[Article 2] The ICC's Corrupt Policies for Money (Part 2)

This article is available for download in PDF format here

A file with all the articles is available for download here

[The Articles of Indignation: Article 2]

Corrupt Policies of the International Christian Church: Part 2

By Daniel Berg           June 25, 2015

In my previous article I wrote about psychological concepts involved in the ICC's abusive actions. So as not to appear arrogant; I write not as an expert on psychology but as an engineering graduate who has also taken up the study of psychology and group psychology on the side. The key behind manipulating a person or a group of people is to keep them from realizing that they are actually being manipulated, therefore the manipulation needs to either be disguised as something else or psychological tactics must be used to keep the victim from thinking about the possibility of manipulation altogether. Many of these manipulative policies appear seemingly innocent at first as these leaders claim that they are just trying to make sure that their members are “spiritual”, but they serve as components in a larger system. I now try to write further about the nature of the psychological manipulation in the ICC that is behind more questionable policies involving money. Hopefully the logic and truth behind my words will hold more sway than what credentials I may or may not have as I once again tackle more aspects of this corrupt system that the ICC has created.

Pledge Cards

Another questionable practice about these contribution raises were the contribution cards, or what are now known as “pledge cards” which were issued to the congregation twice a year.  At first, we were told once again that “all corporations do this sort of thing”, that these cards were being introduced simply for financial planning purposes.  When these cards were passed around to the members they were told to write down their name and contribution.  Even though these cards were supposed to be only for “planning purposes” the members were pressured to write down their new raised contribution that the leadership had asked for, there were even times when the members were required to put down both their old and new contribution along with their name so that everyone who saw their card in the plate could tell whether or not they had raised it, thus subjecting the members to social pressure.

Then came the day when an “odd” Bible verse was printed on the contribution cards; Ecclesiastes 5:4-6 – “When you vow a vow to God, do not delay paying it, for he has no pleasure in fools. Pay what you vow. It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay. Let not your mouth lead you into sin, and do not say before the messenger that it was a mistake. Why should God be angry at your voice and destroy the work of your hands?”  At first I simply thought that this was a bible verse that was in “bad taste” to put on a contribution card, after all, we were told that these cards were solely for “financial planning purposes” up to this point.  I signed the card, wondering who in the leadership had decided to put such a misleading Bible verse; “even leaders make mistakes sometimes” I told myself.  I never suspected what was about to happen. 

My belief that this was a “simple mistake” was soon shattered during a congregational service when an ICC leader began preaching about the subject of contributions.  At a certain point during the sermon the leader that was preaching spoke these chilling words: “We need to have the conviction that what you put on that ‘pledge card’ was a vow to God”. I remember sitting among the congregation in shock as I heard this.  There were a few “amens” from the front row but as I looked around I saw a lot of people whose gazes no longer seemed to be trained on the preacher. Instead they were staring off into space with facial expressions that were a mix between concern and confusion; trying to recall when such a decision was made on behalf of the entire congregation. I do not know whether anyone was as alarmed as I was on that day, all I know is that my mind instantly recalled the pledge card that had been given to me months before, and the verse that was written on it.  I had made only one pledge to God my entire life, and that was on the day that I was baptized.  After realizing that many of the beliefs that I had been taught in the past were not in line with the beliefs of the early disciples I had pledged to God to never accept a belief that I had not verified for myself.  Of all my convictions, those who baptized me can certainly testify that this was my strongest (although it seems that one of my  fathers in the faith has turned against me now).  If there ever had been some kind of good reason or agreement between the leadership and the congregation that what was written on these cards would be considered a “pledge to God” I would have remembered it. Also, I was on my guard since the events from 2010 behind the establishment for the policy of contribution raises (see my first article) where the ICC leaders were telling the congregation “we have always been doing this”, as if trying to trick me into forgetting what really happened.

I was not about to let any more of the central leadership’s “honest mistakes” sneak by me unnoticed. There was no official announcement, instead it was casually slipped to the congregation during a sermon as though saying: “by the way, those pledge cards you filled out…that was a vow to God so you can’t go back on it”.    It was at this point that the leadership began to overwhelmingly refer to the contribution cards as “pledge cards” in reference to Numbers 30:2 – “If a man vows a vow to the Lord, or swears an oath to bind himself by a pledge, he shall not break his word. He shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth.”

