M.D. Reed wrote...When I went to the PI and RWD came for a conference, I will never forget how he and JR Ashmore laughed in my kitchen, making fun of the Steven's for all the personal money they had spent on this work and then were pulled out. My thought was what do they say about me and others when we are not around.
Jeff said...
RWD is one sick, sadistic dude. Go ahead NTCC pastors, keep spending you own money on RWD's investments. See where that gets you. I wonder if you'll think it's funny when RWD laughs at you? Most of you are too brainwashed to even recognize what is happening. You think you are sacrificing for the Lord and RWD thinks you are an idiot and he laughs at you while his organization spends your money. I've been telling you guys this for years. If I were an NTCC pastor, knowing what I know now, I'd leave with my church so quick that Jeff Gordon couldn't catch me driving number 24. Graham wouldn't get a wooden nickle out of my church or my pocket for that matter. Stevens thought he was doing something for the Lord? HA! While RWD was laughing I'm sure he was thinking he'd never spend a dime of his money like that. Suckers, that's all I can say. There will always be poor and there will always be suckers.
Jeff
120 comments:
So as an NTCC Pastor, you spend your own money on a work, Davis laughs at you and then pulls you out of the very work you just spent your money on.
Sounds like a church that I want to pastor in. Do you think? OMG
Yeah, they were laughing all the way to the bank because they got someone else to pay for and improve one of their properties. Typically, you would have to be a citizen to own property there so I wonder what loophole NTCC is using? They must have some type of sponsor that has majority ownership in the property. I also wonder if these Filipina bride's property rights may be used in these cases as well.
http://cebuonwheels.tripod.com/owning_property_in_the_pi.htm
http://real-estate-guide.philsite.net/foreigners.htm
What's funny is that Davis will talk behind Ashmore's back and dismiss some of his pulpit antics and exuberance as being "charismatic".
That is the great prophet RWD for ya. So what, the guy is a millionaire now, he can laugh all he wants.
Now we know one reason rodger tolerated adopting a Filipina girl (tanya m. reynolds davis kekel jingleheimer smith)
His adopted daughter's Filipina ancestry is his ticket to owning land in the Philippine Islands...
So "children hinder the work of gawd" unless your gawd is owning property that someone else does all the work renovating and paying off the mortgage on; then if you adopt a "local" or "native" you can use her birth citizenship to get the real estate of your dreams...
Even tanya is used for r w davis' real estate expansion corporation...
Can you say "pimp daddy"? That's all r w davis is. A big phat pimp who prostitutes out his own adopted daughter, as evidenced by his approval of michael craig kekel molesting tanya when she was a young teen and he was in his twenties...
And the pimp daddy hits just keep on coming.
That is a stretch. R. Davis uses people but I do believe he cares for Tanya. Who knows what his intentions were originally as we can only speculate but I'm confident that he cares for Tanya. He has certainly taken care of Tanya and Mike.
Blood is thick and adoption counts as blood. R. Davis doesn't care about anyone else but I think he cares for his own family. I'm not saying I agree with it but it is an old tradition for young ladies to find interest and marry older men. Just because R. Davis allowed it doesn't mean that he doesn't care for Tanya. Even in the USA, young girls mess with older men all the time. It happens every day and the parents don't discard the young ladies just because it happens. Many young men do wind up in jail as a result.
Now in R. Davis's case, it is hypocrisy because he preached against such conduct but allowed it with his own family and that I understand. Please don't anyone misunderstand my point. I'm just saying that I think he does care for Tanya. He just has no problem with older guys finding interest in younger girls. In the NTCC that is not too uncommon. They marry the ladies off quite young.
Anon
Sorry, Anon. But you are fooling yourself if you believe r w davis cares about anyone or anything other than his own fat neck and the money he wants to do what he wants with.
Everything in r w davis' world comes with a price. If you want in, you have to pay a price. He only took verna / victoria as a bride because at the time he thought she made him look good. He only adopted tanya for whatever she could provide to him; whether a license to buy Filipino real estate or the ability to hush someone he knocked-up out of wedlock... Everything in rdub's world comes for a price with huge strings attached. But not the umbilical cord he used to yell about cutting. That was just one of davis' shows; one of his ploys to add to the lie that tanya was not adopted when in fact she is adopted.
O.k. I had to crunch a few numbers, and this is just an example folks. How long has NTCC been around 30 years? Lets say RWD invested about $500 a month over 30 years in the org and it made about 12% (stock market average for the last 30 years). That comes too $1.621,755.64. I know that’s a pretty low number but look at the potential of what he could have made over the years. And if I were a betting man I would say he has a lot more than that under the mattress.
You are way low. I'm sure. RWD's corporate worth not to speak of his cash far exceeds your estimate. When I say low I mean WAY low. RWD is worth WAY, WAY, WAY more than that. Some folks don't understand what a corporation is. IT'S A BUSINESS. It doesn't matter if it's a church. All assets belong to the NTCC INC and the NTCC INC has people named within the corporate resolution who control it's assets. If the NTCC closes all its doors tomorrow, there are tens of millions and more likely hundreds of millions of dollars worth of property that can be turned into cash and distributed according to RWD's wishes. Don’t fool yourself. RWD controls NTCC assets; make no mistake. The NTCC can absolutely sell every church building and all property and cash out if they want.
Now they won't do that because it's a business, and the business continues to bring in more cash. Why sell a church when the church brings in gobs of cash? That however is not the point. RWD, because of NTCC INC, is worth millions and millions and millions. We are not even talking about his personal wealth. It wouldn’t surprise me if the dude by himself has ONEHUNDRED MILLION or more. Of course I wouldn't know how much but I would give a broad guess that RWD is worth anywhere between $100,000,000 and $500,000,000 U.S. dollars if you include NTCC INC. We are talking maybe a quarter or even a half billion dollars.
What do you think the church in Graham is worth? What do you think the church in St. Louis is worth? You have millions and millions right there and that is just two. What do you think the camp ground is worth with all buildings? RWD is a TYCOON. PERIOD!
Jeff
Another thing. I have no idea if and how much in taxes the NTCC would pay if they cashed out. I have no idea and I don't claim to know. What I do know is that NTCC INC doesn't belong to the Govt or State. It belongs to RWD. The NTCC INC is RWD's corporation.
My Dad owned a corporation. It was a crane service. When he sold a crane because he didn't need it anymore, he and his business partner through whatever legal channels split the money. When they dissolved the corporation and went through all the legal channels and notified the IRS on a form 966 they cashed out.
The NTCC could do the same thing but it's likely they wouldn't. They would sell much of the property while remaining a viable corporation and have cash galore. It's a write off. Kekel and Davis aren't stupid. That is why they have all your money and you have none of theirs and it has nothing to do with holiness.
Jeff
Don said -
"Can you say "pimp daddy"? That's all r w davis is. A big phat pimp who prostitutes out his own adopted daughter, as evidenced by his approval of michael craig kekel molesting tanya when she was a young teen and he was in his twenties..."
You're overboard Don....Way overboard. Back in the day (history), many girls in their teens would marry early. No one thought of it as molestation and it was actually quit normal. And that was a time when our country was more moral than now, I would say. People need to quit throwing this MCK molesting TK around.
Don Said -
"Everything in r w davis' world comes with a price. If you want in, you have to pay a price. He only took verna / victoria as a bride because at the time he thought she made him look good. He only adopted tanya for whatever she could provide to him; whether a license to buy Filipino real estate or the ability to hush someone he knocked-up out of wedlock... Everything in rdub's world comes for a price with huge strings attached. But not the umbilical cord he used to yell about cutting. That was just one of davis' shows; one of his ploys to add to the lie that tanya was not adopted when in fact she is adopted."
