Tag: Dr David Tee

Dr. David Tee is a fake name used by Derrick Thomas Thiessen, a Christian Missionary and Alliance preacher who fled the United States/Canada twenty years ago and now lives in the Philippines. Thiessen has spent the past two years ripping off my writing, hurling sermons at me, and attacking my character. He has written over one hundred posts about me. And at times, I respond. (Search for Dr. David Tee and Derrick Thomas Thiessen.)

This concludes the series titled The Dr. David Tee Saga. From this point forward, Tee/Derrick Thomas Thiessen will not be mentioned on this site. I’m sure he will continue to “correct” me, but I will not respond.

Here’s what Tee wrote about me last week:

Why is he so afraid?

BG [Bruce Gerencser] continues to publish distorted materials about us [this series] and we wonder why he is so afraid of us? All we do is point out the error of his thinking and content and do nothing else. He is a quitter and we have not known one quitter to have any credibility whatsoever.

He offers everyone nothing save his own disbelief, blank ideas, and baseless declarations. He has no credible evidence to support his views. Maybe he is tired of being reminded of the dreadful mistake that he made so many years ago when he left the faith.

We wish we could redeem him but he seems to be happy in his dark life. ‘His story’ is boring, old, and not new as he is just another person in a long line of former believers who have left the faith and blamed everyone else for their departure.

Maybe he does not like being reminded of what he has left and lost? We cannot be sure but he really should stop making himself an internet laughingstock as people laugh at his inability to continue in his faith. Who celebrates a quitter? God doesn’t.

But he likes the bad attention as he likes playing the victim so we do not expect to see any change in him. It is just sad to see a person being used like he is.

I will leave it to others to decide whether what Thiessen said about me is true. I’m confident thoughtful people will see Thiessen’s rant as pure projection; the man looking in the mirror.

Thiessen has been given the opportunity to write a facts-based rebuttal to the material provided by W.W. Jacobs.

Let me conclude this post with two more things about Thiessen you may not know.

First, Thiessen is a 1980 graduate of a Bible college in Canada. It is doubtful Thiessen has a doctorate, and if by some slim chance he does, the degree is likely from an unaccredited institution or diploma mill — both of which abound in Evangelicalism. Thiessen has been repeatedly asked by numerous people to provide documentation for his claim that he has a doctorate. Thiessen refuses to do so, saying that “God knows,” and that is all that matters.

Second, “Dr. David Tee” is a name given to Thiessen by fellow students during his Bible college days. I viewed a college publication in which Thiessen, the student, is called “Dr. Tee.”

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.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Editor’s Note: Dr. David Tee is a fake name used by Derrick Thomas Thiessen, a Christian Missionary and Alliance preacher who fled the United States/Canada twenty years ago and now lives in the Philippines. Thiessen has spent the past two years ripping off my writing, hurling sermons at me, and attacking my character. He has written over one-hundred posts about me. And at times, I respond. (Search for Dr. David Tee and Derrick Thomas Thiessen.) This series will take a look at things Thiessen doesn’t want anyone to know about. Once this series is completed, Tee/Thiessen will no longer be mentioned by me in my writing. You have my word on this subject.

Guest Post by W.W. Jacobs

This will be my final installment in this series. Derrick himself would be wise not to breathe a sigh of relief; I have certainly not disclosed all the damning information I have on him, and I will not hesitate to reveal more if he decides to start rattling his saber of sanctimony again, either here or elsewhere.

However, the objective of the first post I made here last year is accomplished. Any ministry worth its salt should be Googling David Tee / David Thiessen / Derrick Theissen / David Ford / Peter Sullivan / whatever he decides to call himself.

And the first several results of the search will be this site, recording the story of the would-be missionary whose employment in a non-teaching job is only measured in months because he decides the accepted standards of conduct in the typical place of employment do not apply to him … who has credibly been accused of domestic violence by at least two women … who has no verifiable degree from an accredited institution beyond a bachelor’s degree conferred in 1980 … who not only abandoned his child but fled the country to avoid so much as paying a nominal amount of court-ordered child support … who spits in the face of those who extend benevolence and compassion to him … and who is an identity thief and a convicted felon.

The first Scripture for today, just for Derrick, is Luke 12:1-3: “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. Nothing is covered up that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. Therefore whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops.”

Also Luke 8:17: “For nothing is hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and come to light.”

For the overall theme of this remaining installment, the Scripture is Romans 13:1-2: “Every person is to be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.”

