By Dr. David Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen, TheologyArcheology: A Site for the Glory of God, Who Are They Going to Vote For, Then?
Everyone and his dog knows that Mr. Trump faced nothing but kangaroo courts and those verdicts are ludicrous. There was no justice in those trials and it was widely advertised that they would get Mr. Trump. That is not how the law is supposed to work yet in his case, that is how it went.
If there is anyone Christians should not be voting for it is Mr. Biden and the rest of the democrats. They are the party that supports sin and evil, calling them good and right, as well as normal and no Christian in their right mind can vote for such policies or people.
We have also seen the Democrats abuse and ignore the nation’s laws to fulfill their agendas. This is the point of why shaming Christians for removing their support from Mr. Trump. The opposition knows that it is the Christian block that can make or break an election and the democrats are doing everything in their power to ensure they win the election.
If they do win the election, say good-bye to America as that country needs to be destroyed for the one-world government to take over. Plus, with America out of the way, other nations will destroy their neighbors and too many innocent people will die for no reason other than the democrats want power and control over everything.
Don’t be fooled by the news pundits, the leftist politicians, and others who try to get Christians’ support away from Mr. Trump. It is not wrong for Christians to vote for Mr. Trump nor is it wrong to support his candidacy.
There is no perfect candidate in this race and there are no better ones to vote for. Mr. Trump has already proven how good he would be as president as we have his first 4 years providing us the evidence we need to see that he will do a good job.
Biden has failed in his four years and he is senile now. No one can vote for him as he is not qualified to be president. It is an embarrassment to see him led around by his wife. He is the leader of the strongest nation in the world yet he is not capable of walking under his own direction.
That is embarrassing and pitiful. Make your own choices for whom to vote and make sure you select wisely as your security and safety are at stake.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 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.
David Tee/Derrick Thomas Thiessen is the tall man in the back
Derrick Thiessen (who sometimes uses the pseudonym Dr. David Tee) is a retired preacher, English teacher, and currently works as a freelance writer. He has several graduate degrees in theology, archaeology and history and has authored several books.
As a believer, we desire to win as many people to Christ as possible. Our specific ministry has been to bring Christians past square one to spiritual maturity. We have accomplished that through our two websites and books.
We have also sought to help pastors, missionaries, and Christian workers through the same avenue. Christians of all levels must be fed the proper spiritual food. They need to strengthen their faith and have the right information to defend what they believe.
Those actions are not a waste of time. But is it a waste of time and energy to prepare data, verifiable and credible physical evidence, and other historical, astronomical, and scientific information and present it to most unbelievers, atheists, and former Christians?
Why go to all that work and trouble when you know that those people groups will do what Dr. Phillip Davies did when he was presented with the evidence proving ancient Israel was as the Bible said?
All he did was close his eyes, shake his head, and repeat over and over that ‘it did not happen’. Are there any members of those people groups who are open-minded and who will take an honest look at what has been gathered and presented?
It is our experience that very few members of those people groups will be that way. Also, we have learned that even if believers discover the real ark used during Noah’s flood unbelievers will find something to criticize and justify their decision to reject it as physical evidence for the flood.
So what is the point in Christians meeting the demand of unbelievers to present evidence when they will only receive a cold reception and blind dismissal?
We understand that unbelievers are afraid of seeing the Bible proven true. If they were not afraid or if the atheists were right and there is no God, they would have no trouble honestly examining the evidence.
One example of this fear is a comment made in a Patterns of Evidence video posted to YouTube. The scholar providing the upcoming response hit the nail on the head, and we do this from memory when he said that unbelieving scholars and archaeologists do not want to prove the Exodus true.
He said ‘If they do, then they have to confront the reality of the Bible and make wholesale changes to their lives and bodies of work.’ Regular unbelievers can have peace that they are not the only ones who are afraid of seeing the Bible proven true.
This is one reason why they make so many unrealistic demands. One militant atheist we have known for a long time once told us to ‘go and dig’ when we talked about the evidence for Noah’s flood.
The problem with that is we cannot dig every square inch of the earth to uncover all the evidence he wants to see. Even if we present that evidence he is incapable or unwilling to accept it and convert.
There are two problems with providing evidence for Noah’s flood. The first is that a myriad of researchers have uncovered verifiable physical evidence for it. Graham Hancock has been one of those researchers as have Drs. Charles Hapgood, Ryan, Pittman, and Rehwenkle to name a few.
Their failure to recognize this evidence stems from problem number two. The majority of researchers and other folks do not know what evidence for a global flood would look like.
There has been only one and that event is difficult to excavate due to the construction, wars, natural disasters, and other events that change the nature of the evidence or remove it from existence.
When Sir Leonard Woolley declared he had found the flood layer in UR, the mainstream archaeologists at that time said he was wrong because the layer was not uniform. But does the flood layer have to be uniform to be evidence of the flood?