Unproven Don - all supposition based on what you think his motive was. Pretty sick if you ask me, which you aren't. Just sayin.....
Jeff Said -
"ome folks don't understand what a corporation is. IT'S A BUSINESS. It doesn't matter if it's a church. All assets belong to the NTCC INC and the NTCC INC has people named within the corporate resolution who control it's assets. If the NTCC closes all its doors tomorrow, there are tens of millions and more likely hundreds of millions of dollars worth of property that can be turned into cash and distributed according to RWD's wishes. Don’t fool yourself. RWD controls NTCC assets; make no mistake. The NTCC can absolutely sell every church building and all property and cash out if they want. "
This is a fact! Study corporations and you will see what the man is typing is true. That's the scary part, which means you really have to trust the leadership.
QUESTION: Does anyone no of other mainstream church's that are incorporated and if not, why? Thanks in advanced for the tip.
BK.
"If the NTCC closes all its doors tomorrow, there are tens of millions and more likely hundreds of millions of dollars worth of property that can be turned into cash and distributed according to RWD's wishes. Don’t fool yourself. RWD controls NTCC assets; make no mistake. The NTCC can absolutely sell every church building and all property and cash out if they want."
Not legally they can't. The IRS might overlook 39 acres, but the entire value of the org is a few magnitudes of order beyond that. Anytime a nonprofit is liquidated, all of its assets have to be distributed to other nonprofits. The way it is now, they don't own too much on paper, but they don't need to when they control all of the corporate assets.
You're right about one thing though: it is a family business, despite the facade.
"People need to quit throwing this MCK molesting TK around."
Since I'm the one who first broached this subject, about which I have personal knowledge, I'd like to say that I agree with you. What bothered me wasn't the "perversion" aspect, but the hypocrisy of pretending to be a holiness preacher and justifying what was forbidden (by his profession, not by the law). People have way overreacted to this. The fact is, 15 is marriageable age in Missouri, and if they could legally marry (with parental consent, but RW wasn't objecting), then making out couldn't be illegal, and it certainly didn't make Mike any kind of pedophile. It's not like she was seven, people.
I only mentioned the whole episode because I wanted people to know what a double standard there is and how phony his profession of holiness is, not to brand him as a pervert. Enough with the bullshit; there are plenty of real issues to criticize (like a "holiness" preacher making out and groping his girlfriend, whether she was 15 or 55) without resorting to fantastic exaggerations. Some of you sound like a bunch of birthers, and look about as dumb.
For the record: I have no reason to view Mike as a sexual deviant, and neither does anyone else (unless they know something else about his behavior).
I agree with Vic. The main point to me was not that they did something sinful, but that Vic's testimony of the scenario indicated that Mike was not repentant of his sin of making out with someone prior to marriage. I know some women don't look their age and if he was aloud to court her, and be alone with her, well, I think that's Rev. Davis' fault for letting his young daughter be alone with a grown man. Mike was probably just a kid too as most of us were just kids when we ran off to Bible School, and at the time (if the testimony is true) that it occurred, he could have legitimately fallen prey to lust, but the point that I thought was alarming was that Vic said he was talking about it like he was not convicted about it, and even joking about it, and he could sense an attitude in Mike that he was above even God's laws because he was somehow above the law by his newly- acquired relation to Davis.
I don't know if the testimony is true because I wasn't even born until 1975.
Sorry Kris -
My comments were not pointed at GK at all. I totally get the fact that he was part of the family and that many changes came about because of him, but he himself did not make the changes.
In summation, he is not in my equation...I really hope the best for the man. Seems like a fine young man with a good head on his shoulders.
BK.
When I say, he was probably just a kid, I mean to say, he was probably mentally, psychologically a kid, even though I am sure he was in his 20's by then. I was in my early 20's too, but I was just a kid mentally, because I just did whatever Davis said I could do, and if Davis had told me I could court his beautiful daughter who was just a teenager, I don't think I was mature enough to say, "No thank you, sir. I will just wait until she is at a more mature age."
If he fell into lust and she had even seduced him, I can see that happening to other men, too, and I could even say, if he repented and was sorry that he could be forgiven, and not labeled as a pedophile. The problem is when people do wrong and don't repent and is worse if they think they are exempt and above God's laws because they are of high rank in a church.
Bixby,
Ya, I have not talked with Grant at length to concur with you or not, but he seems to be living a normal life that others were not afforded. Unfortunately I think a lot of kids who grew up in NTCC are not now nice young men and women with good heads on their shoulders, because they were ignored while growing up and taught to think that God doesn't care about them. The attitude behind Sunday school was largely seen as a way to get kids out of the adult service so the adults would not be distracted. When Grant came along all of a sudden they had puppet shows and all kinds of fun, gleeful activities. It turned into a huge Barny festival. I even saw a grown man wearing a clown outfit. As I walked past him and we both looked at each other, I did not smile in agreement, but I looked at him seriously, and I could sense some shame in him as you could tell he did not think what he was doing was normal. What does a clown have to do with the bible? It just shows how strange it all was, and how it was not inspired by God. I just thought here is this aspiring preacher who probably came to Bible school with dreams of being a great missionary REDUCED TO A CLOWN! AND HOW MANY MORE OF NTCC'S PREACHERS HAVE BEEN REDUCED TO CLOWNS!!!
briggsby knolls said,
"People need to quit throwing this MCK molesting TK around."
Told you bk was defending that child molester kekel!
Kris said....
The problem is when people do wrong and don't repent and is worse if they think they are exempt and above God's laws because they are of high rank in a church.
Jeff said...
The problem in this case in my mind doesn't even have anything to do with whether or not they repented. That doesn't affect me or my family. If I worry all day about who repents and who doesn't I'd go crazy and be one serious micro manager. Everyone will die and I can't worry about all of them to include the Kekels.
The problem I have has to do with Mike and Tanya being allowed to get away with what others would have been benched or expelled for. The double standard is the part that I have a problem with. Anyone else may have been sent to jail had their parents found out. Tanya and Mike got a get out of jail free card and additionally promoted to the highest positions within the NTCC. That is what makes the NTCC and the whole situation so crooked. I could care less if Mike repented because we will never know if he repented or how long it took. According to Vic he certainly didn't right after it happened but that doesn't effect me or my family.
What does affect me and my family is when the Kekels get a free pass while RWD, his overseers and pastors jump down our throats for every minor infraction they can posibly dream up.
Jeff
BK said,
"This is a fact! Study corporations and you will see what the man is typing is true. That's the scary part, which means you really have to trust the leadership."
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/501-church.html
Kris said -
"To you all I say this: it is your moral duty to do as Esther the queen and Moses the prince. You need to do what is right and stand up to oppressors. You have a moral obligation, especially you of high rank and position and filial relations! "
Now, now Kris - Don't be preaching to us bro. This ain't the place. Just a little word to the wise before you get "jacked up" like I did. ;) (Easy Jeff....just having a little fun).
BK
Hey Kris -
Were you in the Marines?
BK.
Bixby wrote...
Now, now Kris - Don't be preaching to us bro. This ain't the place. Just a little word to the wise before you get "jacked up" like I did. ;) (Easy Jeff....just having a little fun).
Jeff said...
LOL. That was funny. Good one Bixby.
