More True Stories About The NTCC's Fearless Leader

Original thread posted on 3/27/09

Thread #9 Believe it or not I gave this sensitive issue some thought before I decided to to highlight some recent information that was posted concerning the CEO / leader of the NTCC. Specifically Mr. Mike Kekel who is the NTCC CEO. That title classifies him as someone who "should" be considered a leader. Mr. Kekel has recently decided to attack a few people in writing, and as a result someone decided to pull the proverbial plug on him and post some alarming information.

For starters, I didn't know that the NTCC condoned such behavior as a 24 year old man physically playing with the body of a 15 year old girl. For that matter they shouldn't be condoning 23 or 24 year old men even dating 14 or 15 year old girls. Well these are the kind of things that come to the forefront when you back a cat up against a wall. Most cats come out fighting and that is what you will find, if you read Vic Johanson's statement in one of the earlier threads. Below is a portion of what Vic wrote. Sometimes it's a good idea to be careful who's daughter you attack in writing because they may decide to flip the script on you Mr. Kekel. Vic should know; he was quite close to Mike back then. Early in this thread Vic made a correction concerning the age estimates so I made a correction here as well. According to Vic, Tanya was about 15 years old and Mike was about 24 years old when Mike mentioned to Vic and others that Mike and Tanya had been getting very CLOSE to each other physically, i.e. touching and fondling and such.

Most Fathers would go to the door with a shotgun to meet a 24 year old man if such a 24 year old came a calling on his 15 year old daughter. My daughter is a teen and she needs to be focused on school work, not 24 year old men or any other men for that matter. My daughter needs to learn to take care of herself because a dude won't necessarily always be around as is evidenced by the NTCC's divorce rate. Also, some men die, so where does that put your daughter? Struggling and destitute and Mike wrote that it's not the NTCC's biblical responsibility to take care of her if she has ANY family members still living because in such cases she wouldn't be considered "a widow in deed". The NTCC leadership doesn't care about a girls academic progress because they are only interested in marrying their young daughters off to grown men with the hope that he will always be there to take care of her. This has quite often proven not to be the case throughout the NTCC's history. Typical evidence of a CULT. At the time it didn't seem to bother old RWD that his 14 or 15 year old daughter was dating a 23 or 24 year old man, but a guilty conscience often dictates the decisions of men.

Vic wrote...

"Bro Johnson, maybe you could ask Mike about the premarital grope sessions he had with Tanya in the church office when she was about 15 and he was in his 20s, since he seems to be so concerned about the immoral behavior of others. It happened, and not only did he boastfully admit it to me and his other dorm mates, he also justified it when we expressed our consternation. What a piece of work. Of course, when a concerned brother went to RW over it, nothing happened. I guess the "apostle" could relate to that kind of behavior."

Now you have the rest of the story. Holy, Schmoly. You wonder why I left the NTCC? I got tired of following a bunch of fake, abusive, hypocrites. Just more lies of the devil I suppose? You decide. Let Mike tell it and he will say that the things we write are no more than a bunch of lies. Mike said "they didn't go there" before they were married. Didn't go where? That was a good duck and dodge response if I've ever saw one. A complete idiot could see right through that response. I have no reason to doubt these testimonies for one second after all the garbage that I experienced in the NTCC. I got jumped all over by an NTCC pastor for talking to a GROWN woman on the phone. I should have told that pastor to kiss my forth point of contact. In Airborne terms that would be your rear end. That is supposed to be the forth point of your body that makes contact with the ground during your landing or (PLF), after you jump out of an airplane with a parachute.

Jeff

So Now TV Commercials Are Authorized As A Means To Advertise For The New Testament Christian Church?

Explain this one Mike? I thought watching the TV would put you in hell? That is what I heard preached in the New Testament Christian Church since 1985 and I'm sure long before I got there. You guys are such hypocrites that it is unbelievable. There goes Briggs again up to his same old tricks and I guess the New Testament Christian leadership thinks it's great.

Click on the first link below to watch the good old NTCC TV commercial. The second link will open Google images that include photos of DJ Brandi Garcia who's show the NTCC is a proud sponsor of. WOW she is hot!!!!!! The third link is a video of the show "The spotlight" with Brandi Garcia. ***This is not a hyper-link so you will need to copy and paste the link to your address bar to watch the video.*** Notice at how short her dress is. Botta Boom!!! If you don't see a problem with this (at least according to previous New Testament Christian Church standards) you are spiritually brain dead. For a secular church no problem; but for the holiest of holies, New Testament Christian Church? In a genuine NTCC Brother or Sister's mind? This should be a real problem.

http://vimeo.com/13955008

http://www.google.com/images?q=the+spotlight+brandi+garcia&um=1&hl=en&tbs=isch:1&ei=dcJoTKSgF4T58AaL2smtBA&sa=N&start=0&ndsp=21

http://thespotlighttvshow.com/#/Showreel

Whatever. Some folks seem to like following hypocrites. I'm not the one. As for me and my family, we will follow someone else but certainly not the New Testament Christian Church leadership. Oh but there goes old bitter Jeff again with all his hate speeches. You are blind as a bat if you can't see how hypocritical the New Testament Christian Church has become and probably always was. RWD was just good at keeping us in the dark but the light is on now.

