According to the Bible, God created the universe and everything in it. From this basic premise, Christian thinking goes off in all sorts of directions. Generally speaking, Christians believe one of the following about the creation of the universe:
Young Earth Creationism: God created the universe in six literal twenty-four-hour days, 6,028 years ago.
Theistic Evolution: God created the universe by and through the process of evolution, leaving room for God to personally intervene in human history when needed.
Old Earth Creationism: God created the universe with the appearance of old age.
Yesterday, I listened to a podcast featuring an old-earth creationist trying to defend his beliefs. Things did not go well for him. Science aside, old-earth creationism posits that God deliberately deceived humanity by creating the universe with the appearance of age. Thus, they can accept what science says about the age of the universe while at the same time claiming God created everything.
In other words, God lied to us. The Earth “looks” old, but it’s not. God is just playing a trick on us. If the Earth is 6,028 years old, why do various testing methods say differently? Simple, God is playing a game with us. He’s a trickster, telling us a painting is thousands of years old, when it is, in fact, two years old.
Why would God do this? What is his endgame? Why would he lie to us? You would think that God would want us to have accurate information about creation and the age of the earth/universe. When science says the universe is billions of years old, this is a factual claim, old-earth creationists say, but — with a wink — they confidently say, “God created the universe with apparent age.” This, of course, is a faith claim.
Evangelicalism has nothing to offer when it comes to science. Their core beliefs about the universe are directly contrary to what science says about the matter. Even the theistic evolutionist is inserting God where none is needed. Science doesn’t have all the answers, but it is superior to the manic rants of preachers about the literal interpretation of Genesis 1-3.
Bruce Gerencser, 68, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 47 years. He and his wife have six grown children and sixteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
“Dr.” Arv Edgeworth recently sent me the following comment:
Hi Bruce,
I am interested. Would you be willing to share with me why you left Christianity, and now consider yourself an atheist? I promise not to be judgmental. I honestly would like to see things from your perspective. My wife and I live in Southwest Ohio, and next week will be celebrating our 60th anniversary. I wish you well.
I am an evangelist. In the last 14 years I have spoken in over 300 independent, fundamental Baptist churches in 25 different states. I have spent a great deal of time discussing doctrinal issues with those pastors. I have also discussed standards of dress and conduct with them. I send out a newsletter to about 2100 independent, fundamental, Baptist churches nation-wide.
Edgeworth operates the Truth and Science website — a site devoted to young earth creationism and debunking evolution.
Many years ago, Dr. Arv Edgeworth was asked to head up a Six-Step Problem Solving team for the General Motors Corporation. As part of his training he was taught in the proper use of the Scientific Method. His team had a 100% success rate. His love of science grew. He then began collecting science textbooks, collecting over 150 of them. He also collected, about 80 other books about science. He began to be very burdened over the Creation vs Evolution issue. In January of 1997, God called him into Creation Evangelism.
Dr. Edgeworth has given over 450 seminars on the Creation vs Evolution issue in churches and schools in 27 different states. He now sends newsletters to thousands of scientists, science teachers, pastors, churches, and many others.
In his first email to me, Edgeworth asks me why I left Christianity and why I consider myself an atheist. I find such questions annoying. Even a superficial perusal of this site would direct a person to the page WHY? On this page are numerous articles answering Edgeworth’s questions. Alas, many Evangelicals lack curiosity, as I make clear in a post titled Curiosity, A Missing Evangelical Trait.
Edgeworth promised not to be judgmental if I responded to his email, but as you will see below, he failed to keep his word.
I did not respond to Edgeworth; my editor, Carolyn, did. Carolyn has been my editor for years. When I am not feeling well — and currently in a tough spot physically — Carolyn will answer some of my emails, especially those that can be answered without theological or philosophical responses. Edgeworth asked a question, to which Carolyn, my Internet wife, replied:
Mr. Edgeworth,
I am Bruce’s editor and sometimes-answerer of his emails. Please read all the links on the Why page on Bruce’s blog, The Life and Times of Bruce Gerencser, and you will have an understanding of why and how he left Christianity. The short answer is that after he retired, he began to examine all of the tenets of Christianity and how they didn’t fit together and how they contradicted one another, and he reached the point where he no longer believes in the basics of Christianity — the virgin birth, the miracles Jesus supposedly performed, his alleged resurrection, heaven, hell, angels, satan, etc. The more he examined, the more he realized he didn’t believe. He cannot worship a god who would have a hell and a lake of fire where a god tortures certain people for eternity after our relatively short stay on earth.
Carolyn Patrick, editor for Bruce Gerencser
Excellent response. Short and to the point, directing Edgeworth to where he could find fuller explanations for why I converted.
Of course, Edgeworth couldn’t be bothered to do his homework — yet he wants everyone on this site to read his website. He shows no awareness of my background or that I was a college-trained IFB/Evangelical pastor for twenty-five years. There’s nothing in my story that remotely suggests I was a liberal Christian; that I had head knowledge, but had never been born again. Both of these claims are patently false.
The “non-judgmental” Edgeworth is, in fact, judgmental, consigning me to Hell because I don’t believe as he does. He predicts (and knows for sure) that I am headed for Hell and assumes the same about Carolyn.
Here’s what he said:
Hi Carolyn,
Thank you for your reply concerning why Bruce left “Christianity” and became an atheist. The things you told me about Bruce seem to indicate clearly that Bruce may have had a head knowledge about God, and considered himself to be a “Christian,” but has never experienced the new birth. That often happens if someone is in a liberal denomination that does not preach and teach the true gospel. They are “Christians” in name only.
I can predict one thing for sure. Bruce will believe in God, and heaven and hell in the future: one moment after he dies. It is a terrible thing for Bruce that he never experienced true Christianity. How about you Carolyn? Would you like to be 100% sure about your eternity? You can be. You owe it to yourself and to Bruce to at least check it out. I hope you and Bruce have a great eternity. Eternity is a long time to be wrong! Please check this out for yourself. You will be eternally grateful that you did!
Are you telling me that you relied only on my writing to make the decision that Bruce had “head knowledge” but didn’t experience a “new birth”? Are you telling me that you didn’t read the links on the Why page of Bruce’s blog? If so, SHAME ON YOU! Don’t take my word for it, read Bruce’s own words, his own writing. I am fully convinced that Bruce was born again when he was 15 and had a personal relationship with Jesus for more than 25 years. Bruce was not in a liberal denomination but was the pastor of several Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) churches. He preached and taught the true gospel. He would have been a Trump supporter in his Christian days.