Jeff
Here is info about IRS requirements. Note specifically paragraph d), which explains that exempt assets must go to exempt entities:
"IRS prescribes addition of these 4 clauses to be Included in Articles of Incorporation. [use exact or similar wording (refer to www.irs.gov)]
a) Insert the below clause as one of the purposes for which the organization is organized or anywhere else in the Article of Incorporation
“Said corporation is organized exclusively for charitable, religious, educational, and/or scientific purposes, included, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or corresponding section of any future federal tax code. “
b) Insert this clause at any place:
“No part of the net earnings of the corporations shall inure to the benefit of, or be distributable to its members, trustees, officers, or other private persons, except that the corporation shall be authorized and empowered to pay reasonable compensation for services rendered and to make payments and distributions in furtherance of the purposes set forth in Article Third hereof.”
c) Insert this clause at any place:
“No substantial part of the activities of the corporation shall be the carrying on of propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation, and the corporation shall not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distribution of statements) any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office. Notwithstanding any other provision of these articles, the corporation shall not carry on any other activities not permitted to be carried on (a) by a corporation exempt from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or corresponding section of any future federal tax code, or (b) by a corporation, contributions to which are deductible under section 170(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code, or corresponding section of any future federal tax code. “
d) Insert this dissolution clause at any suitable place:
“Upon the dissolution of the corporation, assets shall be distributed for one or more exempt purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or corresponding section of any future purpose. Any such assets not so disposed of shall be disposed of by the Court of Common Pleas of the county in which the principal office of the corporation is then located, exclusively for such purposes or to such organization or organizations, as said Court shall determine, which are organized and operated exclusively for such purposes.”"
Vic quoted...
"except that the corporation shall be authorized and empowered to pay reasonable compensation for services rendered and to make payments and distributions in furtherance of the purposes set forth in Article Third hereof.”
Jeff said...
Ok Vic, I was hasty in posting, (but not intentionally) however I did (intentionally) retract/delete my previous statement. Having said that the paragraph I've listed directly above gives the NTCC leadership some huge leeway. Reasonable compensation for the CEO of a rather large corporation is gigantic. That is what NTCC people always tell me when I say that the Kekels are over compensated. They always make statements such as, "How many CEOs of large corporations do you know that don't make at least 6 figures or more?"
Now I've been told that Vic and I suspect the NTCC leadership shares the same sentiment while openly expressing such sentiments in service in front of decent sized crowds.
Jeff
Vic said...
Not legally they can't.
Jeff said...
That is quite true Vic. Legally they can't. I'm sure even the NTCC exercises some restraint in terms of the degree with which they twist the law. I've been told by an NTCC minister, that he was employed by the NTCC and he did not get a W-2 and he was paid in cash. I've heard that from more than one minister. My point is that I don't believe that the NTCC has a problem with abiding by their own code of ethics while ignoring tax and income laws.
I just have no faith in the NTCC and I don't have faith that our government will or can catch the NTCC at breaking tax or income laws.
I found this and it wasn't from a Micronesia.
"A church should report compensation paid to a minister on Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, if the minister is an employee, or on IRS Form 1099-MISC, Miscellaneous Income, if the minister is an independent contractor."
Notice it say the church "should". The fact is churches get a break in a lot of areas and the NTCC no doubt capitalizes on everyone.
Jeff
Someone by the name of "Hmm" said ...
"No, we're not bitter. We just got tired of being treated like trash. That's all. Enough for now."
Kris said...
That deserves a good ol' fashioned hearty NTCC style "C'mon, Sir... PREACH IT!!!"
Don and Angie said: His adopted daughter's Filipina ancestry is his ticket to owning land in the Philippine Islands...
In the last conference we attended in the PI in '09, we were all sitting around the fellowship table at the missionary quarters one evening. RWD was discussing how the laws had changed in the PI and foreigners could now purchase property. Well, RWD shared how it didn't matter to him anyway about the laws changing because he could get land through other connections.
That's when I piped up and said, that's right, sir, you don't need anybody because you have Tanya, she's a Filipina. He looked over at me and gave me the scum of the earth look and said, "She's not Filipina". Need I say, you could hear a pin drop in that room. I think Tom Wright wet his pants when I said that. John Rodrigues turned beet red. My wife, unable to breathe at that moment, practically passed out on the couch. The rest of the brethren just looked at RWD as if to say, your move. I said, really, sir? I thought she was.
Maybe that's when RWD started to hate me! Nah, he hated me long before that.
Little did RWD know that in '03, we had met Lowena Montilla's brother out soulwinning one afternoon, he asked us if we were with the Ntcc/Pastor Davis group. The very next thing out of his mouth was a question, do you know Tanya? His wife then chimed in and said "You know she's one of ours, don't you?" When RWD said "she's not Filipina", my thought was, why the big cover up? What's the big whoopty deal?
I personally have always thought that this was a non-issue, but it evidently is a big issue. Hey Michael, I guess you need some tissues for that big issue, don't you?
You would have really needed some tissues, Michael, if I would have seen you get up in my wife's face unprovoked back in January when you glared at her and said, "what are you looking at?" I don't even talk to her like that. I was meeting with your father-in-law at that time, and your own wife saw it and called you paranoid and laughed at you as you blushed. My wife just thought you were plain weird. You seem really stressed out these days. Maybe it's time to see a doctor. And besides all that, Michael, didn't you tell a BS class that God had convicted you of that conduct and that you weren't gonna do that to people any more? Huh?
It's kind of like RWD bragging about his 2 PhD's. Not just one, he said, "I've got 2 of 'em". This was never an issue with me until he made it an issue. If you're going to brag about something like your credentials, then back it up with the university of study and the degrees on paper. When Paul boasted of his accomplishments, he could back them up. The Jews knew he had the credentials. In II Cor. 12:11 Paul was compelled... evidently RWD was compelled to boast too, so let's see the proof. He made it an issue, not me.
No, we're not bitter. We just got tired of being treated like trash. That's all.
M.D. Reed
My former Pastor (MDR),
It's no wonder I was enjoying that message. I guess it must have had a familiar ring to it. I see you re-posted it with your name this time. That's so funny, coz that was exactly what we used to yell to you: COME ON SIR! COME ON SIR! PREACH IT, SIR!
MDR,
Sir, do you know what happened to Rick Olson? I remember he won the soul-winning contest to go to Hawaii. Hmmm... There must not have been a move of God in Graham, coz they had to bribe lay pastors with a free trip to Hawaii to get them to invite more people to church... but don't give any poor church members in a 3rd world country 1 peso to help them pay the jeepney for the ride to church that could have cost them 15 - 30 pesos.
The ride could have cost them much more if they came from much farther. I have been to the Philippines like 5 times now. I have spent about a total of 6 months there I estimate. One peso is nothing. You know what you can buy with a peso in the Philippines? A piece of candy. You know how much that peso really helped those poor filipinos. I think they probably took it and wondered, why did he give us a peso? What good is that? I think that I never bought anything in the Philippines for a peso. How strange for him to give one peso to them. I don't know where he was laboring, Mindanao or Luzon, but I have spent time in Luzon and in Cebu. And a peso ain't squat in either of them. I would give the poor people who came to church money to ride a taxi, because I know they don't have the money to pay to for the transportation to come to church. They NEED their money to survive. It's a 3rd world country, for cryin' out loud. I am thinking about putting some pictures of the way people live in the Philippines on my blog for people to understand true poverty and what the people live like that Davis won't let people help. If you had to live with the rats and cockroaches and the nasty stagnant water in the ditches right outside the house you were living in, I think most readers of this blog would say, no way, I'm not staying there. Well, I lived right there with them for 2 months. It stunk so bad. I had a rat living downstairs about 8 inches long that I had to get rid of. I had to straddle the toilet coz it had no seat. I had to take a bath with a bucket and a scoop. I lived with them and learned what they go through. I wonder if RW Davis ever had to do that. I wish he would. I wish Tanya and Michael would, too. I don't wish them harm, but I wish they had to experience being poor for one month. Then Kekel would be qualified to talk about world missions and run a bible school. Until then, I wish he would just be quiet.