For the sake of this discussion, we will assume that a Christian, such as Derrick, will recognize the 535 members of the U.S. Congress and the elected chief executive of the U.S. government – i.e. the President – as having authority that is ultimately been conferred upon them by God (Derrick’s presumed assessment of the legitimacy of Biden’s presidency notwithstanding).  This would include their authority to write and enact U.S. immigration laws.

To keep this simple, when you come to the United States from another country, you are either coming as a visitor or coming to work for an American employer. If you’re coming as a visitor, you are not allowed to work while you’re here, and you have to leave after a certain period of time. If you’re coming to work (an H-1B visa) you have to be sponsored by a specific employer and you have to have a job already waiting for you.

Derrick came in on a visitor visa, which is why he needed to steal …  err, “accept a gift of” … someone’s Social Security number in order to get a job, because possession of a Social Security number is a basic affirmation of your legal right to work in the United States. But we’ll get to that.

First, some background information. All quotes below were offered, under penalty of perjury, by Derrick.

“Mr. Thiessen, where were you born?”

“ British Columbia.”

“What is your date of birth?”

“(Redacted).”

“Do you have a Social Security number?”

“123-45-6789.” (Not the actual number he used.)

“And you’re a citizen of what country?”

“Canada.”

“Do you have any citizenship rights in the United States?”

“No.”

“What is your current immigration status?”

“Visitor.”

“Do you have a visa?”

“Canadians don’t need one.”

[Ed.: this is accurate – so long as they aren’t coming for work.]

“… we get automatic six months in America …”

[This is also accurate, with some caveats that are not germane to this discussion.]

“… we have to leave once in that six-month period, and we get an automatic six months again.”

[This is not accurate. Visitors must petition the U.S. government for an extension if they want to stay longer.]

“It’s your understanding that you can stay in the United States, Canadians can, indefinitely as long as you leave the country and come back in once every six months?”

“In consulting with an immigration attorney, yes, that’s what I can do.”

[Ed.: This is presumably the same immigration attorney who allegedly told him it would be fine to apply for entry to the U.S. under a false name.]

“Is that what you in fact have been doing?”

“Yes.”

 “And what did you do, go to [border town]?”

“Yes.”

“Cross the border?”

“Yes.”

“And then come right back?”

“Yes.”

“Is there paperwork you need to sign when you come back across?”

“No.”

[Ed.: His paper trail does include at least one Mexico-based cell phone number. My presumption is that he needed some way to validate having ‘left the U.S.’ and “here’s my Mexican phone number” was what he came up with.]

 “Have you ever used a false Social Security number?”

“Yes.”

 “Where was that?”

“(Redacted)”

“For what reason did you use a false Social Security number?”

“Just for identification. Someone gave it to me. I never applied for it, never bought it, someone just gave it to me out of the kindness of their heart.”

“Who did?”

“(Redacted name of a lady who is now of age to collect Social Security and, suffice to say, is having some issues doing so because of Derrick’s abuse of what he claims to be her kindness.)”

“What was that Social Security number that she gave you?”

“123-45- … I think it’s 6789.” (Again, not the actual number.)

“Did you ever use that Social Security number?”

“Not really.”

“What do you mean by not really?”

“I had it for identification. That’s it.”

“Did you ever write it down on a piece of paper verifying or saying that was your Social Security number?”

“Not that I can recall.”

…

“You were using a false name?”

“No, that [David Ford] is the name I was going by for ten years through that whole time.”

“Did David Ford have his own Social Security number different than your Social Security?”

“No, he never had one.”

“What Social Security number did you use during this … process?”

“Just the one that was given to me by that girl.”

“What number was that?”

“I don’t know … I haven’t thought about it for years.”

“So you used a false name and a false Social Security number, under oath … is that a fair statement?”

“No, I used the same name I was presenting myself by. I was not going to make matters any worse. I took that name, I stood by that name, I never committed any fraud by that name, because I was always going to stick by that name in all situations.”

[Ed.: this is emblematic of Derrick’s logic: “I never committed any fraud under the fraudulent name I was using.”]

“Did you use a false Social Security number?”

“I used that number that was given to me by the girl.”

“Was that your Social Security number?”

“It was hers, she lent it to me and she said, here, you can have your freedom, use my Social Security number.”

“Did you understand that to be legal?”

“At the time, no.”

“You understood it to be illegal, correct?”

“I … at the time, it took me about a year or two to find out all the legal ramifications.”