I am an agnostic atheist. I have no belief in any god or gods – not yours, not the Catholic god, not the Pentecostal god, not the Episcopalian god, not the Baptist god, not the Methodist god, not the Mormon god . . . . Need I go on? I have no belief in any god. If scientifically valid evidence were presented to me by a god, I might (or might not) believe in her, but as things stand now, I have seen no evidence for the existence of any god, and I therefore have no belief in any god. I am 100% sure about my eternity, and yours too. Yours will be the same as mine and Bruce’s.
Carolyn Patrick, editor for Bruce Gerencser
Edgeworth replied (relevant parts quoted):
Hi Carolyn,
I have finished reading most of the “Why” section on Bruce’s blog. I did skim through a few things, just focusing on the most important. I then compared them with the things you said about yourself. I hope you won’t mind if I try to put a few things into perspective.
…
Your Beliefs and Bruce’s
Bruce refers to himself as an atheist. You refer to yourself as an agnostic atheist. All of this is based on what you choose to believe. The same can be said for the evolutionist. What I don’t see in any of this is a sincere desire to know the TRUTH. Where does REALITY fit into any of this? What about the REALITY of what actually happened in the past, is happening now, or will happen in the future? Does that matter to you?
I have a PASSION for TRUTH! Judging from what you have said: It doesn’t appear that either you or Bruce have any desire to actually KNOW what the TRUTH is. The word “science” means “to know.” It doesn’t mean “to believe.” You and Bruce have every right to choose to believe what you want to. But what about the TRUTH about what actually IS?
The existence of God is based in the REALITY of what actually is. What anyone chooses to believe or not believe has no bearing on the REALITY of what actually is. That is why the Supreme Court ruled that Atheism is a religion. At least they got that one right. Just my personal belief.
For example: You say that my eternity will be the same as both yours and Bruce’s. That isn’t something that you know or can be known is it? You may choose to BELIEVE that, but it will have no effect on the REALITY of what actually IS.
Evolution Can Be Easily Disproven!
I could give you the scientific evidence to prove that. The real facts though seldom result in people changing their mind about what they have chosen to believe. God exists, but He will only prove that to you if you are honestly seeking the TRUTH.
We all fit into one of two categories:
(1) An honest seeker of TRUTH.
(2) A protector of a BELIEF SYSTEM.
What you choose to believe, has no effect on the REALITY of what actually IS. I wish nothing but the best for both of you. The TRUTH really will set you free.
In Search of the TRUTH,
Dr. Arv Edgeworth
Several hours later, Edgeworth wrote:
Hi Carolyn,
I was curious how you could feel so confident Bruce at one time was a born-again Christian unless you had perhaps experienced the same thing yourself. Do you have a story to tell?
Using Bruce’s logic though, if I were to observe a smashed Chevrolet, I would contact General Motors and tell them I could no longer believe in them as a great company because they build automobiles that people can smash. In fact, I am beginning to believe that they no longer exist, or perhaps never did. Same logic?
Also, for a fundamental Baptist preacher to pastor several churches while at the same time, having a mistress on the side, and the probable guilt and shame that he carried with him, but claim that had nothing to do with where he is at today, might lead someone to think he is delusional, at least to himself. But I do not judge him for that, we all fail at times.
By the way, do you know why God gave us the 10 Commandments? To prove to us that we couldn’t keep them, and needed a Savior to die in our place.
But having said all I have, I can guarantee, based on the infallible Word of God, that God still loves both of you, and desires nothing but the very best for your lives. That will never change, because God never changes. He may choose to operate differently at times, but He is unchangeable. He is a God you can trust, no matter how certain experiences may lead you to believe otherwise.
God could have built a bunch of robots that would always do right, but in accordance with His love, justice, mercy, and wisdom, He choose to form the Earth to be inhabited by fallible humans such as you and I.
As the loving father welcomed the prodigal son with open arms, God will do the same for you.
In Christian Love,
Certainty — a foundational belief for IFB Christians — breeds arrogance, and Edgeworth is certainly that. Without getting into a long debate, let me answer several of Edgeworth’s claims.
About my “chosen” beliefs. It is debated whether any of us chooses to believe. For the sake of argument, I will accept Edgeworth’s claim that I chose to be an atheist. I chose to be an atheist based on my careful, painful re-examination of the central claims of Christianity. This was me seeking TRUTH. Edgeworth seems unaware that I am a college-trained pastor, spent twenty-five years in the ministry, preached over 4,000 sermons, and spent over 20,000 hours reading and studying the Bible. It is disingenuous for Edgeworth to claim that I was not a sincere seeker of truth. You are fucking kidding me, right? I have spent more time and effort in understanding the teachings of the Bible than most Christians, including preachers. What, exactly, does Edgeworth think I “missed?” He has no evidence for his claims about my life. He asked for no clarifications and made little to no effort to understand my story. To Edgeworth, I say, the triune God of the Bible said: Answering before listening is both stupid and rude. (Proverbs 18:13) Do better, Edgeworth, do better. I am not your typical atheist. I am not ignorant about Christian theology or church history. I am conversant in all things Christian.
I am baffled as to why Edgeworth brings up evolution. What I believe about the beginning of the universe and how best to explain the natural world has nothing to do with atheism. Atheism is a singular claim about the lack of existence of deities. That’s it. I know several Christians who accept evolution as a scientific fact. Thus, one can believe the core doctrines of Christianity and evolution at the same time. To suggest otherwise means that salvation is by “right belief” and not faith.
I am a sincere seeker of truth. Edgeworth can’t accept this fact, of course, because it doesn’t comport with his peculiar claims. That my proverbial peg doesn’t fit in his hole is his problem, not mine. If Edgeworth wants to challenge my beliefs, I’m game. I am, however, not interested in discussions with people who do not respect me enough to accept my story at face value. Edgeworth says he’s a Christian. As a man who respects others, I accept his story at face value. It would be nice if Edgeworth would do the same. I know, I know, Edgeworth is an IFB preacher. Scores of Edgeworths have emailed me and commented on this site. I have generally found IFB preachers to be “Assholes for Jesus.”
In his last email, Edgeworth questioned whether I was a real Christian since I admitted to having an affair! This ludicrous and false statement suggests that Edgeworth did not carefully read the posts on the WHY? page. Had he done so, he would have learned that the post It’s Time to Tell the Truth: I Had an Affair is satirical.
Edgeworth mentions the Ten Commandments and the infallibility of the Bible, as well as arrogantly saying, based on evidence he does not have, nor can he possibly have, “I can guarantee, based on the infallible Word of God, that God still loves both of you, and desires nothing but the very best for your lives.”
How could Edgeworth possibly know that God still loves me and desires nothing but the best for my life? Does he know the mind of God? How does he know I’m not a reprobate or an apostate? I can definitively prove that I am both — gladly so. And as far as the Protestant Bible being (inerrant) and infallible, give me a break. That claim carries no weight and can easily be disproven. Edgeworth is King James Only. I assume he believes the KJV is infallible too, and not just the original manuscripts — which are not extant.