When I inquired the leadership about the issue with these “pledge cards” the response I got back from the leaders was: “Didn’t you see the Bible verse on the pledge cards”?  This is deceitful; the congregation filled out the cards like they always did twice a year because they were told it was for “financial planning”. It is manipulative to put a certain Bible verse on the subject on vows on the new contribution cards and then suddenly say that these cards (which the congregation was REQUIRED to fill out, under the guise of “financial planning”) are synonymous with being “vows to God” after the fact, without announcing it to the congregation beforehand.  Now they merely feign ignorance after this deceit; telling their members that they “should have known”.  It is now apparent why the leadership tactfully “slipped” this new policy to the congregation in the middle of a sermon; they did it this way to avoid any kind of panic.  They knew that the trust that the congregation had in the leadership would cause them to not want to doubt the decisions behind what was being announced.

Can you imagine what would have happened if these leaders had set up a congregational meeting and announced honestly that they were making a new policy that dictated that from then on whatever they wrote on these contribution cards (which were mandatory for them to fill out) would be considered a “pledge to God”? 

Then what do you think would have been the response if they had announced that because these would be “pledges to God” that in the case that their work hours get cut or even if they lose their jobs; that giving anything less than what they wrote on these contribution cards would be considered to be a sin on their part?

Then to make matters worse, they would be required to fill out a new pledge card twice a year during which they will be pressured to raise the amount of money that they are required to give and thus raising their “pledge” that they cannot break on the basis that it would be a sin to do so. 

It is obvious why the leadership chose to deceitfully “sneak” this new policy into the Church.  Like a fast-talking scammer that will pull people into his rapid pace in order to prevent them from considering the financial consequences of the scammer’s proposal; in their sermons the ICC leaders would preach: “as disciples we need to have strong convictions that our contribution “pledge” is a vow to God”, thus trying to suggest to their members that these were “convictions” that “strong” disciples had.  Everyone became so caught up in the pace of wanting to be seen as a “strong” disciple in the eyes of the leadership that the congregation failed to pause and consider if these were “convictions” that disciples should have based on the teachings of the Bible.  Not to mention this also kept them from considering who the heck thought it was a good idea to make a weekly given and set amount of money into a “vow to God” which would then be increased twice a year.

From this point on, whenever the leadership would raise the congregations contribution, they would claim that it was a “vow to God” that they could not go back on.  This is contradictory to the viewpoint of the Bible; in the very verse that the leadership used to get this policy started, Ecclesiastes 5:4-6, it says “It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay”, and its parallel verse in Deuteronomy 23:21-23 says “But if you refrain from vowing, you will not be guilty of sin.”  The advice from the Bible is to be very careful before making a vow and that it is better not to vow.  The ICC leadership pressuring its members to raise the amount of their tithe twice a year, and calling it a “vow to God”, is the very opposite of being careful before making a vow, and contradictory to the advice of the Bible. If not vowing is the wisest option according to the Bible, then why would the leaders deliberately try to cut them off from this option?

Of course there were people who did not accept this new policy, but they were too afraid of the leadership to speak up because those who did were accused of being “bitter”.  Even though these people did not publicly speak against the new policy, their opposition was still apparent because they would still change their tithe in accordance with their income. 

Therefore, once the leaders had successfully “sneaked” this new policy into the Church, next came the “conditioning”.  People who had lowered their contribution due to financial struggles or other reasons were brought up to speak to the congregation during the “contribution speech” about how ashamed they were that they had lowered their contribution and had therefore “gone back on their vow to God”.  Then people who had not lowered their contribution even during times of financial difficulty were praised and called “spiritual” because they had kept their “vow to God”.  Thus, over a period of time, the congregation was “conditioned” into accepting this new policy; that lowering their contribution was a “sin”, even in situations of decreased income.

This is a policy that serves to further maximize the flow of money into the hands of the paid leaders at the expense of the congregation.  ICC members get pressured to make bad financial decisions and then if they come to realize that their finances are unbalanced because of this decision that they were pressured into making then the leaders try to prevent them from readjusting their contribution according to their income with this new policy on vows. They have done everything in their power to increase the money that they take from the congregation and to make sure that this increase is maintained. With the policies of raising contributions and "vows to God" combined, these serve to increase the money going into the leaders pockets and then keeping it there.

