead people ultimately died a second time. Only Jesus, according to orthodox Christian beliefs, died, resurrected from the dead, and remains alive to this very day. Yet, how many Christians can defend the resurrection from challenges by atheists, agnostics, and other unbelievers?

Evangelicals, in particular, believe the Protestant Christian Bible is supernaturally inspired (written) by God and is inerrant and infallible. When challenging what Evangelicals believe about Jesus’ death and resurrection from the dead, I have found it effective to first challenge the notion that the Bible is without error. If you can get them to question — yea, hath God said — the supernatural nature of the Bible, this could cause them to question and doubt other sincerely held beliefs. Asking them to reconcile the numerous discrepancies and contradictions in the Bible’s resurrection accounts can and does force some believers to wrestle with what it is they really believe. Remember, most Evangelicals are not students of the Bible. Many Evangelicals are infrequent readers, and few of them read the Bible from cover to cover. According to a Pew Research study, forty percent of Evangelicals rarely, if ever, read the Bible. The idea that Evangelicals are walking-talking dispensers of Bible knowledge isn’t true. According to another Pew study, Jews, atheists, and agnostics know more about religion in general than Evangelicals. When asked specific questions about Christianity, Evangelicals and atheists were equal in the percentage of correct answers given. Think about all the sermons Evangelicals hear week after week, month after month, year after year. Think of all the affordable books and Bible study tools at their disposal. Yet, despite a wealth of Bible instruction and knowledge at the tip of their fingers, Evangelicals largely know very little about what the Bible actually teaches. If Jesus is all that Evangelicals say he is, and Christianity is the one true faith, and all others are false, why are they so dispassionate towards the Bible and its teachings? Why do Evangelicals, to put it bluntly, not give a shit about what the Bible teaches? Why are they content to simply believe what they are told to believe, without ever intellectually, rationally, and skeptically investigating their beliefs? If there is only one life that will soon be past, and only what’s done for Christ will last; if this life is preparation to meet the Christian God face to face; if Heaven and Hell are real, death is certain, and judgment awaits, why are Evangelicals so lackadaisical toward the Bible — a book that is supposedly God’s blueprint for life?

All of these things are stunning; but the fact that ninety percent of Evangelicals believe that Jesus (God) killed himself on a Roman cross, spent a couple of nights hanging out in the bowels of the earth, and then miraculously brought himself back to life? That’s just Evangelicalism 101. Such beliefs are irrational and nonsensical, but when faith is the foundation of your beliefs, anything is literally possible.

If you have Evangelical family and friends and want to help them see the light, I suggest you buy one or more of the books written by New Testament scholar Dr. Bart Ehrman. His books are deadly frontal assaults on Evangelical beliefs about the nature and history of the Bible. While one can maintain their Christian faith after reading Dr. Ehrman, it is impossible to hang on to the notion that the Bible is inerrant and infallible. Challenging Evangelical beliefs about the Bible is the first step in leading believers away from a form of Christianity that is psychologically, and, at times, physically, harmful.

If you are interested in challenges to the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, my friend Gary’s blog, Escaping Christian Fundamentalism, is a good resource. Gary grew up in an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist home, and later became a conservative Lutheran.

Gary describes his deconversion this way:

I was very happy as a conservative (confessional) Lutheran.  It is a beautiful liturgical Church.  In this branch of Christianity, my eternal salvation is based on GOD’S act of justification in Holy Baptism, not on my good works, nor on my possession of adequate faith and repentance in an evangelical born again experience.  The doctrines and teachings of the Lutheran Confessions seemed to me to correctly interpret the Bible.

Then one fateful day as I was surfing the internet, I came across the blog of an ex-fundamentalist Baptist pastor turned atheist [that would be Bruce Gerencser].  I was horrified to read his blasphemy against my Lord and Savior.  I took it upon myself to bring this “back-slidden sinner” back to Jesus Christ.  I believed that if I just exposed him to TRUE Christianity (confessional Lutheranism), he would see the light and return to Christianity.  How wrong I was!  Four months later it was I who had seen the “light”…

…I had become an agnostic.

What did this former pastor/turned atheist say that convinced me that my cherished, beloved Christian faith was false?  Well, to put it simply, he told me to read the books of former evangelical Christian turned agnostic, New Testament scholar, Bart Ehrman, starting with “Misquoting Jesus”.

If you have questions regarding your Christian faith, I would encourage you to read Ehrman’s books.  From there, read this blog and the blogs of other skeptics, atheists, and agnostics; interact with former Christians who have been through the same struggles that you are now experiencing.

And I will give you this piece of advice:  If your faith is more important to you than knowing the truth, don’t read one more sentence of this blog or that of any other ex-Christian blog.  But if the truth—the real truth no matter how cold, ugly, and painful it may be—matters more to you than the comfort and security of your faith, step out of the Christian “bubble” and explore the criticisms of your Christian belief system.  Find out why there are so many ex-Christians, of all denominations, who believe that the Christian belief system is based primarily on assumptions, hearsay, superstitions, and wishful thinking.  There is scant evidence to support the fantastical supernatural claims of this ancient religion.