"35) And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee."
This account comes from at the latest, the 1st century A.D. This honourable man gave a complete stranger TWO pesos. And you are telling me that RW Davis had a problem with a pastor using his OWN money that he got OUT OF HIS OWN STIPEND, to share with people ONE LOUSY PESO to help them maybe pay most likely an extremely small fraction of the amount that I figure they must have had to pay to get there for jeepney fare? ONE LOUSY PESO??? I wish people would stop giving RW Davis nice hotels to stay in and nice fancy suits and watches and fancy expensive shoes. They can't even give one peso to some poor filipinos to help them out with the expense to bring their families to church, to help them because perhaps they took time away from work that day to go to church. See, in the Philippines, if you have the work, you don't just take Saturdays and Sundays off unless you have a lot of faith in God. You can't expect someone who is not saved yet to have that kind of faith yet. It's not like in the USA. It's hard enough now in the USA to take time off from work to go to church for some folks. Can you imagine how big of a deal it is for filipinos? I know they need faith. But faith cometh by hearing. I don't see anything wrong with helping poor people out with church finances and even telling them beforehand that you will give them a little bit of money to help them out if they need it. Greg, I am sorry, but I seriously doubt that tons of people were coming to church for a peso, unless he tricked them and told them if they came he would give them money, and then afterwards, when they asked for the money he said, oh, you want money. Here is a peso! That would have been a pretty cruel joke to play, though, or a cruel trick to play on some desperately poor people in order to increase the numbers. I hope he didn't do that.
Kris,
I meant to/should have put a ? mark after 1 peso, as I am not sure of the amount. I know a peso isn't much, and was worth a little less than 2 cents during this time. There was a graduated scale though. Adults got so much, children got so much, etc.
I also didn’t have a problem with Rev. Stevens giving money to people to come to church, I publically thought this was a good idea (and still do, and it was obviously effective), until Pastor Davis made his views known, and no different than a stateside Pastor/church member using their own gas to pick people up, giving them a dollar to put in the plate, and then maybe buying their dinner after service.
A missionaries stipend is for them to do with as they please (in the real world), it is their money once given (in the real world).
Gregory
Greg,
Thanks for the clarification. I really appreciated the testimony. There you have it. Two returned NTCC missionaries who have confirmed that RW Davis was trying to keep missionaries from helping the poor, giving to the poor.
To date, we have no concrete proof that there is any scripture in the New Testament by even the least of the apostles or their affiliates commanding tithe after Jesus died and the New Testament was officially in full swing. Yet I can double-dog guarantee it they told the poor filipinos they would go to hell if they didn't drop their tithe in the basket.
Meanwhile, I have here a scripture from the NTCC's personal favorite, the red-letter King Jimmy, that clearly commands in red letter font to help the poor, which thing RW Davis - by the testimony of two returned missionaries- was clearly discouraging. Here it is:
Luke 12:33
33) Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth.
Just in case you are wondering what alms means. I looked it up the greek word from which it comes in Thayer's. It says it means:
1. mercy, pity
a. esp. as exhibited in giving alms, charity
2. the benefaction itself, a donation to the poor, alms
So please would somebody please represent NTCC on here with a little more biblical prowess than the last one that I dealt with? I mean a real stellar Bible scholar; the best that you got to defend your beliefs and practices. I am just waiting here patiently. Somebody, anybody. I challenge you to a duel!
MDR said...
That's when I piped up and said, that's right, sir, you don't need anybody because you have Tanya, she's a Filipina. He looked over at me and gave me the scum of the earth look and said, "She's not Filipina". Need I say, you could hear a pin drop in that room. I think Tom Wright wet his pants when I said that. John Rodrigues turned beet red. My wife, unable to breathe at that moment, practically passed out on the couch. The rest of the brethren just looked at RWD as if to say, your move. I said, really, sir? I thought she was.
Jeff said...
I guess if you are half "white" and half "other" you could either be considered "white" or "other". No matter what you are still half "other" if you are half "white" and half "other". You can look at Tanya and see that she is half "other" and that "other" certainly appears to be Filipino. Well with birth certificates and all we certainly understand that to be the truth.
Like MDR said, RWD was trying to cover up something no doubt because there was something to cover up. One possibility is that RWD had an affair with a Filipino woman, she got pregnant he adopted Tanya. In conference RWD did say Tanya was his daughter. I remember him telling of how she was borne dead and he lifted up his hands to the Lord and she began to breath. As a result of his testimony things got very emotional and I remember his testimony clearly. So if that was the case, why was Tanya that important to him if Tanya wasn't his biological daughter? We understand that Tanya is half Filipino so again one plausible guess would be RWD had an affair with a Filipino woman but I do not know that to be true and I'm just guessing based upon known evidence. Once again, I do not know that to be true and I'm just guessing based upon known evidence.
Here is the known evidence. We've seen copies of a birth certificate showing Tanya to be part Filipino. I heard RWD testify of him being there when Tanya was borne and Tanya being his daughter. Now of course that could mean that he had already adopted her and claimed her as his own prior to her birth.
Another known piece of evidence. MDR affirms that RWD obviosly had something to cover up when he denied that Tanya was Filipino when all other evidence seems to prove otherwise: 1. Her appearance. 2. The Birth Certificate. 3. The testimony of the Filipino woman as relayed by MDR.
I tried not to be so hasty with this message as I've sometimes been in the past so you decide.
Jeff
Something is messed up with the blog which is making people log in just to post. We will see if it works it's way out or if it is something I need to try and get fixed. For now so it seems, you have to have a google account to post. That includes me. I couldn't post a message just using my name or posting anonymously.
Jeff
I've contacted google blogger about the problem of not being able to post anonymously or just with your name.
Many other blog moderators of google blogs are experiencing the same problem. For now if you want to post a reply, simply create a google account, (which is quite easy) and then you will be able to post a message logged into your account.
Eventually I think google will fix this problem. I've already made sure that "anyone" is selected under options for comment posting. It is selected so that is not the problem.
Jeff
In a couple recent comments it was implied that we have taken the child molestation subject a little to far and that in view of the legal marriage age mck is not a pedophile.
I have to respectfully disagree with you Vic and you Bixby. We are not arguing legal marriage age but what we are simply pointing out is that when a 23 year old "feels up" a 15 year old girl, this is sexual deviant behavior. There is no other interpretation of these actions. If you say that this type of behavior is okay, than what other types of behavior do you condone?
Now we know that the ntcc is cut and dry and they have no qualms about blasting people publicly about so many issues. People have been hurt far worse than we have hurt tanya or mike. We simply use the same standards that the ntcc uses to ruin other people's lives against them. Come on people, call it like you see it.
IF SOMEONE STEALS THEY ARE A THIEF.
IF SOMEONE CHEATS ON THEIR WIFE OR HUSBAND THEY ARE AN ADULTERER.
IF SOMEONE WORSHIPS A STATUE THEY ARE AN IDOL WORSHIPER.
With the ntcc, it's even worse. If yo disagree with them you are in the same category or even worse than all of the above.
IF YOU ARE IN YOUR MID 20'S AND YOU FEEL UP A GIRL, THAT IS IN HER MID TEENS, YOU ARE A CHILD MOLESTER
If you don't acknowledge that you did it or even deny it, then you are still a child molester that hasn't repented.
If you are the Father of a Mid-teen Girl that has been "felt-up" by a pedophilic man in his mid-twenties and allow it then you too are just as bad rwd.
