tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7834523366066076881.post2292465881080843408..comments2023-10-20T07:13:08.058-07:00Comments on The Articles of Indignation: Exposing the Corruption of Kip McKean's "Churches" (The ICC): [Article 3] The ICC's Extortion and Coercion for MoneyDanielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04972523578029238414noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7834523366066076881.post-32242325526312885792016-10-05T14:31:50.573-07:002016-10-05T14:31:50.573-07:00Just a simple question. In some countries donation...Just a simple question. In some countries donations to church are only tax exempt if they are given freely. Otherwise these fall under membership fees - which are taxed. When I was still in church (in a certain country outside US) people used to give their tithe by bank transaction. We instructed people to write "voluntary donation" with the bank transfer. Well at that time it kind of was. <br /><br />How are the laws in US? If membership fees are taxed, then current 'donations' clearly fall under that. If you can't be a member without giving a certain sum of money then this is a membership fee. In the old days we never threatened anyone with disfellowshipment on money reasons and generally even accepted people who gave on average less than 10% (but we did warn them that God does not bless their finances if they are not giving) - so we could get away with calling it voluntary donations. <br /><br />Now if membership fees are taxed in US - then ICC has a LOT of taxes to pay.<br />Does anyone know about this?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7834523366066076881.post-22970618340440917662016-05-31T17:59:11.735-07:002016-05-31T17:59:11.735-07:00Hi Berg! Hey man, I just wanted to say... Don'...Hi Berg! Hey man, I just wanted to say... Don't drive yourself crazy! I think it highly unlikely that you'll ever convince the crazies that they're crazy.<br /><br />Also, I think there's an underlying, fundamental issue with all of this: the ICC isn't a church at all !! They have zero authority to tell anyone anything (biblically, theologically, etc). <br /><br />There always has been, and always will be, one Christian Church. <br /><br />Hope this find you well!<br /><br />Best, <br /><br />BrandonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7834523366066076881.post-84889779523359220972016-05-29T12:05:59.064-07:002016-05-29T12:05:59.064-07:00The ICC's begging for money has only gotten wo...The ICC's begging for money has only gotten worse. Tim Kernan begs for "missions contribution" money on his FB page, and includes a link to the LAICC's donation page (http://www.caicc.net/donations-contributions/). Conveniently, the church's contribution site accepts credit card payments! Hmmm.....all the talk about members being financially responsible, and yet Kip apparently has no qualms with encouraging already-struggling members to further mess up their stability by using credit cards to pay contribution! (At least the "old movement" was wise enough to discourage this practice).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7834523366066076881.post-48623062335202199842015-09-20T10:11:15.735-07:002015-09-20T10:11:15.735-07:00Apparently, someone in ICC leadership is reading y...Apparently, someone in ICC leadership is reading your article(s) especially the one on the group's practice of tagging. Members have been directed to no longer wear their MERCY t-shirts during "begging campaigns" for conferences, workshops, retreats, camps, or special missions. They are now required to wear their 2015 purple GLC t-shirt when soliciting donations. However, the ICC is still not going through the proper channels for authorization to beg and/or raise money for their campaigns. For example, the San Diego ICC was kicked off the premises of a shopping mall for trying to sell cupcakes to fund the group's up coming November mission's drive because they failed to get the necessary approval from property management before setting up shop. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7834523366066076881.post-39446054954001824712015-07-11T15:32:49.498-07:002015-07-11T15:32:49.498-07:00I see your point. Kip obviously planned to reinsta...I see your point. Kip obviously planned to reinstate the same abusive system he had before from day 1 when he started his new organization. Kip was corrupted from the start of the ICC, but he had to put considerable effort into getting all the other leaders to go along with it. This is what I refer to as the ICC "becoming corrupt"; it is the process of Kip McKean slowly introducing his abusive policies into the church and deceiving (or even bullying) the other leaders into going along with it.Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04972523578029238414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7834523366066076881.post-13959387312417564422015-07-09T18:40:58.752-07:002015-07-09T18:40:58.752-07:00Dearest Dan, I appreciate what you are doing to ex...Dearest Dan, I appreciate what you are doing to expose Kip and his criminality. However, the ICC has not "become" corrupt - it was corrupt from its first day. All of these things, with the possible exception of threatening to disfellowship members for non-payment of contribution, took place in the ICOC under Kip. I am the commenter who worked for the admin office in Berlin in the 1990's. I wrote that comment before reading part III. It is all the same, right down to those damned envelopes! Back then we were told that new converts should give 10% of their before tax income. They based this on the OT tithe. They then told us that "sold-out" disciples increase this percentage as time goes on. I remember one sermon where our evangelist took us through the OT and showed us the math of Jewish tithing and contribution. He told us that Jews had actually given much more than 10%. I forget the actual number, but it was very high. He used this to show us how lucky we were only to have to give 10%! I remember thinking to myself: "Good God! Are they going to make me start giving that much at some point?" However, I would never have dared to say this out loud, because they would have called me divisive way back then, as well. I do not believe that Kip ever really repented of what happened in the ICOC. I cannot read his thoughts, but his actions go a long way toward proving my point. It is so sad that he continues to dupe people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7834523366066076881.post-84450991509980372502015-07-02T09:57:15.736-07:002015-07-02T09:57:15.736-07:00"Dear friend, you are faithful in what you ar..."Dear friend, you are faithful in what you are doing for the brothers and sisters, even though they are strangers to you. 6 They have told the church about your love. Please send them on their way in a manner that honors God. It was for the sake of the Name that they went out, *receiving* *no* *help* *from* *the* *pagans*. We ought therefore to show hospitality to such people so that we may work together for the truth." (3 John 5-8, NIV, emphasis added).<br /><br />I think the subject of "tagging" deserves its own article, given that the practice is so insidious, abusive, and widespread.<br /><br />First of all, the practice is deceptive: those who are "contributing" are misled about just what it is that they are contributing to; they are led to believe that they're giving to a benign church group which is then going to use the money for benevolent and charitable purposes. Taggers hold up vaguely-worded signs hinting that the money is going towards "missions" and "benevolence" - when in reality not a dime will go into the hands of those who truly need it. Funds collected through tagging (or any other fund-raising method in the ICC) go primarily to the administrative costs (read: salaries, travel, etc.) of the "mission". Can you imagine how effective a "tagger" would be if his/her sign read: "Help me pay my preacher's mortgage/association payments on his West LA condo and his frequent flights abroad"?<br /><br />Secondly, it is exploitative towards the "tagger" himself/herself. Bypassers see the tagger and probably think, "How nice that this person has volunteered to do a good service for his/her organization." What bypassers *don't* see, however, is the fact that the tagger probably doesn't really even want to be out on the street; they are likely there because they are desperate and their leader told them that they need to do "whatever it takes" to come up with the contribution money.<br /><br />Thirdly, it is hypocritical of the ICC. As someone who was in Kip's original "movement" for nearly 20 years, I think you might be surprised that this sort of fundraising would have been *frowned* *upon* in the early days of the movement. Back then, leaders were proud of the fact that all the funds came from the membership (rather than "the world"), and it was common to hear them say things like: "SEE, WE'RE NOT A CULT LIKE THE MOONIES; WE DON'T HAVE OUR PEOPLE SELLING FLOWERS AND BEGGING IN THE STREETS FOR MONEY". This was - and still is - a big boasting point for ICC/ICOC. But how is coerced "tagging" any different from what the Moonies/etc. do?<br /><br />Finally - and most interestingly - there is absolutely no Biblical support for this practice! None at all! Nowhere in the apostle Paul's fundraising pleas does he even *suggest* that the church should look to the world for support! In fact, the author of 3 John makes this very interesting incidental comment (regarding support for the church's missionaries): they "receiv[ed] NO HELP FROM THE PAGANS" (v.7). Although I am no longer a Bible-believer or Christian, I find it ironic that a group that prides itself on going only by the Bible can overlook such clear principles as these.<br /><br />In closing - let me comment on the utter irony of the situation. Missionary collections are supposed to be collected from the churches and given to the missionaries who do the actual work. In the ICC, it is the R&F members (as opposed to the staff) who do all the evangelistic/missionary work. So, if anything, the *church leaders* should be paying *them* (the R&F) for their service rather than the other way around.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com