Gary has written a good bit on Jesus’ resurrection, often detailing interactions he has had with Christian apologists. His blog is a good source for the various arguments Evangelicals use for the resurrection and how they can easily be rebutted.

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Quote of the Day: Henotheism in Genesis 1 by John Loftus

Bruce Gerencser 4 Comments
quote of the day

By John Loftus, Debunking Christianity, Does God Exist? A Definitive Non-Philosophical Biblical Case

Note: For those unfamiliar with the term henotheism: henotheism is the worship of a single, supreme god that does not deny the existence or possible existence of other deities. (Wikipedia)

When we take the Bible seriously we discover a significant but unsuccessful cover-up about the gods we find in the Bible, who evolved over the centuries from polytheism to henotheism to monotheism.

Let’s look at Genesis 1. I’ll make 7 points about the first two verses, usually translated like this:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was without form and void, and darkness covered the surface of the abyss, and the Spirit of God was moving over the waters.

First, This is not describing the absolute beginning of time! The word “the” in verse one, “In the beginning” is not there.

Better Translations:

  • When God began to create the heavens and earth. (NRSV)
  • In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth. (New American Bible)

Second, Genesis is not describing a creation out of nothing! Instead, it’s describing the making of something from pre-existing matter.

This is stated well by a translators note in New English Translation (NET):

Genesis itself does not account for the original creation of matter. The ‘heavenly/sky’ did not exist prior to the second day of creation, and the ‘earth/dry land’ did not exist as we know it, prior to the third day.

Genesis 1 begins ominously. What exists is a formless empty earth, hidden beneath a darkened watery chaos.

Third, Genesis 1 is not describing the origin of heaven where the saints go when they die! It’s describing the origin of the “skies” above us.

Fourth, Nor is it describing the origin of the planet earth, since it hadn’t been discovered yet! It’s describing the origin of “dry land”.

Fifth, Nor does the “Spirit of God” move over the waters! The word used can be translated “spirit” or “breath” or “wind” because the ancients believed wind came from the breath of their gods. It’s best translated as “the wind of God”. We no longer attribute the wind, or hurricanes, to God’s Spirit or breath.

Sixth, Who was making the world in Genesis chapter one?

It was Elohim, a plural word for “gods”. Dr. Randall Heskett: “Elohim, even after monotheism, still includes the heavenly hosts, who are part of the divine council.” Heskett is an Old Testament and Hebrew scholar. This includes “the sons of god” (Job 38:7). Elohim says, “Let us make man in our image” (Genesis 1:26), which includes these celestial beings. More on Elohim directly below.

Seventh, The word “abyss” is misleading, since what is being described in Genesis 1:2 is not just vastly deep and darkened waters. It’s describing a primordial “chaos” which is being manipulated and maintained by mischievous chaos gods! More on chaos gods after we first look at Elohim.

So here is a better translation of Genesis 1:1-2:

Elohim made the skies and the dry land, beginning with land that was without form and void, with darkness covering the surface of the chaos, with the wind of Elohim moving over the waters.” The original grammar is a bit difficult to translate. If nothing else, consider this a slightly interpretative translation using corrected wording.

I could use the word “God” instead of Elohim since the verbs indicate a singular male God. (i.e., “God he said ‘Let there be Light…’”). It’s just that it’s more complicated than that. Dr. Heskett suggested “In the beginning, when the henotheistic god—who became a monotheistic god but kept his henotheistic name—created the heavens and earth.” He adds, “elohim is the resonance of henotheism, before the move to monotheism.”

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Short Stories: Sunday School Pins

Bruce Gerencser 10 Comments

Do you remember Sunday school pins at the churches you attended as a child? They were given out as attendance awards. Attend Sunday school for one year, get a pin, and then get a pin for every year after that. I have seen older church members with pins adverting thirty, forty, and fifty years of Sunday school attendance.

These pins were meant to be badges of honor; a sign that the wearer had dutifully attended Sunday school year after year. They were also meant to remind people that they had endured years of Sunday school lessons taught by unqualified teachers who often read from quarterlies instead of actually teaching them.

I taught Sunday school for years. I knew how bad adult classes could be, so I wanted to make sure that class members actually learned something and interacted with the lessons. At one Southern Baptist church I pastored in Clare, Michigan, the church had an adult Sunday school class teacher. Polly and I decided to attend the class. OMG, it was awful. I mean awful. Bad theology and interpretation. For example, the teacher said election means “we choose God.” Yepper, the Calvinist in me wanted to strangle him. I tried to gently correct him, but he took the “whatever it means to me” interpretive approach. Week after week class members would share what the Bible meant to them. Many of them had Sunday School pins going back decades. So much time invested in Biblical “truth,” so little knowledge and understanding.

Did you receive Sunday school pins (or buttons)? Do you have a Sunday school experience you would like to share? Comment away!