We fight hate with the same hatred these people have spewed out of their mouths for years. They have used people and literally destroyed them and we will not soft pedal this or any other issue. I know that many like to take the "High Road" and feel that bringing attention to this issue and other issues like it is revolting and going overboard. We have chosen to take the "Low Road" because this is where you will find the thousands of souls who have been walked on by this controlling group of hypocrites.
We will continue to fight fire with fire in the same tradition that the ntcc uses to needlessly dispose of those who oppose them.
We respect you Vic and always value your comments on the blogs. You have been around and been through very much. When my wife originally posted kekel, kekel child molester, I originally thought inside that maybe it was a bit overboard, but I realized as she already knows that this post was very needful and helpful to new readers and ntcc'rs that have not been around very long. If it encourages one person to leave the ntcc, they might not have to suffer years of abuse. kekel, kekel child molester is the most viewed post that we have on our blog.
That's where we are coming from and hope folks understand that we are not the enemy here. Maybe we cover these subjects a lot because the ntcc wants them to go away. We talk about tithe all the time. We talk about the 39 acre land deal (kekel-gate) and we talk about rumors of rwd's impropriety and the fact he has a second wife.
Bixby says that none of it is substantiated, but when did that ever matter to them? Do you think the ntcc uses hard evidence to remove people from their ranks? Do you think that rwd does not run people off without substantiated evidence? If you do, you are living in a dream world, buddy. Ask Matt or Gregory what their accuser's evidence was. We love you all and continue to fight in the trenches.
Don and Ange
The ntcc says that sin is sin and you must call it out. They hammer it over and over again with no regard to who gets trampled over.
We also feel that to expose these bunch of hypocritical abusers that we need to take the same approach. Sin is sin. If you are going to use one portion of scripture to run someone off, than you better use all of it to examine your own lives.
What makes the ntcc so disgustingly sickening is that they do all of this for money and power (mammon). That's the only reason we can find, and it's too obvious. Does God really speak to rwd before he sticks his finger in someones face and jacks them up? What about the four fingers that are pointing back at him.
You got me a little riled up here and felt the need to clarify some of our motives and reasons for doing what we do. We are all about exposing the ntcc so that other people don't have to go through years of what we went through.
Don and Ange
There we go, the blog seems to be fixed now. I didn't have to log in to post a message.
Jeff
Though misattributed to PT Barnum, the phrase is still the same - "There's a sucker born every minute..."
What does a clown have to do with the bible? It just shows how strange it all was, and how it was not inspired by God.
said by Kris
Curious have you been to other churches since ntcc. Many,many,many churches use clowns,puppets,skits,ect in there sunday school programs. To say that it is not of God. that is ntcc jargon!! Ntcc did use it just to make themselves look like a normal church. But other churches do it for the kids enjoyment. To use it during there lessons. A puppet can bring alive the bible to a child that may think it is so boring.
Not sure if this was my husband that you gave your grim serious look to. But he was a clown in WA. and he has done puppet shows since leaving ntcc for churches. And he is just gettingpuppet shows for birthday parties. I have told him he would be a awesome youth pastor. But right now he is not able to do that, spiritually to much damage to heal!
April
Hi April,
I don't see anything wrong with puppet shows and skits for the children with Bible-based themes to teach children Bible stories and morals, and (for their appropriate age level of understanding) even doctrines. I personally don't see how clowns fit in to all of this, but if your church sees a way to fit a clown into a Sunday school curriculum, that's great! Maybe I need to learn something about this clown ministry- and I am not trying to put your husband down, honestly- but I doubt it. My wife and I teach the children in the neighborhood here and we use Children's Bibles with nice pictures of Biblical scenes and words on the pages, and we have lessons and give them prizes (pencils, erasers, paper, things for school) if they can remember the answers to questions based on the biblical teachings.
When I see a clown in a Sunday school- I'm sorry- I just think they tricked some poor humble guy into putting on a clown suit to baby-sit the "little pesky kids" while the "real" church service is going on. If he is just dressing up like a clown and talking about Bible stories, what's the connection? Can't he get the children's attention by being a real person and being creative, showing pictures and asking the children questions? I remember children came to Jesus, but He didn't have to put on a clown suit to get their attention.
I know children love clowns, but I just don't see the connection in a Sunday school program.
At any rate, if I remember right, he was a young black man- probably a Bible school student, and I didn't look at him cross, I just didn't laugh and joke with him, like my initial feeling might have been to do. I thought, here is this man who has not begun his ministry, and he is already being groomed from the beginning to be a clown. And the older women were standing there encouraging him as I remember. I thought, why don't the women put on a silly clown suit? If someone is just starting out in the ministry, I think it's inappropriate to humble him like that. I think it's just like a trick. Come to our bible school. We'll make you a preacher. Then when you get there, they tell you, "Here! Put this on! You want to be a preacher? Hahaha. You're not a preacher. You're gonna be our clown!"
So, I will just say this, April. If your husband who I am guessing is not a brand new young preacher, and is comfortable wearing a clown suit, is using that to bless the children's ministry, that's great! But I just didn't want to encourage the young bible school student that I had the impression that he was, to think, ya, this is the best I will ever be- a clown. I really wanted to say to him, "hey, bro. Are you comfortable doing this? Or are you actually humiliated right now? Because I know I came to Bible school to be a preacher. What about you? Bro, why don't you take this thing off and hand it back to Sis Difrancesco or whichever one of the sunday school teachers that put you up to this, and say, ma'am, I don't want to wear this. I am going to be a preacher." If someone in the congregation wants to be a clown, they can do it, if you don't want to."
Sorry, I didn't mean to say that we are teaching the children in the neighborhood "here" but that my wife does in the Philippines, and so did I this month when I was there.
It's just like the big production they did at a Conference one year. They had all these people wearing silly looking costumes and they sang a silly song that just pretty much kept us all moving and saying the lyrics touching our belly and then our head or something, singing something about somebody who had so many sons... I forgot the lyrics. That was an example of how to have Sunday school. You think my wife and I do that? Nope. We teach the children a lesson so that they are learning something about God and learning the Bible stories, so they can become better Christians. I am not putting down having little cute skits and things in Church, April, it's just that I was putting 2 and 2 together in this case, and I'll tell you what I came up with...
This is no ordinary Christian Church's sunday school. This is a Sunday School run by the man who reportedly told another man's wife that she didn't want to have kids. I read from one testimony that the kids who accidentally threw a ball or something into his yard while playing were too scared to go and knock on his door.
The next part of the equation...
I was in this church for 13 years listening to the same ol' rhetoric over and over in Bible studies. I sat in fellowship after many many services hoping to learn some really good stuff about ministry, missionary work, Bible doctrines, answers to some of the harder questions about the Bible (besides, "oh you just want sin! Quit being so difficult!) NTCC ministers don't get squat of an education about the Bible. So, I am pretty rock-solid sure that the children are getting a very shallow kind of lesson each Sunday, unless there are some women who really study more than a lot of NTCC's preachers do. But if they did, then they would probably be teaching some controversial things and would probably be replaced with someone who simply babysits the kids. I personally think that thinking and learning were stifled in NTCC, and they probably try to stunt their minds at an early age in their Sunday schools to think like silly senseless future NTCCers, and a clown would come in quite handy for such a program of mind-numbing.
I can just see the clown teaching really deep Bible lessons like: "and how much do we pay the church, boys and girls? 2 per cent? 5 per cent? No. You always pay 10 per cent of your gross income boys and girls, coz you don't want to go to the bad place where all the non-tithers go! Oh, and what do you do when your poor brother or sister only has one pair of shoes, and you have 12? Do you give him one pair of yours?" The innocent children might say, "YES!," and hold out their hand for a prize. Then the clown scowls and says, NO!! You weren't paying attention, little children. You NEVER EVER help a lazy poor person. You tell him that if he would just serve God then God would bless him. The most you EVER DO for them is pray for them. Don't even give any money to some poor brother or sister in a 3rd world country. They also are just lazy. Do you understand boys and girls? Do you!!??