To Edgeworth, I say, if you want to talk about the law of God or the inerrancy/infallibility of the Bible, I’m game. As far as evolution is concerned, I am not a scientist. I have no relevant expertise regarding evolution. Others on this site do, some of whom are trained scientists, so if they want to engage you on matters of science, I am sure they will respond.
Wade in if you dare, Arv, but please know that this site is not a den of “ignorant” atheists or people who, as your friend said, “reject the authority of God in their lives.” For me personally, I think you will find that I can adequately and competently discuss Christian theology with you — especially in its Evangelical and IFB varieties.
Saved by Reason,
Bruce Gerencser, 68, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 47 years. He and his wife have six grown children and sixteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
According to Discover magazine, “Charles Darwin, the naturalist best known for his theories of natural selection, described evolution “as ‘descent with modification.’” That means humans descended from common (and now extinct) ape ancestors that lived millions of years ago, a process also referred to as “common descent.” While we share our ancestry with these animals, along the way, over millions of years, we all changed. “[We] each adapted to our own environments or specific circumstances or niches,” says Cofran. It’s believed that this human divergence from the chimpanzee lineage of apes happened between 9.3 and 6.5 million years ago.”
There are so many errors and lies in that paragraph! [So says a man with a Bible College education] If the Bible is a correct record of history – and it most certainly IS – then there is no such thing as millions of years. There is no such thing as ‘descent with modification’ because God made each species unique, and reproduction was always “after his kind.”
….
Now, we have an omniscient God. Darwin’s beliefs didn’t surprise God. So, why would God go ahead and create an animal with such similarities to man, knowing that man was going to create such a blasphemous, heretical doctrine that would lead millions astray through the years?
….
Man was presented with a choice: Worship and serve God or worship and serve His creation. Believe what the Bible says or believe the foolish inventions and imaginations of man. We learn a lot about those who will follow the pseudo-science. God says that they are fools with their foolish hearts darkened. They are not wise. They are fools. And God gave them up because of this.
— John MacFarlane, Pastor of First Baptist Church, Bryan, Ohio, Let’s Go Ape, December 14, 2024
Bruce Gerencser, 68, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 47 years. He and his wife have six grown children and sixteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
Dr. David Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen, has been busy writing about me and my British friend, Ben Berwick. Thiessen swore off using our content for “teaching,” but much like a crack addict, he failed to remain drug-free. Our posts are a drug he just can’t give up. I largely ignore his posts, but I thought I would share with readers a few excerpts from his recent posts about me. Ben has also responded to Thiessen. You can read his posts here, here, and here.
What follows are excerpts from four posts Thiessen has written about me since October 28, 2024. All spelling, grammar, punctuation, and irrationality in the originals.
As for BG [Bruce Gerencser], we wonder how his health is doing as he is taking longer breaks between writing content. We hope his health has not deteriorated too much.
Sometimes we wonder if he is trying to assuage some guilt by posting content that seems more positive toward Christianity than negative. He doesn’t really critique our content anymore and publishes other topics that seem to spread the good news about Christ and Christian living rather than oppose it.
We checked the BG and MM websites to see what they had to say about the election results. Needless to say, their responses have been consistent with a majority of athletes and celebrities who have, as Sky News labels their reactions, had meltdowns.
It is actually quite disturbing to read their responses as their treatment of Mr. Trump violates a lot of characteristics they claim to have about treating others, as well as violating the scriptures, ‘do unto others as you would like to be treated’.
We find their responses to be on the verge of delivering them into the realm of insanity. Some responses had youtubers screaming and wailing toward their viewers in a totally unhinged reaction to losing. All of them, including, BG and MM, have forgotten about how to be good losers.
….
He [Bruce Gerencser] must have been watching a different Former President Trump than we saw as none of that is true. In fact, he just appointed a female head of staff so the accusations do not fit. But this is the way it is with democrats, liberals, and leftists. They hold minor things over people’s heads forever depriving them of the right to change and be better people.
….
G should also look in the mirror when he describes MR. Trump in those terms as he has treated evangelicals and other Christians in the same manner. He is not perfect so he should not be saying one word.
Plus, his words show that BG is part of the problem much like the New York and New Jersey Governors, along with the female NY Attorney General who have made public statements containing threats against Mr. Trump.
The problem is not Mr. Trump, but the attitude of those who oppose him. We listened to his victory speech and none of those words ring true as Mr. Trump seeks to heal the nation not continue the divisiveness that the democrats have caused.
….
This is nothing but lies as Mr. Trump praised his wife as well as other women working for him throughout the campaign. Since he has been faithful to one wife for a long time, it is doubtful he is a predator. But democrats, etc., ignore the good and only focus on the bad to dehumanize others while trying to bully them into submission.
….
Except for the last line, none of this is true. Harris got over 65 million votes and some of those had to be men. or all the celebrities and athletes who said they would vote for her changed their minds and voted for Trump. But this is the level of nonsense the left brings to America.
They [Bruce Gerencser and Ben Berwick] look for excuses to blame anyone or anything for their candidate’s failure. The loss rests solely on Harris and her advisors shoulders for hiding away from press conferences and saying she would not change a thing from what Biden had done.
The mere fact that both people were unqualified & uneducated seems to be outside of the democrats scope and view. They suffer too much from TDS to see the real picture.
….
This is just another lie as it ignores Mr. Trump’s accomplishments in his first term. It is amazing that BG ignores all the people who have been killed by illegal aliens under Biden’s & Harris’ watch. The country has been through 4 years of dark times already and Mr. Trump, with God’s help, will change that.
No one cares which party BG will support. He is just a speck of sand in a sea of sand hills. His insane rhetoric puts him on the fringe and is in need of some therapy. Then there is MM who did not write as much but felt he had to attack Mr. Trump as well.
….
This is just stupid and not dealing with reality. It is also not true. It is a waste of time proving how wrong he is. YOu can read some of the accomplishments here. Besides building a wall to protect the country and fellow citizens he loves, Mr. Trump had a great first term. As for cognitive decay, that is just wishful thinking by anti-Trump people.
….
The evidence that BG and MM have decided against following god and his way is seen in their quotes. They think they are better by forcing or bullying others to do as they want. But in reality, that makes them worse than they accuse Mr. Trump and evangelicals of being.
We have often said you cannot be Christian and vote for or support democrats but as you can see by the reaction of the athletes, celebrities, and politicians, as well as their supporters, there is nothing Christian in the democrat party or side of politics.
It is best for Christians to stay away from them and the misguided ‘Evangelicals for Harris’ and similar people. Do unto others does not exclude those you disagree with and Mr. Trump seems to be extending the fig leaf of peace to save the nation he loves and protect his fellow citizens. He gets it while many of the democrat supporters, etc., do not.