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Who is Bruce Gerencser and Other Questions According to ChatGPT?

Bruce Gerencser 4 Comments
chatgpt

I spent several hours on Sunday playing around with ChatGPT. I asked the AI several questions, and what follows are the responses it gave me. I am astounded by how accurate its responses were. My corrections of the AI are found in [ ].

Who is Bruce Gerencser?

Gerencser is a former Christian pastor and writer who is known for his blog “The Life and Times of Bruce Gerencser.” He was a pastor in the Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) denomination for many years before leaving the ministry and eventually becoming an atheist. [I didn’t remain in the Independent Fundamentalist Baptist church movement, leaving in the late 1980s, eighteen years before I deconverted.]

Gerencser’s blog explores a wide range of topics related to religion, including his own experiences as a pastor, his journey from faith to atheism, and his critiques of various religious beliefs and practices. He is also a vocal advocate for the separation of church and state, and frequently speaks out against the influence of religion in politics.

Gerencser’s writing has been featured in a number of publications, including The Washington Post, The Huffington Post, and Patheos. He has also published several books, including “I’m a Christian and I’m an Atheist: A Memoir of God and Social Justice” and “The Bible and the Closet: How I Lost My Faith and Found Myself.” [I have not published any books. I am quoted in numerous books.]

Who is Polly Gerencser?

Polly Gerencser is the wife of Bruce Gerencser. Like her husband, she was also a devout Christian and a member of the Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) denomination. However, she eventually left the church and became an atheist. [Polly didn’t remain in the IFB church movement either.]

Polly has written about her own experiences with Christianity and her journey away from it on her blog, “Leaving Fundamentalism.” She has been open about the emotional and psychological toll that leaving her faith has taken on her, including the loss of friendships and strained relationships with family members who remain devout believers. [Polly has written very little about her experiences. She sat for some questions years ago and is featured frequently and prominently in my story.]

Along with her husband Bruce, Polly has been a vocal advocate for the separation of church and state and a critic of the harmful aspects of fundamentalist Christianity. Together, they have written and spoken extensively about their experiences and their perspectives on religion and secularism.

Is Bruce Gerencser an Atheist?

Yes, Bruce Gerencser is an atheist. He was previously a Christian pastor and missionary, but he eventually left the ministry and renounced his Christian faith. Since then, he has been a vocal critic of Christianity and organized religion in general, and has written and spoken extensively about his experiences and his perspectives on religion and secularism.

In his writing and speaking, Gerencser has been open about the emotional and psychological toll that leaving his faith has taken on him, including the loss of friendships and strained relationships with family members who remain devout believers. However, he has also expressed a sense of liberation and a renewed commitment to living a life based on reason, evidence, and compassion.

Is Bruce Gerencser a Christian?

Bruce Gerencser is a former Christian pastor and writer who now identifies as an atheist. He has publicly stated that he no longer believes in the existence of God or the truth of Christian doctrine. Therefore, it would not be accurate to describe him as a Christian.

Is Bruce Gerencser a Conservative?

Bruce Gerencser was a conservative Christian for many years, and he served as a pastor in conservative churches for over 25 years. However, he has since undergone a significant change in his political and religious views, and he now describes himself as a progressive, liberal, and humanistic thinker.

Gerencser has been open about his evolution in thought, and he has written extensively about his journey from conservative Christianity to progressive humanism. He now advocates for a more inclusive, tolerant, and compassionate approach to religion and politics, and he is highly critical of many conservative and fundamentalist views and practices. Overall, while Gerencser has a background in conservatism, his current beliefs and values reflect a more progressive and liberal perspective.

Bruce Gerencser, Separation of Church and State

Bruce Gerencser is a strong advocate for the separation of church and state. He believes that the government should not favor or endorse any particular religious belief or practice, and that individuals should be free to practice their religion or hold no religious beliefs without interference or coercion from the government.

Gerencser has been critical of many conservative and fundamentalist Christians who seek to impose their religious beliefs on others through legislation or government action. He believes that such efforts are unconstitutional and violate the principles of religious freedom and equal protection under the law.

Gerencser has also been a vocal critic of public schools that promote religious beliefs or practices, arguing that such actions violate the separation of church and state and are unfair to students who do not share those beliefs. He supports a secular education system that is inclusive of all beliefs and backgrounds and does not favor any particular religion.

Overall, Gerencser believes that the separation of church and state is a fundamental principle of American democracy, and he works to promote and defend this principle through his writing and activism.

What Does Bruce Gerencser Think About Donald Trump?

Bruce Gerencser has been highly critical of Donald Trump, both during his presidential campaign and throughout his time in office. Gerencser is a progressive and liberal thinker who opposes many of Trump’s policies and views, and he believes that Trump’s presidency was detrimental to the United States and to the world.

Gerencser has been particularly critical of Trump’s rhetoric and behavior, which he believes are divisive, cruel, and unethical. He has also been critical of Trump’s policies on immigration, healthcare, the environment, and other issues, arguing that they prioritize the interests of the wealthy and powerful over the needs of ordinary people.