I can just imagine what kind of little monsters will come out of that sunday school. No wonder so many of them leave the b'org when they grow up!
Kris,I do not think you have had any actually experience with the ntcc sunday school program. It might have there own agenda behind it. But the women I knew while I was in ntcc. we are no longer in ntcc. Those women sweated and worked Hard on there lessons. Scraped together with there OWN funds to make it fun and interesting for all kids. It may have been started because of Grant. But many kids did benefit from it. My Daughter was one of them. Who to this day,is asking me to find a youth group for her and she is a teen now!!
My husband volunteered to do the clown and then he started doing puppet shows that the kids all loved!
I think you have a very shaded and the wrong view of the childrens ministry. It was not stifling them,nor was it just to babysit them.I was one of those teachers as well. That had lessons prepaired,crafts that went with the lesson,questions,prizes,ect. All out of our own pocket!
I am glad my child did not have to sit through ntcc services. And ladies like Tracy Pelfry,and others gave my child time to laugh,have fun!
Not sure why you see wearing a clown suit as degrading and uncomfortable to wear. it is not beneath anyone to wear it. Since you may not know,that man volunteered as did my husband. Not that a WOMAN had to wear the outfit to make it just and right!
Somethings you just can not make it out to be horrible thing. Defreshcos wife worked in the nursery as far as I know. She was not a teacher in the classes!
April
"We also feel that to expose these bunch of hypocritical abusers that we need to take the same approach. Sin is sin...You got me a little riled up here and felt the need to clarify some of our motives and reasons for doing what we do."
I'm not questioning your motives, just your tactics.There is enough known to denounce without sensationalizing anything. There is zero evidence that Mike Kekel is a pedophile. Criticize his hypocrisy, which is evident, but calling him a pervert demands more proof than you have and is no different than RW raving about women wearing makeup being whores. Or is that what you mean by taking the same approach? I really don't think you want to emulate him in that way.
Hello April,
I believe you when you say that the women worked hard in their Sunday school lessons. I figured the young preacher volunteered. I don't think they MADE him do it. I was aware of what was being taught at Bible school and the conferences about what a blessing it is for some preachers to get involved in clown ministry/ puppet ministry, etc. If the man was happy doing that, God bless him. I never intended to discount the hard work the women put into making their lessons exciting for the children.
I will just say that I don't see the reason for someone to go Bible if he wants to be active in Children's Church as a clown, unless he was planning to also be a Sunday school teacher and that was just one facet of his children's ministry. What Graham seems to be however is a situation where there is a plethora (overabundance) of ministers that could be out on the field helping people who are pioneering churches hundreds of miles away from HQ's with only one or 2 helpers or no helpers, and they pull from this pool of preachers of whom many are chomping at the bits to be given the go-ahead to go help some poor pastor or to start a new church, and they make them a shoe-shiner, or a grass cutter, or a ... CLOWN! My problem with that is this... Would that young preacher be more valuable as a clown in Graham or helping some preacher who needs helping setting up chairs in the little shotgun room he's renting from someone else who doesn't allow him to leave it set up as a church, so he has to carry the podium and set up the mic and the chairs, etc. every Sunday and throughout the week, not to mention pay for the building, and soul-win people. Pastor Davis has turned Graham into a DisneyLand Church with all these people while there are people who just need someone to help them do some basic things in their little 2x4 church!
Vic,
We posted another comment that expressed our views on this subject in more detail. Its possible that it might have ended up in the spam filter but I think Jeff probably removed it and I believe I know why. We are on the same side here and though we take a different approach it doesn't serve our cause well to be at odds on this issue. While I disagree with you about the tactics that we use, I will accept your criticism with no animosity or hard feelings. I have nothing but respect for the moderator of this blog and those that post here and do not think that an argument on this issue would be beneficial to anyone here. I'm not trying to belittle anyone in any way here, just think that avoiding a clash on this matter might be in the best interest of all here.
There is so much I could say and want to say but there is a time to speak and a time to refrain. Things were complicated and life was a serious struggle in the ntcc. The wounds were deep because they were inflicted by friends. We now fight a good fight and we hope to finish our course with no regrets. I can honestly say that I have fewer regrets right now as an Xer than I ever did as a member of the cult we once belonged to. I'm not ashamed of what I do now, but what we were a part of and what we witnessed was shameful and we are grateful that we are no longer trapped in that vicious cycle of oppression.
Freedom is a wonderful thing and we respect everyone's right to it. Ange and I both disagree on certain things but we respect each other's right to speak our mind. We have deep affection for each other and think very much alike and were meant to be together. We have a bond that we both know has been there for years. There are times when she feels one way about a subject and I have a different opinion. It's amazing how much I have learned from her when I look at things in the same light that she looks at them. I try not to look at either one of us as being right or wrong. Don't know if we'll ever change but not sure if we want to either. Peace to all!
Don and Ange
I came across this passage as I was preparing a message for Sunday service in the Philippines:
3) Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.
4) And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.
I thought of all the PRO-NTCCers that seem to think they are so spiritual and they have all the answers when they say people who post on here should just forgive and move on.
Well, Jesus says, if they REPENT and ask you to FORGIVE them, then forgive them. That's the problem. Who has asked for forgiveness? Who has repented? I am sure that most people on this blog, even Jeff included, would gladly forgive the offenders if they would absolutely clearly ask for forgiveness and admit that they need to repent and make those necessary steps to do so, and we saw evidence in that repentance by the actions they take. Just changing without asking for forgiveness is not good enough. I know they repented in many ways, because often people point out how that they don't do some of the things they used to do, but did they ask any of the offended parties for forgiveness? And I don't mean saying, "forgive me IF I did something wrong, but I didn't do anything wrong." That to me is not truly asking for forgiveness.
I am not saying it is okay to hate them. I don't think that is right either. All I am saying is, it's a two-way street. Why not encourage them to ask for forgiveness? You know why you won't. I am pretty sure they will look at you like you are the worst scum of the earth.
Don and Ange said...
We posted another comment that expressed our views on this subject in more detail. Its possible that it might have ended up in the spam filter but I think Jeff probably removed it and I believe I know why.
Jeff said...
I hadn't checked the spam folder in a day or so and there it was. It is viewable now. I appreciate you guys respecting my occasional intentions where the delete button is concerned. In this case I hadn't done it but as you guys rightly observed, occasionally I do.
I've pondered this issue and I'd like to weigh in. The biggest problem I have with the whole Mike being 24 and Tanya being 15 thing is that I don't believe that anyone else would have gotten away with it the way they did having committed what they did. I believe Vics testimony so I have no doubt of the "facts" that Vic stated.
For the record. My daughter wouldn't have been dating a 24 year old when she was 15 or a 25 year old when she was 16. I wouldn't have allowed it. Having said that I've seen 16 year old girls who looked like 22 and if the state determines that they can marry at that age, and the parent allow it, then that is up to them. Realistically there isn't much difference between the private parts of a "grown" teen and the private part of a 24 year old. Hanky panky is hanky panky and sex is sex. Now having said that, I'd be more accepting of my 15 year old daughter being interested in a 16 year old than a 24 year old but ladies dating older men is nothing new. In fact it is quite common in many cultures and young ladies live through it quite happily. It's no mystery that 15 year old girls are getting "done" every day. It's not so shocking. The problem I have is that Davis allowed it, while most parents wouldn't, and there were no consequences. That's the part that I have the biggest problem with. Double standards and hypocrisy.