No matter where Christians turn, there is always some unbeliever putting forth often refuted arguments and thinking those arguments are true. BG is just one of those people and he continues to proclaim long-dead arguments that go nowhere and prove nothing. Here are some samples of his attempts to persuade himself that God does not exist.
….
He is wrong of course. Atheists have tried for millennia to produce alternative answers to the Biblical record. They have always failed every time. Our origins is just one subject that atheists can’t answer as they cannot produce one shred of credible evidence supporting their point of view.
….
Bg actually does know as he preached about it for 25 years. He just won’t admit it. Christians know because we have all the evidence supporting the biblical record. He won’t admit that either.
….
Being a ‘faith claim’ does not exclude the answer from being true. Especially since all research fields have produced more evidence supporting the biblical record, this is more than a faith claim. It is proclaiming what truly happened.
The question ‘Were you there…’ is not illogical because it points out the fact that unbelievers are making faith claims of their own. They were not there, they did not see life develop thus their claims about life development are all based on faith.
Unbelieving scientists do not know what took place as they have no verifiable or credible evidence supporting their views. Since the Big Bang and Evolutionary theories violate the observable principle of science, these so-called learned men and women cannot come to the truth. They do not know if their mechanisms actually work or not.
….
Sure it is fair to ask that question of Christians. We may not have been there BUT we got the word from someone who was. The scientists do not even have that advantage. His point i smoot as everyone has to take the scientists’ claims on faith as no one but scientists were in their laboratories when the experiments were conducted.
In other words, BG and other unbelievers do not have a leg to stand on. Their conclusions are based on faith as they cannot go back in time to see if their results matched their historical claims about life development. Evolution and the Big Bang are nothing but faith claims.
….
Evolutionary scientists do the same thing. They do special pleading as everyone is supposed to take their word for it, an action Bg and other unbelievers hate when asked to do it for God. Then, all of science’s claims are human-written making their argument against biblical authors and God, moot.
….
Yes, there is but BG won’t admit it.
….
Not true.
….
Also not true and we have heard of more scientific lies and distortion of scientific facts committed by unbelievers than by Christians. The only people trying to fit the ‘evidence’ to their theory are those who accept and believe the evolutionary theory.
….
We know of many cases where forensic scientists have altered, distorted, and misrepresented science and scientific results to get convictions than Christians have been accused of. BG has no argument because he keeps repeating the same old tired arguments that have been refuted for millennia.
No unbeliever has any smoking gun evidence hidden away that would destroy or prove the Bible untrue. They are desperately grabbing at straws knowing they cannot win this debate.
BG has written an article lambasting Christians and God over a lack of supposed healing/
….
He and other unbelievers will never understand how God works. The main reason is that they do not believe in God or that he exists. So how can they understand? They will reject any legitimate explanation in favor of trashing spiritual beliefs.
….
But again, unbelievers do not accept these facts so they continue to criticize the Christian faith. The Bible also tells us that God’s ways and thinking are higher than ours, so how can Christians fully understand something that is beyond their capacity to grasp? It is for sure that unbelievers cannot grasp the reasons God does what he does.
….
They would rather insult and attack than take the time to honestly learn about God. It is not up to us to criticize God’s decisions rather we are to learn from our experience and see how God works everything together for his good and ours.
….
Yes, God could have healed her and millions of other Christians immediately. Would that have brought the person to a greater knowledge of God or to a level of trust? Not always. There may be lessons God wants the woman and other Christians to learn. We just are not privy to God’s intentions and he does not answer to us.
Instead, we learn to be patient until it is time to learn the correct lesson. But one of the most important lessons is that Christians are under, the verse, ‘it is appointed unto man once to die’ In other words Christians die and there is no escaping that event just because they believe in Jesus.
Yes, Jesus will heal people but when it is their time to pass on, there is no more healing in the works for those individuals.
….
We could say the same thing about modern secular medicine. Many doctors are great diagnosticians, but when it comes to healing, their track record thanthey claim God is in this department. Has BG looked at himself lately?
He claims to have several diseases and trusts medical science to find a cure. Yet he has suffered for approx., 14 years, and medical science has no cure for many of his ailments. WHy does he trust medical science and suffer through such great pain and discomfort when medical science has failed him?
Non-Christians like to point fingers and accuse God of the failures that medical science has. Unfortunately for BG, medical science is not greater than he is and has no higher purpose in keeping him sick.
….
They may avoid healing him so they can have a continuous cash income from his insurance but they are no better than he accuses God.
….
No, not true. The bad light is caused by unbelievers as they fail to understand how life works. The Bible tells us that both the righteous and unrighteous will suffer so we were warned about this in advance. We accept the fact that there will be Christians who suffer medically. It is a fact of life.
We just leave these things in God’s hands and look for the solution with his guidance. As the Bible says, we are not to worry about these things.
The unbeliever will rarely grasp these truths and when they recognize that they don’t it is best that they just ask questions and consider the answers honestly. They are in no position to criticize as they do not have an alternative to God. BG says:
For the atheist, in science we trust.
That is a misplaced trust for 100% of all medical science patients have died from day one of human existence till now. That is a lousy statistic to build trust in something that has no power over life or death. The track record of science is dismal and at no time should Christians trust science over God.
— end of excerpts.
As you can readily see, Thiessen doesn’t critique or respond to my posts. He quotes Bible verses, personally attacks me, and pompously and arrogantly says I am wrong. His comments about my health were offensive, well beyond thoughtful dialog. Why he refuses to thoughtfully and intelligently respond to my writing is a question for him to answer. I have my own opinion on the matter, but I will refrain from sharing it.
Bruce Gerencser, 68, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 47 years. He and his wife have six grown children and sixteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
Several days ago, I received the following email from an Evangelical man:
So where did it all come from. The known universe before the bang?
Over the past seventeen years, I have received scores of emails from Evangelicals posing this very question or something similar. Evangelicals think that this question is some sort of “gotcha” question atheists can’t answer; that by being unable to answer this question, atheists show the bankruptcy of atheism.
I am going to surprise the man who wrote this email by answering his question: I DON’T KNOW! No one knows where “it” came from; where the universe came from before the Big Bang. Atheists can’t answer this question, but neither can Christians. Saying GOD DID IT! is a faith claim, as is quoting verses from Genesis 1-3. To quote the great intellectual and scholar Ken “Hambo” Ham, “Were you there?” Ham loves to use this line of illogic when challenging evolutionists and other scientists. Since these learned men and women didn’t observe firsthand the beginning of the universe (and what became before the Big Bang), they can’t possibly “know” what happened. However, what’s good for the proverbial goose is good for the gander. When Evangelicals say GOD DID IT! it is fair for scientists to ask, “Were you there?” If not, then Christians cannot possibly know whether the Christian God created the universe or exists outside of space and time. These are faith claims, not science.