Gerencser has been a vocal advocate for political and social justice, and he believes that Trump’s presidency represented a setback for these values. However, he has also expressed hope that Trump’s defeat in the 2020 presidential election represents an opportunity for the United States to move forward and build a more inclusive, compassionate, and equitable society. Overall, Gerencser believes that Donald Trump’s presidency was a negative force in American politics and that his legacy will be one of division, corruption, and extremism.

Bruce Gerencser, Leaving Christianity Story

Bruce Gerencser is a former Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) pastor who left Christianity and became an atheist. He has shared his story of leaving Christianity on his blog and in other public forums.

Gerencser grew up in an IFB family and became a pastor himself, serving in various IFB churches for over 25 years. [I pastored four non-IFB churches.] However, over time, he began to question the teachings and practices of the IFB movement, particularly its strict rules and lack of accountability. He also became troubled by the prevalence of abuse and misconduct within the movement and the way these issues were often covered up or ignored by church leaders.

As Gerencser continued to explore his doubts and questions, he eventually came to the conclusion that he no longer believed in the existence of God or the truth claims of Christianity. He resigned from his position as pastor and publicly announced his deconversion on his blog in 2008. [I actually left the ministry in 2005, three years before I deconverted.]

Since then, Gerencser has become a vocal critic of the IFB movement and of Christianity more broadly. He has spoken out against the abuses and harms he believes are perpetuated by religion and has advocated for greater transparency and accountability within religious communities. He has also written about his own personal journey of leaving Christianity and the challenges and opportunities that come with this transition

Independent Fundamentalist Baptist Church Movement

The Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) church movement is a subset of Baptist Christianity that emphasizes the authority and inerrancy of the Bible, the need for personal conversion and salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, and separation from the world and from other Christians who do not share their beliefs and practices.

The IFB movement emerged in the mid-20th century as a reaction against what some perceived as the liberalization and compromise of mainstream Baptist denominations. IFB churches often have strict rules and standards of conduct for their members, including dress codes, prohibitions on secular entertainment and activities, and strong emphasis on evangelism and Bible study.

Critics of the IFB movement have raised concerns about its authoritarian leadership, lack of accountability, and the prevalence of abuse and misconduct within some IFB churches. In recent years, there have been several high-profile cases of abuse and cover-up within IFB churches, leading to increased scrutiny and calls for reform within the movement.

It is worth noting that not all Baptist churches or Christians identify as IFB, and that there is a wide diversity of beliefs and practices within the broader Baptist tradition.

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Evangelicals Love to Fuss and Fight While the World Goes to Hell

Bruce Gerencser 4 Comments
evangelical betrayal of jesus
Cartoon by Bob Englehart

Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity! (Psalm 133:1)

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. (John 15:34,35)

Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous: Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing. For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile: Let him eschew evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and ensue it. (1 Peter 3:8-11)

These Bible verses and others present a strong argument for unity and love being essential to Christian faith. The writer of 1 John makes it clear that anyone who does not love his brother is not a Christian. Several times in the New Testament, the Law and the Prophets are summed up thusly: love God and love your neighbor as yourself. In the Gospels, professing followers of Jesus are commanded to love even those who hate them. And speaking of unity, the writer of Proverbs 6 lists seven things God hates, one of which is “sowing discord among the brethren.”

Love and unity are essential to Christianity, yet rarely, if ever, demonstrated by Evangelicals. Instead, Evangelicals are known for fussing and fighting over everything from theology to music styles. Countless internecine wars have been fought over matters as trivial as hairstyles, wearing jewelry, women wearing pants, which Bible translation to use, whether to give altar calls, and how often churches hold services. No matter is too trivial for Evangelicals to fight over. One need only look at how many Evangelical sects there are and how fragmented individual churches are to see that Evangelicals never received the “Love and Unity” memo. And thanks to the Internet, the MMA machinations of Evangelicals are on display for all to see, complete with violent personal attacks on fellow Christians deemed heretics.

What’s heresy? In the Evangelical world, heresy is any belief different from mine. One need only watch Arminians and Calvinists go toe to toe over who has the “true” gospel. Each side casts the other as heretical, calling into question the opponent’s salvation. As a long-time Calvinist, I met numerous pastors who believed Arminianism was a false gospel, and anyone who believed it was unsaved! And now that Calvinism has made huge inroads within the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) and has infected numerous SBC colleges and seminaries, non-Calvinistic Baptists are saying that John Calvin’s progeny are preaching a false gospel. Some go even so far as to suggest that Calvinism leads to atheism!