Steadily Increasing Involuntary Special Contributions

Every year, the ICC has these “special contributions” which are supposedly for raising money for mission teams.  I remember my first special contribution was the day that I was baptized; June 29, 2008.  Back then special contribution was 10 times your regular weekly contribution, but then it was raised to 15 times due to a “particular need”, yet after that money was given the following special contribution a year later was again 15 times without any explanation.  When I asked leaders why this amount had increased they would just tilt their heads quizzically and say “I’m sure there is a good reason”, but no such reason was ever given. 

In May 2014 we were told to give 20 times because we were combining the 15 times with the 4 times contribution that was supposed to be held half a year later (the 4 times contribution became known as the “5 times” because it was 4 times plus the current contribution, so this should actually be a 19 times contribution plus the current contribution for that Sunday).  From this we were led to believe that this would be a single contribution that would account for the special contributions of the entire year, yet half a year later we had another 3 times special contribution anyway.  When I inquired to the leaders why we were having another special contribution when the 20 times contribution was supposed to account for both special contributions for that year the answer I received was “we combined the 15 times and the four times (plus the contribution for that Sunday), but this is a 3 times contribution so we are not technically having the 4 times contribution again”.  This is deceitful since when the leaders initially said that they were combining the 15 times and the 4 times contributions; they knew that the congregation would interpret this to be the total contribution for that year, and yet they squeezed in another 3x profit through some fabricated “technicality loophole”. 

Then in May 2014 another 20 times contribution was held and then it was followed by a 6 times contribution, with no valid explanation they increased the amount once again. Now the latest special missions contribution (on June 14, 2015) has been increased once again to 25 times the weekly contribution; I am not sure how they did this since this time I was not present. Did they claim that they were combining the 20x with the 5x even though the 20x was already supposed to be a combination of the 15x and 5x that was supposed to be held only once a year? Or was the fact that they had pushed the special contribution back a month used as an excuse to collect more money from the congregation? Whatever the reason; it is apparent that they have been very aggressive in their agenda of increasing the money they take from the congregation.

            It became obvious that deceptive mathematical incrementation was being used to steadily increase the special contributions. To put this in a more simple form, here is the timeline:

●June 2008 –> 10x special contribution on June 29. (this was 10x the weekly contribution, keep this in mind when also considering the weekly contribution increases).

●2008-2010 –> Foul play with establishing the policy to continually raise the weekly contributions of the members (see my first article for this). Once established the congregation was pressured to increase the amount of their contribution twice a year.

●2010 –> Kip purchases $850,000 condo for $650,000 (a pretty good deal, but this is still an excessive amount of money to be spending on himself).

●2011 –> 15x Special Contribution with a 4x contribution about 6 months later (on November 13).

●April 2012 –> 15x Special Contribution on April 8, with a 5x contribution about six months later.

●2013 – Kip establishes policy which dictates that members who did not give contribution for two weeks in a row would be “warned” that they would be disfellowshipped. This is regardless of whether that member is actually receiving any income and therefore has led to coercion and extortion of money (as can be seen in my next article).

●May 2013 –> 20 times contribution with 3x contribution about six months later. Even after being led to believe that the 20 times would be a “combination of both 15x and 5x contributions” (and therefore they were led to believe that this would be a single special contribution for the entire year), they took the opportunity to add another “special contribution” a few months later.

●May 2014 –> 20 times contribution with a 6x contribution later in November, close to November 9. Some individual leaders who spoke in front of the Church actually tried convincing us once again that this would be a combination of the 15x and 5x, but there was no official announcement of this because at this point everyone would know that this was a deception. The definition of “official announcement” is left to some ambiguity here, it seemed as though the ICC allowed the leaders to say whatever they wanted and even allowed misconceptions if it would help to sway the minds of the congregation.  Then they even added another 3x to the new special that was introduced the previous year (thus resulting in the added 6x contribution).

●June 2015 –> 25 times contribution on June 14 (and if they told you that this would be a combination of the 20x and 5x contributions, well, look above and you can probably guess what will happen next).