Of course, Ham and other creationists resort to special pleading to defend and justify their beliefs. The Bible is different from any other book, Evangelicals say. Written by God through human instrumentality, the Bible is inspired, inerrant, and infallible. Thus, we can KNOW who created the universe and when and how he did it by reading the Bible! The problem with this argument is that there is no evidence for the claim that the Christian God wrote the Bible. There’s a plethora of evidence, however, that suggests the Bible is the work of fallible men. Believing the Bible was written by God and is somehow, in some way, a one-of-a-kind divine text requires faith. Deep down, creationists know this, and that’s why Answers in Genesis, Creation Research Society, Institute for Creation Research, and dozens of other groups, spend countless hours trying to make science “fit” the creationist narrative. Faith is not enough for these zealots. They desperately want respectability and are willing to lie, distort scientific facts, and misrepresent science to get it. Yet, despite all their “scientific” work, creationism remains a matter of faith, not science.
Creationists can no more answer the aforementioned questions than atheists can. The difference between Evangelicals and evolutionists (a derogatory term often used by Evangelicals as a label for science in general) however, is that scientists continue to work towards answering the question of how the universe began and explaining what existed before the Big Bang. Science may never satisfactorily and completely answer these questions, and I am fine with that. Not every question — presently — is answerable. Evangelicals, armed with arrogance and certainty, think the Bible reveals to them everything they need to know about life. “The Bible says” becomes the answer to countless complex, difficult science questions. The underlying issue is that Evangelicals need to be right; to have “Biblical” answers for every question. Evangelicals have become the insufferable man at a party who dominates the discussion and has answers for every question. Or at least he thinks he does, anyway.
Let me conclude this post with this: atheism and evolution are not the same, any more than atheism and liberalism are the same. Atheism is defined this way: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. While it is certainly true that many atheists are evolutionists and political liberals, that cannot be said of all atheists. Atheism is a singular statement about the existence of deities. From there, atheists go in all sorts of ways.
Bruce Gerencser, 68, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 47 years. He and his wife have six grown children and sixteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
Dr. David Tee, World Renowned Denier of Science, Observations, October 24, 2024.
On the back of the book (Stephen Hawkings — The Origin of Everything), and we are quoting from memory, the book said that scientists have finally got to the point where they understand and know where are origins began. Or something close to that.
As we read those few lines, the first thought was, what a waste of time. The secular scientists still have no clue about our origins because they omit the truth concerning that topic. They have yet to verify that our origins were by natural means.
They come up with different theories but not one of those theories puts the biblical supernatural creative act in jeopardy. The second thought we had and another reason we consider the book and the secular scientific work a waste of time is that God already explained our origins.
The scientists exploring and pursuing an alternative to the Biblical creation act simply wasted their intelligence, time, and money. They have spent years and valuable resources pursuing a topic that has already been answered
That is a waste considering the millions of people who could have benefitted from a wiser use of those three elements. But is the secular world for you. They would rather waste precious time, money, and intelligence pursuing a false idea than humble themselves and accept the truth.
….
As we have said for years, unbelievers always take the wrong paths, in the wrong directions and look in the wrong places for the wrong answers. They never learn or refuse to learn when the truth is presented to them.
Unbelieving scientists need our prayers so that the truth is revealed to them and their eyes are opened once and for all. Those prayers need to include all those Christian scientists and students who listen to the unbelievers and follow their counsel and not God’s
….
Throughout the world Christians can see the difference between the unbelieving world and the believing world. When they do recognize this difference, they will understand why God said to not follow or listen to unbelievers.
Unbelievers do not have the truth and many do not want it. We have read on many occasions where unbelieving scientists say that even if the Bible is proven true, they would not accept it. That is a sad state to be in and shows Christians we still have a lot of work left to do.
The unbelieving world uses its immoral standards and self-righteous attitudes to attack Christians, not realizing how bad off they are. They are merely pawns being used to harm unwary Christians
….
The right information does not come from unbelievers.
It comes from God and the Bible. Learn the truth and teach your children the truth before they come under attack from unbelieving teachers and professors. Giving them the right information is protecting your children.
Thiessen is not a scientist, and, as far as I know, has no science training apart from what he was taught in Bible college. He is no more qualified to opine on evolution than I am physics. That’s not to say that Thiessen doesn’t know anything about science. He knows enough to make it seem to uneducated Evangelicals that he is some sort of authority figure. This is common in Evangelical churches where preachers are viewed as authority figures in areas in which they have no relevant expertise.
What follows are excerpts from Thiessen’s latest posts. Laugh, ridicule, or weep, but never forget that scores of people agree with Thiessen, even if they might disagree with his ham-fisted approach.
There is only one single view that all Christians must accept and hold to. That view is the creation act revealed in Genesis 1. Every other viewpoint that alters or disagrees with this one biblical revelation is false teaching.
….
Evolutionary scientists make a lot of assumptions. The reason for this is . . . they cannot replicate claims made about ‘historical evolution’. It is an impossibility as they have no way of developing partial samples to experiment with.
This failure is another piece of evidence showing that evolution is not true. We do not have to worry about scientifically replicating any results of god’s creative act as it is done on an hourly basis every day.
….
No, other approaches do make scientific sense if science would be more open-minded about our origins. Science cannot study the one-time act nor replicate it. But it can prove that all life goes as stated in Genesis 1. That means God’s creative act makes scientific sense.
….
The truth never changes which is why Christian colleges, etc., need to stand with God and the Bible. Neither has changed over the thousands of years this world has existed. Evolution is whatever the evolutionist wants it to be no matter who it hurts.
….
There is no scientific evidence for any alternative to Genesis 1. All scientific evidence for those alternatives is manipulated to show support and read into any experiment they make. Plus, science has not discovered or tested one mechanism they say is involved in evolutionary human development.
….
To many unbelievers and unbelieving scientists, scientific media outlets and organizations evolution is dogma and settled science, not a theory. Evolution should never be taught in any school except to show why it is wrong and never existed. It is a theory that should never be considered for anything else.
….
It [the Bible] also tells us how God created. There is no room for any other theory to explain our origins. We know everything about our origins as the Bible reveals this creative act correctly. The opinion of Mr. Wright is one that is used to justify denying what God wrote about himself and says that God is incapable of writing about himself and his actions.
….
Any form of evolution is not true, it is not honorable, especially towards God, and it is not right or pure. Plus, evolution is not lovely or commendable as it caused great harm to millions throughout history and today, and it is not in any way shape, or form excellent or worthy of praise.
Evolution is nothing but a deceptive lie that has no place in any part of Christianity or its academic institutions. One cannot take science over God as the former is not the ultimate authority over anything.