An honest person, taking into account all the variables that would change the design of the flood layer, would say no. A person who is not honest would close their mind and say yes.
The failure to accept the mitigating factors surrounding the discovery of evidence means that the person or persons hearing the evidence will not listen and waste the presenter’s time.
It is not that there is a lack of credible and verifiable physical evidence for the majority of biblical events. The internet is full of both Christian and secular websites that present this evidence and they are all easily accessed.
The key to all of this is the one word scientists, atheists, and other unbelievers hate. God created the equation to prove that he exists and his word is true. That word is faith. The Bible tells us that by faith we please God.
Thus God is not going to provide all the physical evidence anyone wants to see or demands. God is not going to destroy what pleases him. This means that we will only get enough physical evidence to strengthen our faith, not ruin it.
This is why there is no scientific evidence for the creation of the world. Creation was a one-time supernatural act that was not enacted using any scientific method.
The way science is constructed, it is impossible for that research field to analyze creation. It will not produce any evidence for that act. Science can study the results of creation and see that God’s word is true but that is as far as science can go.
Those who demand scientific evidence are merely using that demand to hide from the truth. Those who make unrealistic demands do so for the same reason. They do not want the Bible to be true for they would have to deal with the information like the archaeologists and other scholars mentioned earlier would have to do.
God uses faith to help divide the sheep from the goats. His equation tells him who believes him and who does not. Faith is merely believing God and the physical evidence is nothing but a supporting cast member.
So the question is, are you an honest, open-minded unbeliever or are you one of those dishonest, closed-minded ones that will not even give the evidence a fair hearing?
If you are the latter, don’t waste Christians’ time. Just stop making unrealistic demands for evidence that you will never listen to. If you want evidence then you should be prepared to give it a fair hearing and careful consideration.
Note: Thiessen refuses to comment on this site, nor does he allow comments on his main blog. Derrick said in his email to me:
Same instructions apply. It does not need your editor/assistant’s help. I will take the heat for any mistakes alleged or otherwise. I will also read all comments and respond on my own website if the need to respond is there.
Thank you for publishing it as is.
The only thing changed on Thiessen’s post was the title. It originally said, “Is It a Waste of Time” without proper punctuation. His chosen title was unspecific and ambiguous. I changed it to reflect its content. The body of the post was unchanged. I also shortened the bio and provided proper links.
BG opened his website to submit guest posts. He made the offer that anyone can send one in so we did. We asked God first to help us write what needed to be written and told him to publish it as is without his assistant doing any editing.
We shall see if that instruction is met and if he publishes our entry. We kept a copy to compare if and when it sees the light of day.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 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.
By Dr. David Tee, world-class Egyptologist, archaeologist, biologist, cosmologist, and Bible scholar, TheologyArcheology: A Site for the Glory of God, A Word About Egyptian Chronology, May 30, 2024
This is a monumental task. Revision of all the chronologies would change history and support the validity of the Biblical record. As one scholar said . . . no one wants to prove the Exodus true because that would mean they would have to deal with the reality that the Bible is true (paraphrased from memory).
That experience would mean that scholars would have to change their lives, conclusions, academic papers, and books as well as seriously consider accepting Christ as their Savior [the former bears no connection with the latter].
Not many scholars are willing to do that. Here is the realization that God taught us [me] as we [I] were watching those videos [Patterns of Evidence (POE)]. The Egyptian Chronology is not inspired nor is it infallible.
Christian scholars and archaeologists cannot link the Biblical chronology to the Egyptian one and make it subservient to the latter. In fact, all of the scholars and the items they use to determine ancient timelines are not inspired or infallible. There are no absolute dates or events that cannot be changed.
Only the Bible and its timeline cannot be changed because it is inspired and infallible. [Yet, it has been edited, changed, and corrected thousands of times.] The Biblical chronology is the one that influences all others, not the Egyptian one. [in other words, when facts, evidence, or probabilities conflict with the Bible, the B-i-b-l-e is ALWAYS right.]
Those Christians who do not make this change will have trouble harmonizing ancient events with the biblical record and they will also have trouble with their faith. They are not getting to the truth but provide a helping hand in hiding it.
This is crucial for all Christian scholars, historians, and archaeologists, as well as regular Christians. Getting to the truth means not following the secular world and not letting their information damage the Bible. [Actually, getting to the truth means following the evidence wherever it leads, even if doing so uproots things we previously believed. I want to believe as many true things as possible. Unfortunately, Thiessen only wants to believe things that affirm, reinforce, and bolster his Fundamentalist beliefs. Everything else is a Satanic lie from the pit of Hell.]
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 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.
Objectivity: the fact of being based on facts and not influenced by personal beliefs or feelings (Oxford Dictionary)
Objectivity: the quality or character of being objective; lack of favoritism toward one side or another; freedom from bias (Merriam-Webster Dictionary)
Just when I think I have heard everything, Dr. David Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen, will write something that boggles my mind. What follows is an excerpt from Thiessen’s post titled, Christians Are Not Objective. I am beyond words, so I will leave it to readers to weigh in on Thiessen’s claim that he isn’t, nor can he be, objective.