…

“This document … your Social Security number is stated there and it’s Social Security number 123-45-6789.”

“Okay.”

“Was that your Social Security number?”

“That’s the one that was given to me, yes.”

“Answer the question. Was that your Social Security number?”

“These were … can you clarify that?”

“Let’s do it this way. Was that Social Security number issued to you by the United States government?”

“No.”

“This as a false Social Security number given to you by some girl?”

“It was a Social Security number given to me by a friend.”

“You know you were not entitled to use it?”

“At the time, I knew that. At the time initially given, I didn’t know it.”

“You thought this might have been legal to use a false Social Security number?”

“I don’t have an opinion on that either way. At the time I wasn’t worried, didn’t think about it being illegal.”

“Did you have a card with that Social Security number on it in your wallet, on your person, or somewhere?”

“No.”

“[This voter registration record] … just right above the [stolen] Social Security number, it’s got your place of birth and it says California?”

“Yes.”

“Were you born in California, sir?”

“No.”

“So you lied on that question, is that correct?”

“Yes.”

“And do you think that was proper or legal to do?”

“No.”

This would be a good time to revisit Derrick’s recent comment: “…this confession … destroys any credibility or authenticity (he) thought he had. Anything he has published, is publishing, or will publish is now non-credible because he willfully admits to breaking the law. Nothing he says can be taken even at face value because he thinks he is above the law.”

This concludes my posting on the subject, unless Derrick and his lying, deserting, abusive ways escalate matters such that it becomes necessary to offer the rebuke of disclosing additional information.

I thank Bruce for allowing me this space and time.

To Derrick: I would presume that Bruce’s offer to provide the space for you to offer a substantive rebuttal remains in force.  Just remember having held the monkey’s paw if you do.

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.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

Editor’s Note: Dr. David Tee is a fake name used by Derrick Thomas Thiessen, a Christian Missionary and Alliance preacher who fled the United States/Canada twenty years ago and now lives in the Philippines. Thiessen has spent the past two years ripping off my writing, hurling sermons at me, and attacking my character. He has written over one-hundred posts about me. And at times, I respond. (Search for Dr. David Tee and Derrick Thomas Thiessen.) This series will take a look at things Thiessen doesn’t want anyone to know about. Once this series is completed, Tee/Thiessen will no longer be mentioned by me in my writing. You have my word on this subject.

Guest Post by W.W. Jacobs

“Your irrational ‘response’ has no evidence backing it up.” — Derrick Thiessen, 27 July 2022

“Make sure you’re not holding onto a monkey’s paw when you demand evidence be offered against you.” — “W.W. Jacobs”, 27 July 2022 (For an explanation of this comment click here.)

This exchange eventually escalated to Derrick threatening suits over libel and slander. Problem: accusing someone of libel and slander involves documenting that they knowingly and maliciously disseminated false information.

The information disseminated to date isn’t even false, let alone maliciously disseminated. And what is contained herein is just a portion of the information available to me.

I haven’t decided how far I’m going to dive into this – that will largely depend on my interest and the level of benevolence Bruce is willing to extend – but since the single biggest pet peeve Derrick seems to have is being addressed as “Derrick” and not “David” (which he has the audacity to compare to Saul being renamed Paul) I’ll start there.

The following is excerpted from a sworn deposition that Derrick sat for a number of years ago:

“(The deponent), having affirmed to state the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, testified as follows:

“Would you state your full, legal name please?”

“Derrick Thomas Thiessen.”

“And Derrick is spelled how?”

“D-E-R-R-I-C-K.”

“Your middle name is Thomas, T-H-O-M-A-S?”

“Yes.”

…

“Mr. Thiessen, do you have any other form of ID in any other name, or is Derrick, or David, the name?”

“No. Surname is David, I go by David. My immigration lawyer who filed the paperwork put David Thiessen down as the primary name, so I’ve gone by that instead of Derrick, so all my American ID is in David.”

(Incidentally, Derrick, the next time you’re hard up for money, you may well have a solid malpractice case against the attorney who advocated filling out paperwork listing a name other than the one on the identification issued to you by the Canadian government when you sought to enter the U.S., considering how far your detrimental reliance on that information has spun out of control.)

…

“Mr. Thiessen, have you ever used any other name other than Derrick Thiessen?”

“What?”

(His attorney) “We did discuss his name David Ford, I believe.”

[Ed.: he published a tract or pamphlet entitled “Abortion: Where Can We Turn?” under the pseudonym “John Ford” – not “David Ford” – in the mid-1980s, and testified to same in this deposition.]