Science, like many tools, is used to destroy people and Christians need to be aware of it before jumping on board scientific research. Christians can not teach other Christians to accept science over God’s word. If they do, they are leading those students to sin against God. That is very wrong.
If you don’t teach creation [ism] as true, then why teach the Bible at all? Or another good question why claim you are a Christian if you think the Bible is in error?
….
Good exegesis does require that everyone accept God’s word and does not hint at him being a liar. There is no evidence in scripture or nature that a process was involved in the origin of everything.
….
The very first biblical verse [Genesis 1:1] does not imply a process. Neither do the words ‘Let there be’ Every step of the creative act supports a supernatural creative act leaving no room for processes.
….
First, there is no evidence supporting evolution. To get evidence, scientists would have to produce the original conditions and let life take its course. With no intelligent being involved in the origination or development of life, scientists cannot be a part of any evolutionary experiment.
Then their ‘experimental’ set-up would have to produce the same results as scientists claim took place in their version of human history. If millions of years are needed for this production of verifiable evidence, then evolution is not true. One does not have evidence to support their extraordinary claims.
….
While the information about the fossilization of life forms is true, evolutionists will ignore this fact and claim the fossil record supports evolution. Unfortunately, for the evolutionist, everything about evolution is read into fossils not taken out of it.
Fossils do not support an evolutionary process. They are pawns in a high-stakes game that evil uses to deceive people.
….
If Christian colleges are not pursuing truth but academic freedom, then the truth is lost and Christians are not getting the right spiritual food to grow strong and maintain their faith. You get what we have today, false teachers teaching false doctrine to vulnerable people. That is not a recipe for success.
After browsing the science books placed on the tables [at a book fair], we came to the conclusion that we do not need to read unbelieving science books anymore.
There are good reasons for following that realization. First, all the authors are telling the same story. They all do not depart from the main evolutionary claims or themes. Thus, they are boring to read. We figure they are writing these works to avoid the perish part of the academic publish-or-perish mentality.
Second, they offer no new evidence especially any that would be considered groundbreaking or history-changing. No new ‘physical evidence’ has been discovered or reported from the evolutionary side of the creation debate.
Anything they would present would be preceded or followed by the words ‘We Think’, ‘We Believe’. ‘it is possible’, ‘we do not know’, and similar phrases all evolutionary scientists cover their theories with. The last one is the most telling as it openly tells everyone they cannot find an alternative to God’s creative act.
Their evolutionary theories, etc., are merely wishful thinking and a waste of everyone’s time. Third, those first two points add up to the fact that it would be a giant waste of time reading those books.
They are nothing but false teaching and no Christian should be reading them unless they are looking for data and points to refute as well as show students why evolution and the Big Bang are wrong. These books provide no other type of valuable information.
Save your money or use it to buy solid, good Christian books written by true Christian scientists who believe in a 6 24-hour day creation. Remember, unbelievers do not have the truth and that includes all research fields under the science umbrella.
Every alternative to God’s creative act found in the Bible is false and untrue. Find Christian works that support Genesis 1 and 2 and learn the truth about our origins. Learn to strengthen your faith, not undermine it by accepting and adopting false information written by deceived people who are far from the truth.
Only God was there when creation took place and scientists cannot see back in time. It is laughable to think that evidence would survive billions and millions of years untouched by anything else.
— End excerpts
Bruce Gerencser, 68, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 47 years. He and his wife have six grown children and sixteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
Several years ago, an Evangelical man by the name of Steve left the following comment on the post titled, An Atheist Thanksgiving:
You went from being unsaved to a flat out reprobate buddy. You rejected the God of the Bible to believe you evolved from a rock which came from and explosion 13.8586.678 billion years ago. I agree that these old IFB pastors you pick on all the time have no spine and are just in it for the money but to believe you came from a monkey which nobody has ever seen a monkey turn into a human! Never! You just traded one religion for another. You traded Paul the apostle for that Pedo Richard Dawkins! Have fun in hell buddy
I will leave it to Brian — a former Independent Fundamentalist Baptist preacher’s son — to answer Steve’s comment:
I read Steve P’s post sentence by sentence and tried to find even one sentence that approaches an accurate statement. I was unable to see even one in the lot. Accuracy/truth seems very unimportant to Steve P. Is this true belief in God, this parrot-dull squawking? (with apologies to parrots, who at least make their dull repetitions entertaining!)
Some day, perhaps, Evangelicals will realize that threatening me with their God’s judgment and Hell has no effect on me. The only God I fear is Polly and the only Hell I know is Trump’s America.
Bruce Gerencser, 68, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 47 years. He and his wife have six grown children and sixteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
An Evangelical pastor whom I have known for over forty years sent me some questions, the answers to which appear below. He previously asked me some questions which I answered in a post titled, Four Questions from an Evangelical Pastor. I found his questions sincere and honest, unlike many questions I receive from Evangelicals. Far too often, ulterior motivations lurk behind some questions, but I don’t sense that here. Hopefully, readers of this blog will find my answers helpful.
Are There Different Levels of Atheism
The short answer is no. Atheism is defined thusly: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. That’s it. Unlike Christianity — a hopelessly fragmented group — all atheists agree on one thing: atheism is the disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. From that point, atheist beliefs go in all sorts of directions.
Strong theist. 100% probability of God. In the words of Carl Jung: “I do not believe, I know.” De facto theist.
Very high probability but short of 100%. “I don’t know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.”Leaning towards theism.
Higher than 50% but not very high. “I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.” Completely impartial.
Exactly 50%. “God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.” Leaning towards atheism.
Lower than 50% but not very low. “I do not know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be skeptical.”
De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. “I don’t know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.”
Strong atheist. “I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one.”
Atheists debate amongst themselves Dawkins’ scale, and whether agnostics are, in fact, atheists. Agnostics believe that the existence of God, of the divine, or the supernatural is unknown or unknowable. (Wikipedia) Another definition of agnosticism is as follows:
In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in God, whereas an atheist disbelieves in God. In the strict sense, however, agnosticism is the view that human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify either the belief that God exists or the belief that God does not exist. In so far as one holds that our beliefs are rational only if they are sufficiently supported by human reason, the person who accepts the philosophical position of agnosticism will hold that neither the belief that God exists nor the belief that God does not exist is rational. (Richard Rowe, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.)
Enlightenment deism consisted of two philosophical assertions: (a) reason, along with features of the natural world, is a valid source of religious knowledge, and (b) revelation is not a valid source of religious knowledge. Different deist authors expanded on these two assertions to create what Leslie Stephen later termed the “constructive” and “critical” aspects of deism. “Constructive” assertions— assertions that deist writers felt were justified by appeals to reason and features of the natural world (or perhaps were intuitively obvious) — included:
God exists and created the universe.