(Added commentary 11/11/2015; the ICC is having another "special contribution" this year for November 2015. This once again raises the total yearly money they take from the members through "special contributions". So true to my predictions the ICC has continued to escalate their financial pressuring on their members)

The ICC leaders refer to a member’s assigned amount for the special contribution as their contribution “goal”, as if this was an amount that they themselves have set. I remember when a leader once asked me “do you have enough money to reach your 20 times special contribution goal?” Perplexed at this statement I answered; “What do you mean by goal? If you mean an amount that I agreed to, I willingly said that I would give 10 times my normal contribution when I first got baptized, so I can consider this as my minimum goal.” The previous year I had actually given a 15 times special contribution just like everyone else, thus exceeding my minimum goal by 5 times. I didn’t mind giving the extra money because I too believed in sacrificing for the Lord, but I was becoming uneasy about the pressure being put on the congregation as well as the mathematical misconceptions being used to increase the special contribution amounts. If I was to consider a certain dollar amount of the special contribution as my personal “goal”, then this would actually be 10 times the normal contribution since this was the amount that I personally agreed to when I first joined the Church as I was told that this was an amount that everyone willingly gave. The leader in question still seemed disturbed by my statement, however, and then he said to me “everyone’s goal this year is 20 times their weekly contribution”; as if he were insisting that this was something that everyone had decided on rather than being imposed on them by the upper leadership. It was the same “everybody is doing it” group psychological influence that I had seen the ICC leadership use countless times before.

As an attempt to validate their activities, the ICC leadership likes to point out that the first century church also had special contributions.  Yes indeed, the early Church did have something similar to a special contribution in Acts 11:27-30 which states that the disciples gave as they were able in order to help out the rest of the disciples who were suffering because of the famine in Judea.  This gift, as the verse describes, was sent to the elders via Barnabas and Saul, for the purpose of helping these disciples who were suffering.  The thing about gifts is that they should be happily received; when you get a gift for Christmas or your birthday you may not get everything on your list you wanted, but you are still happy for what you received and show gratitude toward those from which you received.  In the Old Testament, the people of God also had “special contributions”, such as the event in 1 Chronicles chapter 29 where they were helping to build the temple of the Lord.  In verse nine of this passage it says: “Then the people rejoiced, for they had offered willingly, because with a loyal heart they had offered willingly to the Lord; and King David also rejoiced greatly.”  We see that according to the Bible, special contributions should be offered willingly and accepted with gratitude.

The attitude that the ICC exhibits toward receiving special contributions from its members, however, is very different from this.  In the ICC, church members are criticized and told that they should be “ashamed of themselves” if they cannot come up with the full special contribution that the leadership asked for, even as they keep raising this amount.  I know of church members who were in financial trouble yet still gave as much as they could for the special contribution, though it was not the full amount that they asked for.  Rather than being grateful for the gift that these members had given sacrificially, instead the ICC leaders would sit down with them in a private meeting then subject them to character assassination methods; calling them “selfish” and that they should be “ashamed of their negligence” in not being able to come up with the full contribution that they imposed on them.  Then once they have the member/victim feeling bad about themselves they tell them to pay the rest of their special contribution at a later time, as if it was some kind of debt that they owe.  These same kind of shakedown tactics were also used during the time that Kip McKean was leading the ICOC. 

Rather than allowing their congregation to give willingly they demand a certain amount of money that they “call” the members to give, and they show little gratitude when they receive it, only a sense of entitlement as if the congregation owes it to them. Aren’t these special contributions supposed to be the same as donations which are to be given willingly? How come the ICC leadership thinks they can dictate the amount that each member needs to give while using such aggressive methods to put pressure on their members?  To make matters worse, Bible Talk leaders were being told to “look after the salvation” of their Bible talks by making sure that everyone had their “assigned” amount for the special contribution (this disturbing kind reasoning was also used during the contribution raises).

When I brought up these issues concerning the special contribution to the leaders in the past I only got the following contradictory response; “As disciples they need to obey their leaders and therefore need to give the amount that is asked, and they need to give it willingly and have a cheerful heart about it”.  So in other words these members were being forced to give “willingly” and had to have a “cheerful heart” while they were giving under this compulsion?  This is hypocritical and manipulative and shows that the ICC leaders were just using the influence of the Bible as a tool to further their own agendas. 

But once again the leaders would bring up their favorite go-to verse in Acts 4:32-37 where the disciples sold everything they had and that their members needed to have “the same heart as these first disciples”.  Yet there is a major difference between the special contributions of the first century church and those of the ICC, not only a difference in how it was conducted (which was discussed earlier), but in the reason the special contributions were held.  The special contribution in Acts 4 was to support all the new converts that were currently in Jerusalem (many came from outside of Jerusalem and needed financial support since they initially only planned to stay for the duration of the Pentecost), and the special contribution in Acts 11 was to help support the disciples in Judea who were suffering due to famine. Also the “special contribution” in 2 Corinthians 8:1-7 was a benevolent offering for the poor and famished disciples in Jerusalem (as shown in Romans 15:26-27 for the Macedonian church).  All these special contributions were for benevolence; if the ICC is really imitating the first century church as it claims then why has it not once ever had a benevolent special contribution? Many people on the mission teams are asked to sell their belongings and ask their families for money in order to pay their own way, why didn’t the SMC money go to them? Not only that but many mission teams were cut off from funding prematurely after being told that they had “budgeting problems”; where had this money gone? If they are going to demand such heavy sacrifices from their congregation then the least they can do is not have such defective budgeting where large amounts of the money that was supposed to go to the mission team mysteriously disappears.