Jeff

Don And Ange Have Started A Blog, The More The Merrier

Don and Ange have started an ntccxer blog. This will be yet another website where you can go and learn the truth about what the New Testament Christian Church is really all about. Ange has been a loyal supporter here and it's my duty to announce the existence of a new blog that she and her husband have created. I posted a link to their blog directly below and you can also click on the title of this thread to take you there.

http://ntccxerblog.blogspot.com/

It's good to have folks like Don and Ange who want to sacrifice a little of there time in order to help save people from wasting years of there life only to hear, "If you don't like it here, there is the door". "Don't let it hit you on the back side on the way out".

New Testament Christian Church pastors gave me, my family and everyone else in the church building too many invitations to leave, and by the grace of God we finally decided to take them up on their offer. You talk about having a burden lifted. Man, our life is so much better outside the NTCC. One of my regrets is that I didn't take them up on their offer years earlier.

Jeff

False Doctrine The New Testament Christian Church Way: Keepers At Home

I've addressed this topic many times before and I remain amazed that not one person has been able to even remotely, effectively defend the NTCCs interpretation of Tts 2:5 and specifically the portion of that verse of scripture that reads "keepers at home".

Directly in front of me I have a Strong's Concordance of the Bible; specifically the "Abingdon" Strong's Concordance, copyright 1890 by James Strong. I want people to know where I'm quoting my facts from. Anyway; a New Testament Christian Church pastor suggested that I get this Strong's Concordance and that is exactly what I did, so don't expect me not to use it.

The phrase, "keepers at home" originally was not three separate words as we see written in the King James version of the Bible but in the Greek language prior to being translated into the English language it was one word, "oikoupos". The word "oikoupos" literally translated means to be domestically inclined, a good house keeper, one who takes care of household affairs, or a stayer at home. It is not translated into meaning that a woman can't have a job outside the home. If someone wants to take the one definition "STAYER AT HOME" literally and to be absolute meaning that a woman must "stay at home", then that would mean that a woman literally couldn't lawfully leave her home for any reason. That interpretation would be nonsense and absurd and it would be in direct conflict with the lifestyles that current and past NTCC women have lived all along. She couldn't leave for soul winning, she certainly couldn't leave to clean the Kekel's house or to clean the church or to go shopping for church supplies or she couldn't even leave her "HOME" to attend church service. Once again none of the definitions found in the Strong's Concordance for "keepers at home" states that a woman can't have a job outside the home. It simply does not say that, imply that, or suggest that. What it does mean is that "young" women are to be taught to take care of the household affairs, be a good house keeper and be "inclined" to spend time around her home i.e. "domestically inclined" as it is literally translated.

My wife "stays" around our home when she is not shopping or going to appointments or teaching 1st grade at the local school. That is no different than Tanya Kekel because Tanya is not "staying at home" when she is teaching at the NTCS and my wife is not "staying at home" when she is teaching 1st grade. Oh I forgot, all school teachers should be guys, right RWD? Right Kekel? Wrong and that notion would be complete nonsense. I wouldn't want my kids to attend a school where all the teachers were men. Oh I suppose that all female school teachers should either stay single or quit their teaching job as soon as they get married? That would be stupid because it's not Gods rule, it's the NTCCs rule. For every 100 male teachers you'd be lucky to have 1 woman teacher if you follow that stupid rule. What nonsense and the Bible doesn't teach that in Tts 2:5 or anywhere else. My wife doesn't have her students come over to clean our house either like Mike and Tanya. You call that getting a blessing because you clean the Kekel's house? It's sucking up, eating cheese and being used and God knows it!!!!! You ain't being blessed, you're being cursed and being used and being played like a fiddle!!!! God knows and so do I.

Now, we do want our wives to be virtuous women like we see mentioned in Proverbs 31 don't we? Of course we do if we believe the Bible. And correct me if I'm wrong but we don't believe that God contradicts himself do we? Of course not? So if women can't lawfully keep a job outside the home or work for pay outside the home, (or she will go to hell if she does) and that is what God was trying to say in Titus 2:5, then why did God (in Proverbs 31) state that a "virtuous woman" was known for doing things like and I quote Pro 31:24: "She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant"?