God gave humans the ability to reason.
“Critical” assertions— assertions that followed from the denial of revelation as a valid source of religious knowledge— were much more numerous. They included:
Rejection of all books, including the Bible, that are claimed to contain divine revelation.
Rejection of the incomprehensible notion of the Trinity and other religious “mysteries”.
Rejection of reports of miracles, prophecies, etc.
True Christianity
All deists rejected the Bible as a book of divine revelation. If you define “a Christian” as a person who accepts the stories in the Bible as true, divine revelations, the deists were not Christians. They rejected the miracle stories in the Bible and rejected the divinity of Jesus. Many, however, accepted Jesus as an actual historical person and held him in high regard as a moral teacher. (This position is known as Christian deism and was Thomas Jefferson’s motive for assembling his famous Jefferson Bible.) On the other hand, if you define “a true Christian” as a person who regards the historical human person Jesus as a great moral teacher and attempts to follow Jesus’ moral teachings, many deists considered themselves to be true Christians. Some deists were of the opinion that Jesus taught timeless moral truths, that those moral truths were the essence of Christianity, and since those truths are timeless, they predate Jesus’ teachings.
I have long believed that someone could look at the night sky and conclude that a deity of some sort created the universe; and that after creating the universe, this deity said, “There ya go, boys and girls, do with it what you will.” This God is unknowable and non-involved in our day-to-day lives. Believe in this deity or not, it exists. Some readers of this blog will call this deity divine energy or power. Of course, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that what we call “life” is, in actuality, a Westworld-like alien game simulation. Once I was freed from the authority and bondage of the Bible, I was free to think more freely about human existence. Who knows, maybe “reality” is an illusion.
Here is my take: I am an agnostic atheist. I cannot know for certain whether a deity of some sort exists. It is possible, though unlikely, that a deity of some sort might reveal itself to us someday. Possible, but improbable. For me, it is all about probabilities. (And the probability of the existence of any deity, let alone the Evangelical God, is minuscule.) On the Dawkins scale I am a six. The currently available evidence leads me to conclude that there is no God or gods. I am open to the possibility of the existence of one or more deities should evidence of their existence ever be provided, but, until then, I live my day-to-day life as an atheist. The only time thoughts about God enter my mind is when I am writing for this blog.
That said, let me be clear: I am not an anti-theist. Some atheists are vociferously and stridently anti-religion. I am not one of them. This has led to all sorts of criticisms and attacks from what I call the Fundamentalist wing of atheism. On occasion, I have had anti-theists tell me that I am not a True Atheist®. I laugh when such arguments are made, thinking, “Is this not the same argument Evangelicals use against me when they say I was never a “True Christian®?”
Do All Atheists Rely Strictly on Science and History for Answers?
Strictly or solely? No. Once we move from the base definition of atheism, atheists go in all sorts of directions philosophically, politically, socially, and even religiously. Yep, you will run into atheists who view themselves as “spiritual.” I have been blogging for seventeen years. I have met all sorts of atheists. Over the years, several pro-Trump, anti-abortion, anti-homosexual atheists/agnostics have commented on this blog. I don’t understand their viewpoints and logic, but I don’t have to. Atheists are free to meander every which way from “atheism is the disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.” One can be an atheist and be irrational; and believe me, more than a few atheists are as dumb as rocks. Some atheists will comment on this blog and leave me scratching my head, saying “huh?” I rarely respond to such people. I let them say their piece, hoping my silence tells them all they need to know.
This would be a good point to mention the fact that most atheists are humanists. There’s nothing in atheism that gives a person moral or ethical grounding. Atheists look to humanism to find a framework by which to live their lives. The Humanist Manifesto remains the best summary of humanism:
Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.
The lifestance of Humanism—guided by reason, inspired by compassion, and informed by experience—encourages us to live life well and fully. It evolved through the ages and continues to develop through the efforts of thoughtful people who recognize that values and ideals, however carefully wrought, are subject to change as our knowledge and understandings advance.
This document is part of an ongoing effort to manifest in clear and positive terms the conceptual boundaries of Humanism, not what we must believe but a consensus of what we do believe. It is in this sense that we affirm the following:
Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis. Humanists find that science is the best method for determining this knowledge as well as for solving problems and developing beneficial technologies. We also recognize the value of new departures in thought, the arts, and inner experience—each subject to analysis by critical intelligence.
Humans are an integral part of nature, the result of unguided evolutionary change. Humanists recognize nature as self-existing. We accept our life as all and enough, distinguishing things as they are from things as we might wish or imagine them to be. We welcome the challenges of the future, and are drawn to and undaunted by the yet to be known.
Ethical values are derived from human need and interest as tested by experience. Humanists ground values in human welfare shaped by human circumstances, interests, and concerns and extended to the global ecosystem and beyond. We are committed to treating each person as having inherent worth and dignity, and to making informed choices in a context of freedom consonant with responsibility.
Life’s fulfillment emerges from individual participation in the service of humane ideals. We aim for our fullest possible development and animate our lives with a deep sense of purpose, finding wonder and awe in the joys and beauties of human existence, its challenges and tragedies, and even in the inevitability and finality of death. Humanists rely on the rich heritage of human culture and the lifestance of Humanism to provide comfort in times of want and encouragement in times of plenty.
Humans are social by nature and find meaning in relationships. Humanists long for and strive toward a world of mutual care and concern, free of cruelty and its consequences, where differences are resolved cooperatively without resorting to violence. The joining of individuality with interdependence enriches our lives, encourages us to enrich the lives of others, and inspires hope of attaining peace, justice, and opportunity for all.
Working to benefit society maximizes individual happiness. Progressive cultures have worked to free humanity from the brutalities of mere survival and to reduce suffering, improve society, and develop global community. We seek to minimize the inequities of circumstance and ability, and we support a just distribution of nature’s resources and the fruits of human effort so that as many as possible can enjoy a good life.
Humanists are concerned for the well being of all, are committed to diversity, and respect those of differing yet humane views. We work to uphold the equal enjoyment of human rights and civil liberties in an open, secular society and maintain it is a civic duty to participate in the democratic process and a planetary duty to protect nature’s integrity, diversity, and beauty in a secure, sustainable manner.
Thus engaged in the flow of life, we aspire to this vision with the informed conviction that humanity has the ability to progress toward its highest ideals. The responsibility for our lives and the kind of world in which we live is ours and ours alone.
Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis. Humanists find that science is the best method for determining this knowledge as well as for solving problems and developing beneficial technologies. We also recognize the value of new departures in thought, the arts, and inner experience—each subject to analysis by critical intelligence.
Humans are an integral part of nature, the result of unguided evolutionary change. Humanists recognize nature as self-existing. We accept our life as all and enough, distinguishing things as they are from things as we might wish or imagine them to be. We welcome the challenges of the future, and are drawn to and undaunted by the yet to be known.