Thiessen — thank you, Bruce for giving proper attribution — writes:
That is the true concept of objectivity. Nothing is ruled out. That is if one wants to be honest. However, for Christians, the time for being objective is before they become a Christian. After they accept Christ as their savior, they are no longer objective but have sided with God and his words.
The new and old believers have made a choice to follow Jesus and live by the word of God. The word of God does not teach objectivity. It teaches how God created the world in 6 days, leaving no room for alternatives to take place.
The Christian does not need to be objective and question everything. They have found the truth and decided to accept that truth. Once that decision is made, they no longer need to search for answers to a mystery that does not exist.
Objectivity only helps lead one to examine all the facts. It is not supposed to keep questioning once the answer has been discovered. Unfortunately, for many scientists, the answer to our origins has been provided and has been in existence since the beginning of time. There is no mystery to our origins, the origin of the universe or how life developed.
We have those answers and the good scientists who are Christians can move on to more important work either refuting those who promote alternatives or solving many of life’s challenges, including curing diseases, solving water problems in many countries, and so on.
There is a world of problems that need Christian scientists to focus on instead of worrying about where we came from. While we still need Christians and Christian scientists to dig up facts to refute the claims of the unbelievers who reject creation, we do not need as many.
….
Objectivity is very limited in its application and it is never a good thing to be objective when you have sided with God and his word. When you do become objective again, you are saying you have not found the answer and there is no reason for unbelievers to convert.
Christians have to decide if the word of God is true or not, then make their stand on it no matter what unbelieving scientists say. God does not lie and to say that unbelieving scientists are telling the truth about our origins, then you are saying that God lied.
….
When you serve God, there is no room for objectivity. You either promote his views or you are not serving God.
….
Christians, do not even try to be objective as it will put you on the wrong side of God and have you obeying secular man over what God has said. We know that there is no such thing as objectivity as God has said you are either on his side or not.
When you pick a side, you are accepting and supporting the information, etc., that is found on one side or the other. There is no middle ground, which is why progressive creationism and theistic evolution cannot exist.
….
No, Christians are not objective as they have picked a side and when they stray from representing that side properly, they have left or almost left their faith. Their words, etc., must reflect that choice and not be swayed by those who do not believe.
The latter side has no smoking gun of evidence or knowledge that will destroy Christianity. They are bringing falsehoods mixed with a little truth to help trap unwary Christians. We cannot be swayed by their degrees or years of experience. If they disagree with God and the Bible, they re bringing a false gospel and the wrong information.
Christians put objectivity aside so that the truth can be shared around the world.
Sigh . . . beyond words 🙁
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 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.
Every year or two, I ask readers to submit questions they want me to answer. That time has arrived once again. Any question. Any subject. Please leave your questions in the comment section or send them to me via email. I will try to answer them in the order received.
I look forward to reading and answering your questions.
Dr. David Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen, continues to write posts about me and my British friend, Ben Berwick. I have largely ignored him. Thiessen is a rabid Fundamentalist, and at his advanced age, it is unlikely that anything will move him away from Bible literalism and young earth creationism. He is not interested in debate, argument, or discussion. He is convinced that he is one hundred percent right, and that atheists, agnostics, liberal Christians, and other people he deems “unsaved,” are one hundred percent wrong. Thiessen has no room for question, doubt, or nuance. As a true-blue Fundamentalist, everything to him is black and white. So, I no longer try to reason with Thiessen. I have kicked the dust off my sandals and left him to his own devices.
I do, however, want to respond to a post Thiessen wrote yesterday titled I Have a Question. As you will see, Thiessen really doesn’t have any questions to ask me. He just wants to attack my person and besmirch my character. I will be the better man and answer him anyway.
All spelling and grammar in the original.
BG [Bruce Gerencser] may say that we are not banned on his website but we are not going to post there and give him the opportunity to ban us. We will address any information we glean from his website here. That way nothing can be edited or changed on us.
Thiessen is NOT banned from commenting on this site. Any assertion that suggests otherwise is a lie. Thiessen is free to comment any time he wants. I have also offered to debate him. I have even offered to publish a guest post of his. He claims that he is afraid to do so because I might edit or change his words. I have told him several times I will publish exactly what he writes — unedited. I will even leave his misspellings and grammar errors as is. Come on Derrick, time to man up.
Currently, he has this annual theme where he allows his readers to ask him any question they want. it goes under the same title heading above – I have a question- and I guess he selects the ones he will answer.
Note that Thiessen tries to suggest that I pick and choose which questions to answer. This, of course, is untrue. I answer every question I receive, even from him and his bunkmate Revival Fires.
Question One: Why does a guy with nothing to offer keep posting ‘his’ story which hasn’t changed in 10 or 11 years?