 It is heartbreaking to see the ICC leaders quoting these verses that describe the loving sacrifices of the first century disciples giving to each other and then using them to pillage resources away from their own congregation, even from those who barely have anything; telling them that they need to put “The Kingdom God” first and failing to recognize that it is all the people of God who make up the real “Kingdom” and not just the upper leadership or paid staff.

Now many of the new converts are told; “look at how sacrificial our congregation is. They give a 25 times contribution. Look at how devoted our church is!” This is not simply some matter of the congregation “having the heart to be sacrificial”; these exorbitant contributions are not something that the congregation collectively “agreed” to like the leaders want these new converts to believe. These contributions were imposed upon the congregation using deceitful and manipulative methods. These are not sacrifices that have been willingly given, and therefore the act of the leadership collecting such a contribution is an abomination to our God.

For members who are financially struggling or who do not have jobs the ICC introduced something they call "tagging" where the members go out on the street corner with signs and ask for money.  Now if an organization wishes to go to a street corner or an intersection to raise money for a cause then they need to obtain a license to do so in the area in which they are operating; then the city recognizes that they have legal rights to go “tagging” in that area. When tagging was first introduced in the Church they had announced that they had obtained such a license, however, that was only for a limited time at one area and since then they have generally never bothered to legally obtain a license. 

Now prior to the special contributions, members who are jobless or in financial trouble are told that they need to go “tagging” in order to come up with their portion of the special contribution.  The problem here is that this cannot be called “tagging” anymore. Since the ICC does not even provide their members with the dignity of being licensed; this is little more than sending them to go begging on the street corner.  The ICC’s insistence on using the term “tagging” is just a poor attempt to sugar coat that they are really sending their members to go begging on the streets and for those who have no other way of paying; making it mandatory for them to do so. When asked about this, they will openly admit that what they are doing could very well be classified as begging, however, they still stubbornly call it “tagging” when convincing their members to do it as this is a more psychologically pleasing term.

Moreover, in many areas they have been warned multiple times by law enforcement officers that what they are doing is illegal, and yet they continue to go “tagging” in these areas until they are threatened with a citation. At this point they just move to another city and do the same thing over again as they tell their members that they need to bring them more money in order to be as sacrificial as the first century disciples in Acts chapter 4; to sacrifice their time and energy to “advance the Kingdom of God”. The contradiction here is that in Titus chapter 3 it says that we must be submissive to obey the legal authorities over us, as long as the established authority is not ordering us to do something against the teachings of the apostles. Special contributions are to be given willingly, and are thus not mandatory; however, obeying the authorities IS mandatory. Proverbs 21:3 says “To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.” The right thing to do in this situation is to obey the Bible and therefore comply with the law established by the authorities (Titus 3:1, 1 Peter 2:13-17, Romans 13:1). Even after bringing this concern to the leadership I was completely ignored as the leaders continued to tell the members to go “tagging” to obtain more money for their special contributions regardless of the fact that they already knew that this was an illegal activity in their areas. 

The things that I have just written about I have explained to other people in the past and I always received the same excuse; “nobody is perfect, even Church leaders make mistakes”. I was quickly becoming uneasy about the direction that the Church was going, but this situation brought with it a whole new fear. The Church had been pressuring people to give more money even though it was in contradiction with 2 Corinthians 9:6-7; any time they were criticized for crossing the line with their coercion they would always tell any concerned person to “stop being bitter over an honest mistake”, the same thing had happened with any situations concerning the “vows to God” as well as the deceitful mathematical tactics behind the contribution increases. But now they were directly disobeying scriptures from the Bible and showed no hint that they were at all concerned about this. There was no longer any way to differentiate ourselves from the modern day evangelical Churches who ignore Acts 2:38 for the sake of their popular beliefs and then our Church that was now disregarding scriptures for the sake of making money. How could we claim that we are a Church that obeys the Bible if we are going to ignore scripture? No longer did we have any right to call ourselves a “Bible-based Church”. Scriptures that promoted profit for the upper leadership were being over-emphasized while scriptures that were inconvenient for these goals were being blatantly ignored.  In the words of Gustave Le Bon on group psychology: “We have shown that crowds do not reason”, he writes; “that they accept or reject ideas as a whole, that they tolerate neither discussion nor contradiction, and that the suggestions brought to bear on them invade the entire field of their understanding and tend at once to transform themselves into acts.” He goes on to talk about how being part of a psychological group causes the members of that group to have a sense of invincibility, as if they are above reproach.  These Church leaders were exhibiting these exact qualities; disregarding anyone who attempted to bring to their attention the ICC’s breach of the scriptures and labeling them as “bitter” or even “divisive” if they continued to voice their objections. To question the leadership became tantamount to sin. 