Do All Atheists Believe in Evolution?
Since I am not party to what all atheists believe, I can’t speak authoritatively on the matter. I can say that all of the atheists I know generally accept biological evolution as a scientific fact. While the word “belief” can be used in a variety of ways, in the context of evolution, atheists don’t believe in evolution. Belief, in this context, much like with religion, implies the use of feelings to come to a conclusion. Most atheists I know would say that their acceptance of evolution and other scientific conclusions rests on evidence, facts, and probabilities, not their feelings.
For most of my life, I was illiterate when it came to science. I believed that Genesis 1-3 told me all I needed to know about biology, cosmology, and the like. God created everything just as it is recorded in the inspired, inerrant, infallible Bible — end of discussion. I had a few creationist-oriented Evangelical apologetical books in my library. All these books did for me was affirm that I was “right.” It wasn’t until I was disabused by Dr. Bart Ehrman and others of the notion that the Bible was some sort of perfect, supernatural book that I was able to question what it was exactly I believed about science.
Let me be clear, I am not a scientist. I know a hell of a lot more about science today than I did a few years ago, or when I was a Bible-believing preacher, but that doesn’t mean I can speak authoritatively on matters of science. I continue to educate myself, but at my age, I will likely run out of time before I master any specific scientific discipline. I hope that one or more of my grandchildren will do so and become what their grandfather could not. Many of my grandchildren are straight-A students, so I have high hopes that some of them will enter STEM programs post-high school.
I know where I am lacking knowledge-wise, and I do my best to not speak beyond that which I know. Want to talk about the Bible, Evangelicalism, theology, photography, Lionel O Gauge trains, or Windows-based computers? You will find that I generally know what I am talking about. However, when it comes to biology, astronomy, cosmology, geology, archeology, and other scientific disciplines, I am, in every way, a novice. It is for this reason that I rely on experts to tell me what I need to know about science. Smart is the person who values expertise. I have certain scientists I trust to tell me the truth. “So, Bruce, does this mean you put “faith” in what they say?” Yes. Many atheists shy away from the word faith because of its religious connotations. However, I refuse to let religion hijack certain words. Faith means “confidence in a person or plan.” There are scientists that I put great confidence in; when they speak, I listen. No, these men and women are not infallible, but they have given their lives to understanding this or that science discipline, so I trust what they say.
In Christianity, There is so Much Disagreement! How About Among Atheists?
There’s no doubt that Christianity is the most fragmented religion on the planet. I have long argued that if Christians were unified theologically that I might at least pause for a moment when considering the “God question.” However, there are thousands and thousands of Christian sects, each with its own version of the “faith once delivered to the saints.” This disunity says to me that Christianity is very much of human origin.
I wish I could say that atheism is monolithic, and everyone thinks and believes the same things. Sadly, atheism is quite divided too. Not so much on the core belief: “atheism is the disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.” Every atheist I know believes this statement to be an accurate definition of their view on God or gods. However, recent years have brought attempts by some to expand the definition of atheism to include social justice issues. This spawned a group called Atheism+. While there was a moment when I thought Atheism+ might be worthwhile, I quickly thought better of it after seeing who it was that was driving this attempt to redefine atheism. Socially and politically, I am as liberal as you come, but I saw Atheism+ as a purity test; an attempt to divide atheism between us and them. I concluded that the proponents of Atheism+ were using methodologies eerily similar to those I saw in Evangelicalism. No thanks. And let me be clear to Atheism+ flag-wavers, I have zero interest in re-ligating this issue with you in the comment section. Been there, done that, still bleeding.
Here’s one thing I know about most atheists. We can heartily disagree with one another and later enjoy each other’s company at a pub or restaurant. Back in my Evangelical days, every disagreement had eternal significance. Not so with most atheists. I don’t understand how an atheist can support Donald Trump or the present iteration of the Republican Party, but I am not going to let that affect our relationship (if we have one). I have booted several pro-Trump atheists off this site, not because of their politics, but because they were assholes. And as much as I hate to admit it, there are atheist assholes; people who don’t play well with others; people who think throwing feces at people on social media is “good conversation.”
I hope I have adequately answered my Evangelical friend’s questions.
Bruce Gerencser, 68, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 47 years. He and his wife have six grown children and sixteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
First off, we need to look at the source of scientific information. Are the people bringing us the alternative to Genesis 1 or scientific discoveries actually and truly Christian? If not then we know that they are being led by evil and are deceived people.
They are the blind trying to lead the blind.
….
God separates education into two distinct categories—true teaching and false teaching. If the scientists are not following God and the Bible then they are not bringing true teaching to the faithful. They may mix some of the truth in with their alternative ideas but as all con men know, to deceive people you need some truth to make the con work.
….
Secular scientists and alternative believers bring a different gospel than the one Jesus and the disciples taught. They are saying that Moses is wrong but Jesus, Paul, and the apostles never corrected Moses and in fact, Jesus stated in John 5:45ff that if you do not believe Moses how can you believe his words? So believing Genesis 1 is important to one’s salvation.
Secular scientists and alternative believers do not believe Moses thus they try to alter the gospel message because they cannot bring themselves to follow God’s rule of using faith to accept a supernatural origin.
….
We have help [God and the Bible]. The secular scientist does not have this aid so we know that whatever they conclude or say is not coming from God but from evil. They do not know what the truth is.
….
There is only one way for secular science to be compatible or harmonized with scripture and that is for those in secular science to repent of their sins and get right with God then toss out all false teachings from the field of science.
God and the Bible do not humble themselves to secular scientists, science, or alternative believers. Those groups are to humble themselves and give up what is wrong. We cannot put the truth into secular science because it is not made new but a very sinful and corrupt field of research and the Bible teaches us.
….
One is not blessed by God for taking sinful words and counsel over God’s words. Here is a question I have asked many an atheist, alternative believer, and secular scientist: Where in the Bible do both God and Jesus give permission to take secular science over their words?
So far not one of the people I have asked has been able to provide an answer.
They can’t because both God and Jesus tell us to follow them over the secular world and to use faith when we believe. We do not have to use secular science and its rules to combat secular science. We just need to know who God is and what happens if he is wrong to see that the truth lies in Genesis 1 and not with those who have rejected that passage of scripture.
It is not the amount of educational degrees behind a name that finds the truth nor is it the amount of expertise or years of doing experiments that lead us to the truth about our origins. It is following the Holy Spirit that gets us to the truth and the Holy Spirit will not contradict God or the Bible.
— Dr. David Tee, TheologyArcheology: A Site for the Glory of Scientific and Theological Ignorance, Harmonizing Science and Scripture, September 3, 2024