Years ago, I pastored a church affiliated with the Christian Union (CU) denomination. In the early 1900s, CU suffered a schism over the doctrine of sanctification. This led to the establishment of a new denomination called the Churches of Christ in Christian Union. Both denominations have a strong, but aging/dying, presence in Ohio. As an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) pastor, I witnessed numerous conflicts and church splits. While virtually all Evangelicals are Fundamentalists theologically, (see Are Evangelicals Fundamentalists?) some sects, pastors, and churches take it to the extreme. Such is the case with the IFB church movement. The narrower beliefs become the more likely it is that there will be division. One oft-told joke about how the IFB church movement got its start comes from a story about Abram and Lot in Genesis 13:

And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the south . . . And Lot also, which went with Abram, had flocks, and herds, and tents. And the land was not able to bear them, that they might dwell together: for their substance was great, so that they could not dwell together. And there was a strife between the herdmen of Abram’s cattle and the herdmen of Lot’s cattle: and the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land. And Abram said unto Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we be brethren. Is not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left. And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where, before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar. Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan; and Lot journeyed east: and they separated themselves the one from the other.

Much like Abram (Abraham) and Lot, the IFB church movement came to be when they said to their former denominations or churches, you go your way and I’ll go mine. The IFB church movement was birthed from denominational battles over various points of Christian doctrine and practice. Scores of churches and pastors left denominations such as the Southern Baptist Convention and the American Baptist Convention, establishing their own fellowship groups or quasi-denominations. In the intervening seventy years, IFB churches and pastors have continued to squabble, fuss, and fight, resulting in a plethora of church splits and new, more “pure” groups. Each group believes they have the truth, and those who believe differently are either deemed heretics or heterodox brethren. This infighting is the main reason IFB churches tend to turn over their memberships every few years. The IFB churches I pastored had a steady stream of members from other churches visiting our services — church hoppers, I called them. These devoted followers of Christ were disgruntled or upset with their current churches, so they left, looking for greener pastures. One church I pastored took in over twenty-five members from one nearby IFB church. They loved my preaching, that is until they didn’t, and off they went to find a new church to attend. Many of them returned to their old church once the offending pastor left. Some of them were instrumental in starting new IFB or Bible Fellowship churches in the area.

I follow and read numerous Evangelical blogs and news sites. One thing is certain: Evangelicals continue to fuss and fight, not only with liberal/progressive Christians, mainline denominations, but amongst themselves. Proverbial blood runs in the streets, a never-ending stream thanks to perceived offenses and heresies. The last thirty-five years have given rise to what is called “discernment ministry.” These ministries believe God has called them to be gatekeepers or monitors of the Book of Life. They alone know what “truth” is, and they aren’t shy about calling out anyone and everyone who violates their standard of orthodoxy. Long-time readers — all the way back to 2007-2008 when I was still a Christian — might remember a previous iteration of this blog attracting the attention of “discernment” preachers such as the late Ken Silva and a man who called himself Pastor Boy (he is now divorced and no longer in the ministry). (Please see the post, Rob Bell and Homosexuals on Silva’s “discernment” blog. I was still a Christian when Silva and I got into a debate about homosexuality.) I was working my way through what it was that I actually believed theologically, and these esteemed discerners of “truth,” and others like them, decided that I was a false prophet and a heretic. My later deconversion was proof to them that they were right about me; that I never was a True Christian®.

It seems to me that there is a huge disconnect between what the Bible says about love and unity and how Evangelicals practice their faith. Evangelicals are roundly condemned as preachers of hate, even more so since they climbed into bed with the Republican Party and Donald Trump. Millennials and Generation Z are leaving Evangelical churches in record numbers. Many of them are abandoning organized religion altogether, and an increasing number of them have become agnostics or atheists. Why are Evangelical churches hemorrhaging young adults? Separatism and anti-culturalism, along with social Fundamentalism — anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQ, anti-public schools, anti-science, and anti-women, to name a few — are driving the train as it leaves the station. Evangelicalism is losing two generations of potential congregants, leading to widespread panic among church leaders and church growth gurus. Of course, Evangelical extremists see such departures as a good thing; that doctrinal purity is far more important than love and unity. Quality rather than quantity, they say. We need to love what God loves and hate what God hates! Of course, the beliefs and practices they love and hate are, oh so ironically, the very things they say their God loves and hates.

I am well aware of what the Bible does and doesn’t say on these issues. I long ago concluded that the Bible can be used to prove anything and that when asked which sect has the “truth,” I reply, all of them. They all have proof texts to support their versions of orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Thus, everyone is right. Here’s my advice to Evangelical truth seekers.  Want to find the “true” church? Choose the one which has the best potlucks.

Christianity in general, and Evangelicalism in particular, is split into thousands of sects, and countless independent congregations, each believing that they are the holders of the one true faith. Lost on Protestants and Catholics and Evangelicals and Mainline Christians alike is what their fussing and fighting says to the unwashed, uncircumcised Philistines of the world. Where’s the love and unity? worldlings ask. Where are the believers who practice what the Bible says about love in 1 Corinthians 13?