Conclusion to Part 2

For any of you who are still doubting me when I say that the ICC is corrupt, let me ask you this; what is the source of corruption? In other words, what motivates corrupt people to do corrupt things?  The answer is money.  Do you really think it is a coincidence that this self-proclaimed “Bible based Church” has proceeded to make a series of increasingly complex “mistakes” all around the issues of money and all of which have always had the effect of increasing the amount of money that flows into the leadership’s hands?

Let’s look at a brief summary of the events that I have written about so far:

●The Church established a policy which would continuously put pressure on the congregation to increase the money that they were giving the Church twice a year. People who didn’t raise their contributions when asked were called “unspiritual”. Then “financial workshops” were used to put additional pressure on the congregation as well as to introduce this policy to the new members and subject them to social pressure.

●“Pledge Cards” were introduced into the Church, which were originally supposed to be for “financial planning”, now they are introduced during each contribution raise as “vows to God” that they cannot go back on as doing so would be considered to be a “sin”.

● The special contributions were steadily increased through “technicality loopholes”, deliberate mathematical misconceptions and deceptive incrementation.

Then we take into consideration how these things were presented to the congregation:

●The congregation was “called” to raise their contribution, thus implying that if they didn’t do so that they were going back on some kind of commitment and subjecting them to psychological pressure.

●These new beliefs were called “convictions”, and these “convictions” were used to describe what it means to be a “strong” disciple according to the ICC leaders.

●The amounts for these increasing special contributions were called “goals” as if this was something that every individual had decided on rather than being imposed on them.

●These new policies were established in such a way as to prevent the congregation from thinking about the changes that were being made; trying to make them feel like what was happening was “no big deal”.

We see very tactful use of wording by the ICC leaders so as to have a psychological influence on the congregation and this psychological manipulation was used always with money as the end goal. This manipulation continued even when it became apparent that they were in violation of the scriptures of the Bible, and anyone who criticized them was character assassinated.  These policies were also established in such a way as to keep the congregation from thinking about what was being done to them. Most people are familiar with the lesson of 1 Timothy 6:10; that money is the root of all evil, and evil has definitely taken root in the ICC. It is no coincidence that these red flags were all popping up over issues that involved money. Yet even though these policies contradicted the Bible they were still being closely protected by the ICC leadership through logical (or not-so-logical) and “Biblical” loopholes that they themselves kept fabricating (I address these additional arguments that these ICC leaders try to make in the other articles). My conclusion that the ICC is corrupt comes not out of bitterness but from careful observation and study and I have provided the evidence to prove it.

On the contrary, I am sure the ICC leadership will be all too eager to throw my own accusations back at me after reading this article and seeing how many times I use the words “corrupt” to describe the ICC.

If you want to say that my using the word “corrupt” was somehow inaccurate, I believe I presented the definition of this word quite thoroughly and showed how it related to the ICC’s activities.  If anyone can present sufficient evidence to suggest the ICC’s actions do not meet up to this definition, I would be willing to give it my full attention.  I believe that I clearly explain the reasoning behind the things I choose to write about in my articles and I don’t baselessly throw around psychologically tactful words or phrases.  The same goes for the other words I chose to use such as “manipulative” and “deceitful” since I proved why the actions taken by the ICC deserved to be described by such wording.

When someone comes into the church I want to see them grow in their love for God and continue to build great relationships. I don’t want to see them being shaken down by the leaders to give more money; telling them that they are “unspiritual” unless they do so until they finally leave the church in disgust.

                                                                       

In my next article I will show how the ICC extorts money from their members and then in another article I reveal the methods they use to character assassinate people in order to silence them.