“Fine. Did you have any other names, other than David Thiessen?”

“I don’t believe so.”

“What other name did you use?”

“David Ford.”

“Did you use any other names at all?”

(His attorney) “I’m sorry, are we remembering the fact that he also said that Derrick and David is, used those names recently? I just want to make it clear he doesn’t forget we’ve already discussed that.”

“We did discuss his name David Ford, I believe.”

“You testified that you used the name David Ford?”

“Yes.”

“You also testified you used the name David Thiessen?”

“It’s synonymous. I don’t differentiate between the two.”

“Your synonymous names are Derrick Thiessen and David?”

“I use D. David Thiessen, it’s on my American ID.”

“What about the name David Ford?”

“I haven’t used that in years.”

“Why did you use it?”

“I didn’t want my family to find me.”

“Who specifically in your family didn’t you want to find you?”

“My immediate family.”

“Why didn’t you want them to find you?”

“Personal reasons at the time.”

“What were the personal reasons at the time?”

“Just disagreements between the family and me.”

“What type of disagreements?”

“I just said I wasn’t coming back.

“Why did you want them not to find you?”

“Didn’t want anything to do with them.”

…

“So you used the name David Ford?”

“Yes.”

“It’s your testimony that you didn’t use any other false names?”

“Yes.”

“This was a false name, correct?”

“It wasn’t changed legally, but it –“

“That was not your name, correct?”

“For ten years it was, yes.”

“But not your legal name, correct?”

“Not my legal name.”

“Where did you come up with Ford?”

“Came to me. I just picked a name out of the hat.”

(There are other names he acknowledged previously using, including Peter, elsewhere in this deposition.)

So, let’s recap:

Neither “David” nor “Tee” are part of his legal name.

“Derrick Thomas Thiessen” is his legal name.

His legal name has apparently never been changed – through deed poll, civil action, or similar – from “Derrick Thomas Thiessen.”

He did not start calling himself “David” to commemorate some “road to Damascus” moment, but because he wanted to go “no contact” with his family.

In this same deposition, he identifies his parents as “Frank” and “Eleanor.” The cemetery where they are buried records their names as “Franz” and “Elnora.”

As best I’ve been able to determine, they were either first- or second-generation Canadians of German descent. It is certainly understandable why people living in North America in the 1940s might want to downplay their German heritage, thus understandable why they started calling themselves Frank and Eleanor, just as Derrick’s uncle Heinrich started going by Henry. But none of them ever legally changed their names. They also never disclaimed Franz / Heinrich / Elnora as their legal names, they simply started identifying themselves by Anglicized versions of those names.

Derrick is definitively a name of Germanic origin. I gave Derrick the benefit of the doubt and looked into whether “David” (or even “Thomas”) might be an Anglicization of “Derrick.” It is not.

However, “David” is the name he reverted to once he left the company of anyone who was aware of his second marriage. (Yes, his current marriage is at least #3 … what is it Paul instructed Timothy about church leaders being “the husband of one wife”?) He also left the purview of people aware of the child his second marriage produced – including child-support enforcement authorities, who had the name “Derrick Thiessen” flagged for wage garnishment if the name was ever listed on an I-9 form.

But I’m sure Derrick will be happy to explain that it is a complete coincidence that the beginning of his child-support obligations approximately coincide with when he started abbreviating his last name to his college nickname. Just as I’m sure the increased scrutiny of identification and immigration records after 9/11 merely happened to coincide with his “call” to Korea.

One other issue needs to be pointed out. To reiterate, this is Derrick’s sworn testimony under oath. This leaves only a couple of possibilities:

1. He told the truth in this deposition and has been misrepresenting the truth since then, such as when repeatedly denouncing Bruce’s use of a “wrong name” to identify him. (Even the one admission he made in his own blog implied that he had legally changed his last name, and still paired it with the first name “David.”)
2. He lied in this deposition, in which case he committed perjury.
3. Just kidding. There is no third possibility.

Neither lying under oath nor lying in the years since is a good look for a man who claims to lead a broad and far-reaching ministry.

Next time if Bruce’s magnanimity and my schedule permit: why the curriculum at Canadian Bible College [now called Canadian Theological Seminary] apparently does not involve studying Romans 13 or any portion of 1 Timothy. We’ll also discuss the odds of a man with Derrick’s level of arrogance opting not to acknowledge holding a degree more advanced than a bachelor’s in theology when under oath.

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.

You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.