Jeff
Jeff said,
"The biggest problem I have with the whole Mike being 24 and Tanya being 15 thing is that I don't believe that anyone else would have gotten away with it the way they did having committed what they did."
Don and Ange said:
We have been referring to this as child molestation, because regardless if the advances were unwanted, which is very possible, the state would view it the same way. Even if both participants were consenting it still would be considered statutory rape in many states and depending on the age would carry a sentence. When there is penetration it becomes a more serious sex offense, but people are put in jail for what mck did. There is no difference in a catholic priest fondling a child or "feeling them up" than there is with an ntcc grown man doing the same thing. Willing or not many priests have been held accountable for the same actions that mck got away with. The victim might allow the actions to take place but the adult has power over them and therefore they are violated.
The ntcc creates a culture that nurtures this type of behavior. We feel that they have no respect for victims of abuse and they have turned a blind eye to many instances where people have been violated. If a young teen were to be violated by an outsider that was not in the ntcc, the police would be called and the dude would be thrown in jail regardless of weather the actions were consensual. There is also no evidence that t davis wanted this or welcomed these advances.
We feel that the stance of the ntcc is that they take sides too often with the abuser and the victim gets ostracized. The ntcc has a holier than thou attitude about these things and they always downplay it. We posted an article on our blog called kekel, kekel child molester and at first I had reservation about it, but it has become the all time most viewed article on our blog. Is it a false accusation? Only if a person views the actions of mck as normal or if the story itself is not believed. We believed that if it had happened to anyone elses daughter that was not in the ntcc that the perpetrator would be a sex offender and would have served jail time. The behavior of mck had to be acceptable in rwd's eyes for this to go unpunished.
This is where we stand on this subject and as we enjoy our freedom to voice our opinions, we respect the rights of others to do the same. This is a very positive venue for people to voice their opinions about what they went through in the ntcc. We all have been through the mill and have different approaches to dealing with what we have been through. The fact that we are openly discussing these issues is a testimony against the ntcc. More and more people are waking up and leaving.
Don and Ange
"IF YOU ARE IN YOUR MID 20'S AND YOU FEEL UP A GIRL, THAT IS IN HER MID TEENS, YOU ARE A CHILD MOLESTER"
Well, Mike never told me he "felt her up," and I don't believe I've ever used that terminology either. Even if I did, I certainly never defined it as reaching the threshhold you appear to be using to make your "pedophile" determination. I hesitated even sharing the info precisely because I was afraid that someone would go puritanical and try to mischaracterize Mike as some kind of pervert, when all I wanted to do was expose hypocrisy and nepotism.
If the state of Missouri says that girls can marry at 15, it is likely that few of those marriages involve girls that haven't made out with their fiances. Since I wasn't there witnessing just exactly how far these petting sessions went, I wouldn't presume to pen dissertations as if I were an authority on the subject. I'm not. All I know is that he was preparing to be a holiness preacher and simultaneously justifying and even boasting about forbidden behavior, and that was the whole point. I didn't really get a play by play, but he said enough to make us know that it was certainly against school rules and a capitulation to the flesh. That doesn't mean he was meeting the legal definition of a pedophile, and no amount of revisionist history will change that.
Who cares about your precious hit counter? Is that really a justification for posting questionable information as truth? Maybe you should just fabricate some more sensational speculation and really please the Lord with your zeal. RW and Machiavelli would approve too.
I'm disturbed that you have misused and embellished information that I provided just to take a cheap shot at your enemy. It's not right, even if your motives are. Sorry if your hits fall off, but that's the way I see it.
MDR said, if I would have seen you get up in my wife's face unprovoked back in January when you glared at her and said, "what are you looking at?"
She should have told him "nothing much".
MDR wrote, "It's kind of like RWD bragging about his 2 PhD's. Not just one, he said, "I've got 2 of 'em". This was never an issue with me until he made it an issue. If you're going to brag about something like your credentials, then back it up".
Yeah, and I have a Bachelor's degree in Theology from NTCC, have the paper to prove it. Now ain't that special. NOT.
Wow... a House divided!
"Wow... a House divided!"
More like the freedom to have divergent opinions. That's the way it works in the real world. We don't have to pretend to agree about everything. Wow.
Frankly we have a lot more liberty here than you'll ever seen in the NTCC especially around RWD. I don't know if it is so much a house divided as people being real while having the freedom to express their true feelings without fear of being ostracized by the church you are a part of.
Try expressing your real feelings around the NTCC leadership and see where it gets you. I'll tell you what else any sensible person should be able to get from this. Through the years, Vic has been a harsh critic of the NTCC and it's leaders. Many have accused him of being bitter and a hater and all the rest that NTCCers accuse people of who've left their church. Well here you have Vic quite sternly defending his position which could be considered by some, favorable in Mike and Tanya's behalf. Does Vic sound like a bitter hater to you?
It's really not favorable, but what Vic doesn't want to see is what he considers to be exaggerations which he believes paint an inaccurate picture of what he wrote about Mike and Tanya's conduct. Lets recap.
A few years ago Vic Johanson said that Mike Kekel had bragged about making out or touching or petting Tanya during a time when they were dating while Tanya was a young teenager. Vic never said that they had intercourse. What Vic did say is that the grope session between Mike and Tanya was brought to the attention of RWD, and RWD basically blew it off. Vic also said that Mike acted like it was no big deal and he essentially had no regrets for touching or groping or making out with Tanya before they got married.
Now correct me if my recollection is wrong Vic but I think I hit it pretty much right on the money. So the problem that Vic had was that he thought Mike was able to get away displaying improper conduct according to the NTCC's then known standards simply because he was dating RWD's daughter. The firm understanding was that other guys would have gotten slammed for the same conduct. That I totally agree with that assessment.
Now Vic says that it's not uncommon for a teenage girl who's dating, to make out with her boyfriend. True? Most certainly. The problem Don and Ange have is that Mike was dating Tanya when she was about 15 years old and Mike was 24. Vic says that girls can marry with parental consent at about that age and someone probably won't go to jail just because of a kiss or a feel up or a touch of the private parts.
Which ever the case we don't know exactly what went on during Mikes and Tanya's touch sessions but we do know that it got a little hot and quite personal because back in the day Mike actually told Vic that it did according to Vics written testimony.
Continued below...
So lets have it. Is anyone interested in a vote? If so answer the questions below.
1. Was Mike Kekel wrong for groping Tanya when he was about 24 and Tanya was about 15?
2. Was the NTCC leadership i.e. RWD wrong for allowing it?
3. Was there a double standard?
4. Should Mike be considered a pervert or child molester?
We know that Don and Ange would say yes to all questions so that is a given. We know that Vic would probably say yes to all except #4.
I would say yes to all but I'm leaning toward Vic assessment of question 4. You probable won't go to jail for kissing or touching and we don't know if there was sex so we can't assume there was. The fact is RWD allowed whatever went on and Mike married the young lady. Tanya didn't claim that she was molested and neither did RWD so whatever went on, it certainly was with Tanya's and RWD's consent.
Double standard. You better believe it. I got jumped on by "Ramirez the Abuser" for talking to a grown women on the phone and no more, when I was a Sergeant in the Army and refused entrance to the NTCS. We never even held hands nor attempted to go on a date. Mike could grope the founders daughter and get away with it unscathed? Can you spell double standard? Can you understand NEPOTISM?