Selling fine linen is making money and delivering girdles to the merchant is not only making money but doing it outside the home. This is a Biblical example of a woman having a job and being considered virtuous in the process; she was hardly being considered a SINNER. The scripture said that she "delivereth". That means that she had to go outside the home, make a delivery to the merchant, and do so for money. One attribute that qualified a woman to be considered "virtuous" according to Proverbs 31 was that she did in fact make money OUTSIDE THE HOME by working on a JOB!!!!! Now this isn't just some Jeff Collins fancy play on words people, it's real and it's the Bible. I didn't write it so don't get mad a me New Testament Christian Church folks. If you have a problem with the Bible get mad a God not me, and tell God that his Bible doesn't line up with your New Testament Christian Church women not working doctrine, and you don't believe that a virtuous woman should leave her home to make money by selling merchandise and making delivery's to the merchants. Not only that but you need to tell God to change Titus 2:5 to read differently because it is supposed to read that a woman can not lawfully work outside the home for pay.

New Testament Christian Church people: RWD has taught you wrong so just admit it. If I'm wrong come on this blog or call me and prove it with the type of evidence that I just provided. Hey if you don't think a woman should have a job outside the home that's fine but don't make it a matter of heaven or hell and then try to back up your false assertion with Titus 2:5 because that dog don't hunt. Prove me wrong. The reason RWD would rather not have woman working is because having control over woman to a "Chauvinist" is way more important than having a piece of the extra money that she would make. The fact is, according to the Bible, RWD is dead wrong on this one. Prove me wrong. I challenge all you New Testament Christian Church so called scholars to prove me wrong and show me where in the bible that is says that a woman can't have a job outside the home.

Now don't misunderstand me people. There are benefits to a woman staying at home to raise non school age children. Huge benefits!!!! I have no problem with that at all and in fact I think it's great. I have no problem with women not working at all and I know that a woman not working outside the home can be a very good thing depending on the circumstances but don't make it a matter of heaven and hell with scriptures that don't support your false assertions. Especially when there are other scriptures like Proverbs 31:24 which clearly and undeniably show the exact opposite of what your church teaches. A man absolutely should work and provide for his family but that does not mean nor does it suggest anywhere in the Bible that his wife can't help him and work also "OUTSIDE" the home for pay. If you say that a woman must lawfully STAY AT HOME then this ain't Burger King and you can't have it your way when you want her to go soul winning, clean the church or Kekel's house. According to your interpretation she must STAY AT HOME and that means her own home, not Kekel's. And that would also mean that Tanya Kekel has no business teaching in your non accredited bible school because according to your interpretation she must "STAY AT HOME" literally. If a woman can lawfully go outside her home to soul win, clean the church or help clean the serviceman's home, pick up church supplies, clean the Kekel's house, then she can lawfully get a real job outside the home for pay like we see in Proverbs 31. Which way is it going to be NTCC folks? Prove me wrong, I challenge you.

False Doctrine the New Testament Christian Church way. RWD's way; control, control, control.

G.K. Socially Disadvantaged Or Not, You Decide

There have been discussions taking place on the previous thread concerning whether or not the Kekel's son should be considered quote " socially disadvantaged". I think my wife's research and analysis best describes G.K's social experiences. It's all in black in white, you just have to look for it.

What many don't understand is that by virtue of the school G. Kekel has attended, his socialization experience has been vastly different from the typical NTCC kid. I recall a conversation when Verna Davis told of a school trip to Canada that G.K. attended. This included an overnight stay. I'm not sure how many days. That classifies as a sleepover in my book. Tanya Kekel stating that her son was not allowed to attend sleepovers is just another one of their half-truths in my opinion. School trips and outings are sleepovers, just not at someone's private residence. G. Kekel has probably partook of many such school-sponsored excursions.

At the bottom I've attached a hyperlink to Charles Wright Academy 2009-2010 report that clearly outlines requirements for their graduates. Backpacking, sea kayaking, camping, 15 hours community service per year, mandatory senior internships, and mandatory sports participation doesn't sound like a situation where G.Kekel had no opportunity to socialize outside of NTCC.

Also note the report states that CWA is a college prep day school where 100% of their graduates attend a 4-year college. I guess that rules out NTCS for G. Kekel. Also (pun intended) NTCS is not on the college matriculation list.

My point: G. Kekel has not missed out on socialization having been an NTCC kid. While the rest of NTCC has kept the strict rules of no sleepovers, only 2 visitors, and no fraternizing with the world, the Kekels have indulged their son in all sorts of "worldly" experiences. They've gotten away with it right under everyone's noses. Why? A possible response from Mike Kekel: "Silly rabbits, don't you know we were just following the requirements mandated by G K's school."

Below is the link to the document I referenced. When you open the link, make sure you scroll through and at the bottom, look carefully at the list of "additional graduation requirements". These are activities that other NTCC children have been deprived of because they were considered worldly and of no benefit to "God's program".

http://fc.charleswright.org/cwainfo/FAV1-0001711D/FOV1-00017606/2009-10_Report_to_Colleges.pdf?FCItemID=S0099BC8A