What if I could speak all languages of humans and of angels? If I did not love others, I would be nothing more than a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. What if I could prophesy and understand all secrets and all knowledge? And what if I had faith that moved mountains? I would be nothing, unless I loved others. What if I gave away all that I owned and let myself be burned alive? I would gain nothing, unless I loved others. Love is kind and patient, never jealous, boastful, proud, or rude. Love isn’t selfish or quick tempered. It doesn’t keep a record of wrongs that others do. Love rejoices in the truth, but not in evil. Love is always supportive, loyal, hopeful, and trusting. Love never fails! (CEV)

Where, oh where, can we find such faith? Not among Evangelicals, that’s for sure. I am an atheist for many reasons, one of which is the lack of love and unity among Christians. If I looked at Christianity as a whole and saw people loving God and loving their neighbors, I perhaps would pause and reconsider the value of being a follower of Jesus. If I saw a group united in doctrine and practice, I might, at the very least, ponder the historic claims of Christianity. However, all I see is the fussing and fighting, and this tells me that whatever Christianity might have been twenty centuries ago, THAT version of Christianity no longer exists. What we have today is a religious version of WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment). While it is unlikely that anything or anyone will successfully “save” me from atheism/agnosticism/humanism, if I truly saw love and unity in action, I might, at the very least, admire those who follow after Jesus. Until then, I will continue to treat Evangelicalism as a blight on the human race, a worldview that causes great harm. Want to change my opinion of you, Evangelicals? Repent.

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Just Remember, Evangelicals Always Have an Agenda

Bruce Gerencser 8 Comments
fake friends

Evangelicals talk a lot about loving their neighbors and doing good to others. Pastors and parachurch leaders encourage Evangelicals to befriend their neighbors, workmates, and anyone and everyone they come in contact with. Sounds like a good idea, right? I am all for kindness and compassion toward others. I am all for doing good and loving my fellow humans (and dogs, cats, possums, squirrels, and raccoons). We only get one trip through this thing we call life, so why not be a good person, help others, and make the world a better place to live? The problem when it comes to Evangelicals doing these things is that they almost always have an agenda. Lurking behind practically every act of kindness lies an ulterior motive. That’s not to say that non-Evangelicals, including atheists and agnostics, don’t do the same, but Evangelicals have turned subterfuge into an art form.

Every year, thousands of American Evangelical churches have what is called Friendship Day (or Friend’s Day). Held on a Sunday, Friendship Day is an evangelistic effort meant to inspire Evangelicals to befriend their neighbors and invite them to church. The goal is not to meet new friends, but to evangelize people who have been labeled as “lost.” Congregants are encouraged to scope out their neighborhoods and workplaces, looking for people who need to be born again. Once targeted, church members are asked to invite these sinners to the Friendship Day service. Unwary “lost” people will be told that the church is having a special day just for them, complete with food and entertainment. What they won’t be told is that while they are there, the pastor of that church will preach AT them about their need for salvation. You see, the offer of friendship isn’t genuine. Evangelicals, according to their interpretation of the inspired, inerrant, infallible Protestant Bible, believe they are commanded by God to distance themselves from the “world.” James 4:4 says:

Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

Befriending the unwashed, uncircumcised Philistines of the world for friendship’s sake is a sin. Christians are commanded to not be yoked together with unbelievers.

Evangelistic endeavors such as Friendship Day have one goal in mind: evangelizing non-Evangelicals. And once someone is successfully won to Christ, the next step is to incorporate them into the Borg collective, also known as the church membership; and once made part of church, they will be taught that the God who saved them expects them to attend church on Sundays, daily read the Bible and pray, and donate a portion of their income to “the church that loved them enough to tell them about J-E-S-U-S.”

You see, the goal was never for Evangelicals to be friends with non-Christians. In their minds, Jesus and his gospel are so important that it is okay to act deceitfully towards their neighbors. If, through outreaches such as Friendship Day, souls are saved, what’s a little deception among friends, right? The end justifies the means.

Several years ago, The Gospel Coalition published an article by Christy Britton titled 3 Ways to Show Up—and Speak Up—to the Lost.  Here’s an excerpt:

When Christians fail to show up, those around us remain unreached. Complacency is a sickness that keeps us from loving our neighbors. In fact, we misrepresent the gospel when we fail to bring it to our unbelieving neighbors. This proves our lack of love for them, our lack of gratitude for our own salvation, our underestimation of its primacy in our lives, and our rejection of God’s call to go.

But Christ’s love is the antidote to complacency, and it compels us to go to the lost. Jesus spent his life among the needy, and that’s where he sends us (John 17:18). We shine his light in the darkness. We speak up where the truth is silenced. We welcome when the world abandons.

….

We think strategically about how we can live out our mission to make disciples of the nations (Matt. 28:19). The global refugee crisis has, in many cities in both the United States and across the world, brought the nations to our neighborhoods. They’re coming to us. We have an unprecedented opportunity to show up.

My local church, Imago Dei Raleigh, cares for refugees who live in an apartment complex in our city. We seek to build friendships as these families transition to life in Raleigh. Recently we facilitated a vacation Bible school inside the complex. The gospel was shared with the children and their parents through Arabic and Burmese translators. My boys played soccer with new friends who speak multiple languages and have multiple skin tones.