As you can see, Thiessen makes a value judgment: a guy with nothing to offer. I am a guy who has nothing to offer closed-minded Fundamentalists like him. It seems thousands of other people disagree with him; people who found value and support from my writing. I know my work is not for everyone, so why doesn’t Thiessen stop reading it and mosey on his way? If certain foods constipate you or aggravate your hemorrhoids, change your diet. Instead, Derrick would rather bitch about how much his anus hurts.
I suspect I have a lot more of my story to tell, even from my Christian days. Unlike Thiessen, my life continues to move forward, and as I continue to walk this path called life, I will have new and varied experiences. And when I do, I will write about them. I am a story-teller, Thiessen is not. He chooses, instead, to preach, teach, and rage. And that’s fine, but there’s no reason for him to criticize me for choosing a different path.
My story is not the only subject for my writing. I write about sports, politics, humanism, atheism, cooking, chronic illness, chronic pain, the Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) church movement, Evangelicalism, and a plethora of other subjects. And even if I did ONLY write about my story, what’s wrong with that? Every blog has a niche, Thiessen’s included.
His previous answer to us was ‘he wanted people to know his story’. Yet, he could have done that in one website page or one post. However, he keeps repeating the same thing over and over, and over, as if no one has read it before.
I have explained this to Thiessen several times, so I can only conclude that he is being deliberately obtuse. A majority of readers on any given day are new. They don’t know my story, so as a good writer, I believe it is incumbent upon me to share with them who I am, who I was, what I believe, and where I’m headed. Yes, regular readers know my story, but most first-time readers don’t. I make no apology for making sure people know my storyline.
Thiessen shares nothing about his past and present life. He hides from accountability and responsibility in the Philippines, not letting anyone see and know the man he really is. Again, this is his choice, but I shouldn’t be faulted for choosing another path.
Thiessen must live a boring, uneventful life if it fits on a single website page or blog post. I have had an interesting life, filled with all sorts of experiences. Take my short stories series. I am sitting on over a hundred short story draft posts I have not published. I enjoy telling stories, and I plan to tell a lot more of them in the months and years ahead. Hopefully, many of these stories will be published in book form.
The obvious answer is that he is a narcissist and wants everyone to think he is a victim. His continuous reference to ‘his story’ makes his content useless, boring, and out of touch. He needs the attention.
Now Thiessen makes things personal, asserting without evidence that I am a narcissist and a victim. I will leave it to others to decide whether I am a narcissist, but as far as being a victim is concerned, I have faced a lot of trauma in my life. In a clinical sense, I am a victim, a survivor. Should I ignore these experiences in my life? I choose to use them to fuel my passion and help other people. My therapist tells me that my continued writing is essential to managing my depression.
Thiessen expresses his feelings when he says my writing is useless, boring, and out of touch. He is entitled to his opinions, but my email inbox and social media messages suggest that a lot of people find my work useful, engaging, and relevant. That Thiessen doesn’t is his problem, not mine.
Question Two: Why does he keep beating a dead horse?
The “dead horse” Thiessen speaks of is any subject I write about that he disagrees with. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Thiessen writes about the same subjects over, and over, and over. Again, he is free to do so. But why is Thiessen so obsessed with policing the content on another creator’s website. This would be like me telling the writers at Science-Based Medicine that they are beating a dead horse. All they talk about is science and medicine. Duh, right. I read their writing because it especially deals with these subjects. I don’t go to their site to find information on Evangelical Christianity. They have a wheelhouse, as do I. I talk about what I know. Too bad Thiessen doesn’t do the same.
Question Three: Why do you continually make yourself look bad?
This is a question about his black-collar series. As we have talked about this before, it does not make BG look like a saint for his reporting of these arrests. Actually, it makes him look bad as he piles on those unfortunate souls as well as rubbing it in their and their families’ faces.
Those types of postings are not making BG look good. It makes him look like some hate-filled person who does not have an ounce of sympathy, forgiveness, or kindness in him. One reason for that is because he is rifling through law enforcement and news outlet files to get the information LONG AFTER the ‘crimes’ have been committed.
He is not helping anyone but he does look vindictive and mean-spirited in his actions. he also looks void of any love and compassion as love does not rejoice in evil. He is rejoicing as he gets clicks when he posts those articles.
Thiessen wants me to “care” and “love” these predators. Give me a fucking break. I’ll tell you who I care for: the children they molest and rape; the church women they take sexual advantage of; the teens they seduce and assault; the church people whom they steal from and take advantage of. My care and love is reserved for the victims and the families of predators. The criminals themselves? I want to see them prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I want to make sure they never, ever pastor a church or have an opportunity to harm people again.
Thiessen, on the other hand, thinks these perverts should be forgiven and restored to the ministry. How sick is that? I have often wondered why he is so anti-victim. What’s the story behind his support of sexual deviants, while at the same time deriding their victims?