I also met a Syrian woman with her four children. She lives in isolation, because she speaks little English. One tangible way I can love her is to help her practice conversational English. We exchanged phone numbers so that we can make plans to visit together. I’m committing to show up—not to exegete Romans, but to love her by helping her to learn English. Hopefully, as we become friends, I’ll have the opportunity to share Christ with her.

God orchestrates the placement of his people for his purposes. Our presence in our neighbors’ lives creates space for us to share the gospel. Engage your relational networks with gospel intentionality. Who’s better equipped to reach your neighbor than you are?

We’re not bound by one playbook for how to reach our neighbors. Be creative! For example, my friend hosts a neighborhood book club. Ladies come to her house to spend time with their friends as they discuss the latest bestseller.

Over time, as they get to know each other better, the group begins to see the genuineness of my friend’s affection for them and her love for God. They see gospel fruit displayed in and through her life. Planting a church presents opportunities to think creatively about reaching the lost. It forces us to ask questions that push us to create new spaces for people to encounter Christ.

….

We don’t show up to invest in the lives of others because we’re “do-gooders” or “super Christians.” We invest in people for their good and God’s glory. As churches are planted across the globe, God’s kingdom advances, and God’s fame is magnified.

Britton succinctly illustrates what I call agenda-driven evangelism. She makes it clear that the motive for Evangelicals engaging non-Christians is not to be “do-gooders,” but to give them what they need — Jesus. Never mind what non-Christians might really need physically, emotionally, financially, or socially. These things are but red meat waved in front of hungry lions; distractions meant to soften unbelievers up for evangelization. The agenda, as Britton makes clear, is to evangelize the lost.

lets be friends

Over the past decade, I have had numerous Evangelical pastors, evangelists, college presidents, and Holy Spirit-led laypeople attempt to befriend me. (Two people just today.) They have offered me breakfast, lunch, dinner, coffee, and/or beer (but no sex). Some of them have even sent me generous donations through PayPal. In every instance, these friendly Evangelicals had an agenda: to win me back to Jesus. They weren’t interested in me as a person. All these evangelizers saw was a man in need of saving; and if they could win the former Evangelical-preacher-turned-atheist Bruce Gerencser back to Jesus, why, they could then put another notch on the wooden grip of their gospel revolver. These deceivers never wanted to be friends with me. Their goal was evangelization, not friendship. One preacher swore up and down that he just wanted to be friends with me. After repeatedly saying his motives were pure, I said, fine. Let’s meet for dinner at the strip club in Fort Wayne. Just two guys out on the town, right? Of course, he declined my invitation. I suspect he knew that semi-nude women dancing near us might negate his attempt to evangelize me. Jesus can’t compete with naked women. 🙂

I have no problem befriending Christians, even Evangelicals. I have plenty of things in common with Evangelicals: family, grandchildren, sports, good food, to name a few. If a prospective Evangelical friend is willing to not speak of Jesus/Christianity unless I ask them to do so — and I will do the same with my atheistic beliefs — then we can be friends. I want to be left alone. I know almost all there is to know about Jesus/Christianity/the Bible. I am a godless heathen by choice. I have weighed Christianity in the balance and found it wanting. If an Evangelical is willing to let me go to Hell in peace, then maybe, just maybe, we can be friends. Unfortunately, Evangelical zealots have a pathological need to talk about Jesus; to share the “good” news; to evangelize anyone and everyone deemed unsaved. This need to proselytize keeps Evangelicals from being friends with people just for friendship’s sake.

I want friends who love and accept me as I am. I want friends who can revel in the things we have in common and ignore the things we don’t. I want friends who see me as a good person; as a man who loves his family, neighbors, and friends. That’s why Evangelicals can’t really be friends with me “as I am.” The Bible tells them that I am broken; an enemy of God; a man whose father is Satan. Ponder all the atrocious things the Bible says about non-Christians. Why would I want to be friends with someone who thinks I am fundamentally a bad person; a man whose behavior warrants eternal punishment in Hell? No thanks.

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

I Attended a Segregation Academy

Bruce Gerencser 3 Comments
guest post

Guest Post by MJ Lisbeth

Last week, the Archdiocese of New York announced that twelve Catholic schools in its domain—which includes three New York City boroughs and seven suburban counties to the north—will close at the end of this school year.

That does not surprise me. The Catholic school I attended, in the neighboring Diocese of Brooklyn, closed in 2004. Three years ago, two dozen schools in the Diocese shut their doors forever. Today, there are roughly half as many Catholic schools and Catholic school pupils as there were in the mid-1960s, when both counts reached their peaks in New York and the United States.

Diocesan leaders and students of such trends cite several factors, which were accelerated by the COVID epidemic and sex abuse revelations. One is cost. When I entered Catholic school, right around the aforementioned peak, a parent, usually the father, could work a few hours’ overtime, or the other parent, usually the mother, could take on part-time work to pay their kids’ tuition. (Notice that I used the plural for children. It was not unusual to find multiple siblings in the same school, or even the same classroom.)  Although Catholic schools still aren’t nearly as pricey as secular private schools, today a working- or middle-class parent’s entire salary could go to the cost of sending one child to a Catholic school.