As long as preachers continue preying on innocent, vulnerable children, teens, and adults, I plan to continue publishing the Black Collar Crime Series.
It will be interesting to see what his responses will be. He won’t be allowed to post them here. So hopefully we will get a pingback.
Thiessen refuses to let anyone comment on his blog. He also has disabled his contact page. He is immune from criticism and accountability. Nothing I can do about that.
I have sufficiently answered Thiessen’s comments. I am sure he will object to my answers, which he is free to do. As always, I will leave it to readers to weigh the worthiness and value of my writing. Thiessen not liking it is a badge of honor.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 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.
[This post is about] how many believers try to marry secular science to the Holy Bible.
….
One is written by a holy and divine God who knows how everything came to be. The other is filled with lies, and misinformation, and does not have the Spirit of Truth guiding it. In fact, the latter of the two have kicked God out of the science lab and excluded him from all of their work.
….
The only way for science and the Bible can be compatible, is if the former humbles itself and repents of its sins, and accept Christ as its savior. There is no other way for the two to work together. Secular and bad Christian science only corrupts the revelations of the Bible and keeps the truth from people who need it.
When secular science repents and becomes Christian, then lets God and the Spirit of Truth back into the science labs, classrooms, and so on, then the light of Jesus can shine so that all can see the truth.
Secular science does not have the truth because it is not guided by the Spirit of Truth. It is guided by the deceit and lies from evil. There is no way to yoke the biblical truths to secular science until the latter accepts the biblical truth and Jesus as its savior.
The Bible is never wrong.
— TheologyArcheology: A Site for the Promotion of Scientific and Biblical Ignorance, Unequally Yoked, April 22, 2024
It is no longer in my best interest to write any further posts about Dr. David Tee, who is neither a doctor nor a Tee. Tee’s real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen.
My posts referencing Thiessen are typically responses to something he has written about me, but I’ve decided I am no longer willing to provide him the attention he needs and craves. I will leave him to his own devices, choosing to not cast my pearls before swine.
Thiessen will try to provoke me to respond, but those days are over. While I despise the man and his incessant attacks, lies, and mischaracterizations, nothing I say will change his mind. He is pathologically unable to play well with others.
Rage away, Derrick, but I will not respond to you. I am removing your site from my RSS feed reader, so I will no longer see or read your posts.
David Tee/Derrick Thomas Thiessen is the tall man in the back
The following is my response to Dr. David Tee’s post titled Where is Their Evidence? Tee, who is neither a Tee nor a doctor, took issue with my post Understanding Religion from A Cost-Benefit Perspective. Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen, refuses to mention me by name or properly link to this site, while, at the same time, using my copyrighted material as the main, and often only, source of material for his blog, Theology Archeology: A Site for the Glory of God. Quite frankly, without my writing, Thiessen would have little, if anything, to say. This boorish behavior has been going on for over three years.
It is tempting to ignore Theissen, writing him off as just another ill-bred Evangelical who is pathologically unable to play well with others — including Christians. Thiessen considers himself a “true Christian,” while evidencing behavior that suggests he is anything but. I choose to respond to him — as regular readers are well aware — because I don’t like people who piss in my corn flakes; people who misrepresent my views or attack me personally. Bullies such as Theissen must not be given a pass, though I try my best to only respond to him when a post of his is egregious or absurd. His latest post is both.
Now to my response:
Unbelievers make astounding statements about Christianity, God, Jesus, and the Bible. It is not their faith, yet they feel they have a right to criticize something they do not believe in or accept.
Thiessen seems to forget that I was a Christian for fifty years; that Evangelical Christianity made a very deep imprint on my life. I have as much right as anyone else to critique Evangelicalism. It was the religion of my tribe, one that I know well and continue to follow from a distance to this day.
Thiessen is a Fundamentalist; a cultist. His peculiar brand of religion causes harm, both psychologically and physically. Many ex-Evangelicals feel duty-bound to expose Fundamentalism for what it is — a pernicious cult. How could I possibly be silent while people are being harmed, knowing that telling my story and critiquing Evangelicalism might help them? Shall I stand by and do nothing while well-meaning, sincere people are drowning? Shall I say nothing while cultists such as Thiessen harm others? Sorry, but I cannot and will not be silent.
This criticism would not be so bad if they did not just want everyone else to take their word for it. That is all that it amounts to, their opposition to Christianity is just their rejection of the truth. If they had an argument, they could point to real, objective evidence that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Bible is in error.
I have written over 5,000 posts since 2014. Not one time have I ever told readers to “take my word for it.” Not-One-Time. Further, Thiessen knows that I have extensively explained why I am no longer a Christian. One need only read the posts on the Why page to know why I deconverted.
Thiessen believes the Bible (including translations) is inerrant and infallible. Every word is without error. Such a fantastical claim cannot be rationally sustained. It is absurd at face value. One need to only point to ONE error to bring the whole house of cards down. I could quote dozens and dozens of glaring errors, mistakes, and contradictions in the Bible, but doing so would be a waste of time. No amount of evidence will move Thiessen off his belief that the Bible is inerrant. As Evangelicals are wont to do, he will have an “explanation” — no matter how superficial and lame — for every error.