Another factor blamed for the decline in the number of Catholic schools and their enrollments is the changing demographics of their mostly-urban locations. The closure of my old school is practically a “poster child” of this trend. When I was growing up, my neighborhood was overwhelmingly Catholic with a small, mostly secular, Jewish minority. Today nearly all of the Catholics are gone; now my old neighborhood is part of the largest Hasidic Jewish communities in the United States. 

While it is true that nearly every New York City—and urban American—neighborhood has changed its racial and ethnic composition since the 1960s, many people who moved into those neighborhoods are also Catholic. I am thinking in particular, of course, of Hispanics, but in neighborhoods like Brooklyn’s Crown Heights and East Flatbush, there are large communities of Haitian, Jamaican, and African Catholics. Having come to know some, I can safely say that many are at least as devout—and would want a Catholic education for their children as much– as parents of my community.

Of course, one reason why they don’t enroll their children is the aforementioned cost. While some immigrants are, or become, middle-class professionals, others are working multiple menial jobs just to keep a roof over their heads and food in their kids’ mouths. And it must be said that some who could afford to pay the tuition don’t see the point of doing so when, in contrast to the nuns who taught me and my old schoolmates, most of today’s Catholic school teachers are secular, just like the ones who teach in public school. “How Catholic is their education?” an acquaintance of mine wondered about her grandchildren whose single mother, from what I could tell, could afford the tuition only because of the child support payments and a couple of side jobs that augmented her main salary.

There is, however, a related story that no official in the Archdiocese of New York, or anywhere else in the Church, is mentioning. Most of the Catholic school kids of my generation, while working- or lower middle-class, were White. During the 1960s and ‘70s, many of their families moved. One reason is that they needed larger quarters for their growing families — it wasn’t called the Baby Boom for nothing — and houses outside the cities were more affordable. Or, as in the case of my family, the main breadwinner’s job moved outside the city.

Some of those families continued to enroll their kids in Catholic schools. But most, like my family, sent their kids to the public school in their new locale. As my mother would say, my brothers and I didn’t attend Catholic school because it was Catholic. Rather, she and my father, like other parents in the neighborhood, felt more confident in the education the Catholic school provided. Some of that, I suspect, had to do with the fact that my mother also attended Catholic schools.

But other families moved out of their urban enclaves for the same reason they enrolled their kids in Catholic schools while they were living in those neighborhoods. While some schools date to the beginning of large-scale Catholic immigration—first from Germany and later from Ireland, Italy, Poland, and other European countries—others, like the one I attended, didn’t open until the 1950s and 1960s. In fact, the school I attended opened only a year before I entered.

That was also the same time Evangelical, Fundamentalist, and other conservative Christian churches were opening private schools, mainly in the South and Midwest. Ostensibly, the founders of these schools feared that “moral values” were being erased from public school curricula—and from the nation’s laws and value systems. They cited the end of prayer and the diversification of reading lists (and other things, one of which I’ll mention) in those public schools.

And what was being “diversified?” Well, for one thing, points of view: history and other classes were being revised to include the stories of people who had been left out.  But, most troubling to the founders of those “Christian” academies was the new variation in color among the student bodies that resulted from Brown v Board of Education in 1954.

A few school boards and elected officials—most notably Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus—openly defied orders to desegregate.  But more people, including church leaders, subverted that order through the IRS tax code, which allowed “religious” schools to claim tax exemption, and through exemptions provided in the civil-rights laws themselves for private institutions. 

Those schools are now commonly called “segregation academies.” While few, if any, openly barred students of color (mainly Black), they adopted policies that had the same effect. One was, of course, tuition that most Black families couldn’t afford. Another was professions of faith that may have run counter to the families’ beliefs. And some simply made nonwhite kids and families feel unwelcome.

Such was the case in my Catholic school.  I can recall no non-White students; nearly all of us came from the same few European backgrounds I’ve mentioned. (This, I believe, is part of what some of my old classmates mean by the “good old days” they pine for on their Facebook pages.) School and church officials would claim that the school’s demographics reflected that of the neighborhood, which was mostly true.  But, when I was growing up, a few of my schoolmates actually told me that their parents sent them to that school because there were “too many (N-words)” in the local public school.  And, as I recall, at least some of their parents were furious that “trouble”—a code word for Black kids—was being bused into the school and neighborhood.

In short, I can’t help but to think something that leaders of the New York Archdiocese, Diocese of Brooklyn and the church can’t or won’t acknowledge: some of their schools, like the one I attended, were essentially Northern segregation academies. The irony is, of course, that in some neighborhoods, the very people those parents, and sometimes school and church officials, tried to keep out are now the neighborhood that can’t or won’t support the Catholic schools that are, or are in danger of, closing. 

Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

Connect with me on social media:

Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Bruce Gerencser