Typically, I ask people to read one or more of Dr. Bart Ehrman’s books on the history and nature of the Bible. Don’t take my word for it. Read the words of an esteemed New Testament scholar. Thiessen, however, won’t do this. He has read articles and blog posts about Ehrman’s books, but I doubt he has actually read one of his books from cover to cover. No need, right? The Bible is inerrant and infallible, and Ehrman is an atheist. He has nothing to offer to this discussion. Never forget, you can’t argue with an inerrantist, presuppositionalist, or creationist — Thiessen is all three. Fundamentalist minds are shut off from anything that does not fit in their narrow worldview and beliefs.
Yet, all they point to is either their unbelief or made-up evidence created by them or their fellow unbelievers. Case in point:
Many of my fellow atheists and agnostics have a hard time understanding why, exactly, people are religious. In particular, many godless people are befuddled by Evangelicals.
How can anyone believe the Bible is inspired and inerrant; believe the earth was created in six twenty-four-hour days; believe the universe is 6,027 years old; believe Adam and Eve were the first human beings; believe the story of Noah and the Ark really happened; believe that millions of Israelites wandered in the desert for forty years, and believe a Jewish man named Jesus was a God-man who worked miracles, was executed on a Roman cross, and resurrected from the dead three days later.
I could add numerous other mythical, fanciful, incredulous Bible stories to this list, all of which sound nonsensical to skeptical, rational people. (BG website)
The first paragraph is easy to refute, the Bible says that the preaching of the cross is foolishness to those who do not believe. Every Christian has experienced that attitude from unbelievers.
It remains foolishness to them because the unbeliever only experiences the here and now. Unfortunately, the unbeliever will reject any physical evidence presented to them. We have seen this done and experienced it ourselves. The best thing to do is to stop arguing with them and leave the unbeliever with the evidence we have.
The unbeliever wants physical evidence but will always find ways to reject the presented physical evidence. Some do as the late Phillip Davies did one time and just close their eyes and deny that the evidence proves anything.
Thiessen says unbelievers live for the here and now (how is this relevant to the discussion at hand?) and are averse to any evidence presented to them by Evangelicals. Thiessen uses his own subjective experiences with non-Christians as proof that unbelievers will reject any evidence shown to them by true Christians. He never bothers to consider that maybe, just maybe, the real issue is the quality of evidence being presented to unbelievers; that quoting Bible verses is not evidence. The Bible says — according to how Evangelicals interpret the Bible — that the universe was created in six literal twenty-four-hour days. This is a claim, as is the earth being 6,027 years old. Claims are not evidence, science is, and science overwhelmingly says that Thiessen’s claims are wrong. Thiessen, who fancies himself as an author, rejects much of what science has to say about the world (even though he has no substantive science training). He has the B-i-b-l-e, and that’s all he needs. In Thiessen’s world, whatever the Bible says is true, and if what it says conflicts with science, science is wrong.
In other words, a majority of unbelievers do not believe because they do not want to believe. No matter what evidence you present, it will never be good enough to convince them. The question really is not about unbelievers being amazed at why Christians believe in God and the Bible, the question is with all the supporting evidence, Christians are amazed at why unbelievers do not believe.
I am open to evidence for the central claims of Christianity. I am open to evidence that supports the claim that the Bible is inerrant. Unlike Thissen, I am willing to follow the evidence wherever it leads. But saying, “Bruce, you are wrong, the Bible says __________, is not evidence. Those are assertions, assertions for which Thiessen has yet to provide empirical evidence.
Thiessen seems unaware that only a small percentage of earthlings are “true Christians”; that the overwhelming majority of people are unbelievers, and that a minuscule number of people — mainly Evangelicals — believe the Bible is without error and infallible. Yet, Thiessen arrogantly thinks he is right and 7+ billion people are wrong. There’s not much you can say to a person who thinks like this. The first step to intellectual honesty is to admit that you could be wrong. It wasn’t until I gave space for the possibility of being wrong that I was able to consider whether the central claims of Christianity are true.
There is a wealth of physical evidence proving the Bible true. Noah’s flood alone has more evidence supporting it than any other biblical event. Just read Noah’s Flood Did Take Place to get a lot of that evidence.
Wealth of physical evidence? Really? Want to know about this so-called evidence? Read Thiessen’s 122-page “best-selling” book, Noah’s Flood Did Take Place. Theissen left off the rest of his title: An Examination of the Non-Scientific Evidence. Thiessen says there is a wealth of evidence proving young earth creationism is true, but his book says that this evidence is non-scientific.
Theissen says this about his book:
“Scientific evidence is not always the best field of research to use to know if an event, etc. took place in the past. This book goes outside of evidence to bring to the discussion all the evidence that is not talked about today and show that Noah’s Flood was real.”
As for creation, it is more rational to believe that God had the power and did create in 6- 24 hours days than it is to believe a theory that is statistically impossible to do. It is also more logical and rational to believe in a supernatural creation than it is to believe that the universe came from a small pinpoint and expanded to a size no telescope can see the edges.
Or be filled with different elements that were created by matter crashing into each other, especially when every attempt to crash things together destroys the two objects not combine them into a set of planets and stars that miraculously creates gravity, a force that even science cannot figure out how it operates.
It is also more rational and logical to believe in a super being that has the power to do all of this than some unknown entity no one can touch, feel, or experience. All that evolutionary scientists can do is study the supposed results of evolution. They cannot study the process itself nor can they put it in a test tube and examine it.
All they can do is make faulty predictions, which are not 100% correct, and ruin their theory anyway, and then declare ‘evolution did it and is true’ even though every one of their experiments is not exclusive. Any process can produce the same results.
Again, Christians scratch their heads and wonder how can unbelievers in Jesus believe such fairy tales and nonsense? There is no evidence for the alleged original conditions that started and developed life, there are no transitional life forms, and there is nothing to support the theory of evolution except some fallible human’s word.
Sigh. I will leave it to readers with science backgrounds to challenge Thiessen’s so-called “rational” assertions. I know what I know, and most importantly, I know what I don’t know.
In every case, the unbeliever presents no evidence to support their views of Christianity. Take these words for an example:
Here we are living in 2024 — an age driven by technology and science — yet millions of Evangelicals and other conservative Christians flock to Kentucky to tour Ken Ham’s monuments to ignorance: the Ark Encounter and the Creation Museum…Why is it that Evangelicals continue to believe, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary? (BG website, we left out his anti-Trump remark)
….
To answer the question posed in BG’s quote, we believe because Jesus and the Bible are both real and true. There is nothing the unbeliever can say or do to change that fact. We have eyewitness testimony, we have physical evidence and both come from the believing and unbelieving sides of the world.
Thiessen provides no physical evidence for his claims, and quite frankly, none is needed. Thiessen’s claims are based on faith, not facts. Faith needs no evidence — just belief. I have argued with, debated, and talked with scores of Evangelicals over the past seven years. Without fail, “faith” is always the final answer. And once someone runs to the house of faith, no further discussion can be had. Facts do not need faith. Evidence does not need faith. Faith allows people to believe things that are not true.
Thiessen claims he has eyewitness testimony that proves that “Jesus and the Bible are both real and true.” Wikipedia says, “The majority of New Testament scholars also agree that the Gospels do not contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.”
The alleged eyewitness accounts in the Bible are claims, not evidence. If Thiessen wants to me to accept his claims, he must provide evidence that supports his claims. Just because a book says something doesn’t mean what it says is true. I will await Thiessen’s empirical evidence for his claims, especially his fanatical claim that the gospels are eyewitness testimonies. I have been studying theology for most of my sixty-six years on earth. I have yet to see any evidence that supports Thiessen’s Fundamentalist claims. If he has it, he needs to cough it up.
So here’s my offer to Thiessen: write a guest post that provides evidence for your claim that the Bible is eyewitness testimony, and I will post it unedited to this site. Actual evidence, Derrick, especially that “unbelieving” evidence you speak of (which is hilarious since you reject “unbelieving” evidence any time it challenges or contradicts your narrowminded Fundamentalist worldview). You have my email address, Derrick. I look forward to reading your scathing defense of eyewitness testimony in the Bible. Who knows, your post might convince me to reconsider the claims of Christianity.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 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 humans are born sinners; that from the moment of conception, humans sin in thought, word, and deed; that humans don’t become sinners, they are sinners. Further, the Bible tells us humans are the enemies of God; haters of holiness and truth. Labeled, “natural (unsaved) men,” the Bible says unregenerate people CAN NOT understand the things of God
Salvation (deliverance) from sin requires the active work of God on behalf of people who are dead in trespasses and sin. Humans have no power to save themselves. Salvation requires regeneration and faith, both of which must be given to unsaved people for them to be saved.
Most Evangelicals are cradle Christians, meaning they were born into and came of age in Evangelical churches. Typically, Evangelical congregants come to faith between the ages of four and fourteen. Ninety-eight percent of Evangelicals come to faith in Christ by age thirty. Simply put, most Evangelicals are saved before developing mature, rational thinking skills. It is much harder for someone to be saved once they develop the skills necessary to distinguish truth from bullshit.
Dr. David Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen, was raised in an Evangelical Christian home. The only religion he knows is Evangelicalism. Thiessen believes the words “Evangelical” and “Christian” are interchangeable. In his mind, Evangelicalism — his peculiar version of it, anyway — is True Christianity. Thiessen has a Christian Missionary and Alliance background. The CMA sect is a garden-variety Evangelical denomination. Within the sect, you will find believers who believe once a person is saved, he can never, ever fall from grace, and other congregants who believe a Christian can lose their salvation. What Thiessen actually believes on this issue is unclear. He has espoused both views, and has, at times, promoted works-based salvation. His viewpoint is determined by the particular theological point he is trying to justify.
Recently, Dr. David Tee, who is neither a doctor nor a Tee, wrote a post titled We Are Against Deconstruction. Here’s an excerpt from we’s post: 🙂
The issue here is the word ‘skepticism’. This is where many believers go wrong. Their skepticism should have been done long before they made a decision to follow Christ. All doubts should have been dealt with prior to that same decision.
There is no need to be skeptical about Christ or the Christian faith once one has been redeemed by Christ. That experience alone should tell them that God is real and that the Bible is true. Having second thoughts after you have been living the Christian life is wrong.
….
If one has doubts about a doctrine or practice of the church, they should search scripture to get the truth, like the Bereans did in Acts, and then follow the truth. No one should be deconstructing their faith as they did that before they became a Christian.
No one is born a Christian either so they should not live under a false assumption. Do your deconstructing before accepting Christ as your savior for then you still have a chance to be saved.
….
Doubts and skepticism after you have become a Christian is evil doing spiritual warfare against you and you need to do spiritual warfare against those attacks. Deconstruction is throwing up the white flag and surrendering. That is just the wrong thing to do after you believe.
According to Thiessen, children are supposed to deconstruct their Christian beliefs BEFORE they become Christians. All doubts and skepticism should be dealt with before a person is saved. This, of course, is impossible. The unsaved person, according to the Bible, cannot understand the things of God. They are dead in trespasses and sins, alienated from God, without hope in this present world. Yet, unbelievers are supposed to have a comprehensive understanding of Christianity BEFORE they are saved. How is this even possible, knowing that most Evangelicals are saved when they are children?
Most Evangelicals are saved BEFORE they have a full understanding of all that Christianity teaches. I heard scores of evangelism experts say that when winning sinners to Christ, soulwinners should tell them just enough to get saved; that they should avoid questions and stick to the plan of salvation. There will be plenty of time for their questions after they are saved! Most Evangelicals become Christians without thoroughly investigating the central claims of Christianity, and, sadly, many saved Evangelicals never take a hard look at what they believe.
How can a six-year-old child, raised in Evangelicalism by Evangelical parents, possibly determine whether Christianity is true? They do not have the rational thinking skills to do so — in a comprehensive way. Children “believe” because their parents, family, and tribe “believe.” Rarely, does skepticism play a part in their decision to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. One can’t be skeptical if they have no understanding of the world’s religions. How can one choose if he or she is only given one choice? Deconstruction requires choices. How can anyone possibly deconstruct Evangelicalism until they have first been exposed to non-Evangelical religions, beliefs, and practices? Choice requires knowledge, but most Evangelical children are deliberately sheltered from any other religion but Evangelicalism. And when these sheltered believers are exposed to the “world,” what often happens? They start asking questions, beginning their travel on the path of deconstruction.
Deconstruction is not the enemy — simplistic, untested faith is. Thiessen thinks his site exists to promote Biblical Christianity; a place where doubters and questioners can find answers. The problem is that Thiessen only has one answer for every question: believe and practice what the Bible says. The B-i-b-l-e, yes that’s the book for me, I stand alone on the Word of God, the B-i-b-l-e. BIBLE!
Thiessen believes deconstruction leads to Hell:
Yes, deconstruction does lead to hell because Christians are following and listening to unbelievers over God and his word. Peter talks about leaving the faith and it is not pretty. There is only one truth, one true faith, and deconstruction does not lead you to either.
In other words, rationalism and skepticism lead to Hell, ignorance leads to Heaven. My, what an advertising slogan.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 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.
By Dr. David Tee, Whose Name is RealDerrick Thomas Thiessen, We Already Know How, January 10, 2024
God has power that we do not have nor can comprehend. Yet we do understand that this power is greater than anything else in the universe. We do not need science to tell us what God did. God has already told us and our origins are not a mystery.
Why should we go to unbelieving, blind, deceived, and lost people to get our answers about our origins when God has already told us what he did in the Bible
….
There is the truth and then there is false teaching. Biblical creation is the truth and you either accept it or you don’t. The other so-called option is a fantasy made up by those who rejected the truth yet needed something to fill the void left by that rejection.
….
There is no need to debate this topic. You either preach the truth or you proclaim false teaching.
….
The how is not only explained in Genesis 1 but it is also explained in other verses speaking on this topic throughout the Bible. God took only 6 days to create everything. If you cannot accept that, then you are left with false teaching.
There is no debate because there is only one truth and the Bible has the truth, not science. So there are no muddy waters to wade through and there are no old earth facts to worry about. That is because the facts support a young earth and the biblical account.
….
We know how God created everything because he told us and God cannot lie.