That is Vics point but Don and Ange are certainly entitled to their opinion and I can guarantee this. No 24 year old man would have come sniffing around my house for my daughter when she was 15!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Not for one second. Neither would anyone else for that matter. My daughter will graduate HS this year and she has more important things and better things to worry about than boys. She may like a boy but I don't promote it. She's human and I am also so I understand, but I'm not going to promote it. She's not gone on a date yet as far as I know. School is enough to worry about. When she goes to college and she is 18, it's only natural that she will date and I don't expect otherwise. Not at 15.
Jeff
Bixby Knolls said,
"Back in the day (history), many girls in their teens would marry early. No one thought of it as molestation and it was actually quit normal." BK
....................
People used to beat their slaves and thought it was quite normal too; but that doesn't mean it was right!
The following is an example of a state statute dealing with sexual molestation:
"16-6-4. Child molestation; aggravated child molestation.
A person commits the offense of child molestation when he or she does any immoral or indecent act to or in the presence of or with any child under the age of 16 years with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the person.
A person convicted of a first offense of child molestation shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years.
Copied and pasted from USLegal.com.
If this did not happen than I publicly and officially apologize to Mike and Tanya Kekel. You both know if the contact you had prior to marriage is accurately defined by the above definition of child molestation laws. God also knows. It is not beneath me to say, "I'm sorry", to everyone I offended. (blanket apology, Works for rwd!)
If it did happen the way Vic has shared and if I didn't misunderstand the definition of "groping sessions" then I do not extend this apology to mike or tanya kekel. Is there a difference between a "groping session", "making out" or "feeling up"?
Don and Ange
This is off subject, I know, but I just read on facebook that RW Davis has a winter home in Arizona!
No wonder he wouldn't tell us where he was going. We like sheep probably thought he was going around in his RV visiting and encouraging churches. It looks like he just goes there in the winter to escape the harsh cold winters in Washington. Must be nice!
I guess the church bought it for him, coz he told me he only had like 3,000 dollars in the bank the night that i left his corporation for good.
MD Reed,
Rev. Ashemore says he doesn't know what in the world you're talking about with Rev. Stevens. He doesn't remember it at all (what you said about him and RW Davis laughing about him spending his money on the work in P.I.) and he said maybe you should refresh his memory.
Here is the quote:
"I have no clue what he is talking about. I recall NO such situation."
I told him that it's easier to believe Rev. Reed than him, knowing what I already know about the org and from talking to my girlfriend who was under McDonald in P.I. and from hearing the accounts of many other former missionaries in NTCC.
maybe RW Davis has a lot of money from something else, of course, like when he was charging a hundred dollars an hour to sinners to council them as a psychologist. Too bad we can't go to college coz Rev. Olson says it may be spiritually devastating!
"Is there a difference between a "groping session", "making out" or "feeling up"?" Don and Ange
................
not according to the law there is no difference legally its all child molestation if one is underage and one is an adult!
"Even in the USA, young girls mess with older men all the time. It happens every day .. Many young men do wind up in jail as a result." Anon
.................
because it is illegal!
Anon wrote...
because it is illegal!
Jeff said...
I'll have to say I'm leaning far in Vic's direction to the point of tipping over. Come on folks, lets think about this for a moment. I understand that Mike was in his mid twenties but lets be real. If every 18+ year old man that messed with a 15 year old girl went to jail, there would be no buildings left in America other than jails because they'd all been converted. 15 year old girls are in 10th GRADE!!! With few exception they are all messing around. I know, my daughter is a 12 grader and I hear all about it and they ain't just messing with 16 year olds. As often as not they are messing around with 18 year old Seniors.
I understand that law is law but speeding is against the law ans so is j-walking.
Now before everyone jumps on me I've already said that my daughter was not going to be messing around with an 18+ man when she was 15. I don't care if the man was 18, 21, 24 whatever. She wasn't messing with any of them certainly not with my approval.
Having said that, a 15 year old girl messing with an older man is about as common as j-walking or speeding. Does that make it right? No! Does it make it some completely hideous crime that should be punishable by some young man having the title of child molester following him for the rest of his life? Not in my book and that is my story and I'm sticking to it. The ones who do get put on the child molester registry are the ones who get caught. The other 50 million never get caught or all associated parties simply don't care so it never gets brought to anyones attention.
15 year old girls are in the 10th grade people. If you think that 10th grade girls aren't messing around with 18 year old 12th grade boys you are wrong. Does that make it legal? No, but our society basically turns a blind eye to it because it is so common for a 10th grade girl to mess with a 12th grade boy. Many 10th grade girls haven't yet turned 16 but many 12 grade boys have turned 18.
The NTCC makes it's own laws and in the NTCC, young ladies are groomed to get married at a young age. Especially the ones who are daughters of the NTCC leadership. I think it is garbage but that is the NTCCs way of doing things and just like Mike was a part of the NTCC, so were we. The only difference is that it was brought to RWDs attention and he blew it off and a 24 year old messing with a 15 year old is quite questionable (to say the least) but not unheard of even outside the NTCC. I'll tell you this. I'd rather my daughter get married than mess around with every guy that she can prior to it. There are a lot of young ladies getting pregnant these days and few associated parties are going to jail and few of these girls are getting married.
I'd rather a dude marry my daughter than just do her and leave her with the baby. My Mom was 21 when she married my 30 year old dad. Same age difference as Mike and Tanya. They stayed married for over 50 years and Mike and Tanya have been married for quite a good many years as well. There is some honor in the whole thing regardless of her age when they got started. How many young girls get pregnant and don't marry the man? Millions and Tanya wasn't pregnant prior to marriage.
Jeff
MD Reed,
Rev. Ashemore says he doesn't know what in the world you're talking about with Rev. Stevens. He doesn't remember it at all (what you said about him and RW Davis laughing about him spending his money on the work in P.I.) and he said maybe you should refresh his memory.
Here is the quote:
"I have no clue what he is talking about. I recall NO such situation."
This event happened in the kitchen at the Emerald Classics mission quarters during an Asian conference. The laughter was specifically in reference to the money that he spent on the appliances by D. Stevens and how he was pulled out of that work after buying them.
JRA may not remember some other things that happened while we were together in the PI, but I have a lot more I could share.
Jeff said:
"If every 18+ year old man that messed with a 15 year old girl went to jail, there would be no buildings left in America other than jails because they'd all been converted."
Don and Ange said:
Point understood and well taken, but mike was not 18 he was 24 and part of a holiness organization that preaches hell and damnation to all who don't fall into their definition of Christianity. Reading through the previous threads on your blog and Deborah's witness, Many have the been left with the same impression that we have. We find it disturbing that any man that claims to be a Christian and attends a holiness or hell so called Christian seminary would violate a 15 year old and then bragg about it. We are not the only ones that consider this child molestation.
Are we wrong for using "tactics" that expose the ones that blatantly broke the rules and bragged about it because we feel they should be looked at with the same judgmental attitude that they imposed on all the people whose lives they destroyed?
These people are a part of an abusive and destructive cult. They don't care if they step on someone or if they emotionally, physically, sexually or spiritually abuse anyone. What we all went through was hideous and completely unnecessary and we cope with it and live with it and remember it all the days of our lives. Although we learn to overcome and we forcefully put these things in our past and "get on with life" anyone who reads this blog or any Xer forum material from the outside can clearly see that we have all wasted years of our lives needlessly. We have been wrongfully hurt and spiritually wasted by a bunch of pompous hypocrites that require us to live perfectly according to the highest standards, while they sit up there in Graham, allowing the ones that gave them their wealth to wash and wax their Cadillac's, BMWs and Motorhomes for free while they live lavish lifestyles in their million dollar mansions off of what should have been our life savings.
Are we going overboard by calling mike a child molester? We have earned our right to have this opinion. We are not the only ones who feel this way. The sickness of the ntcc is that they want people to look at this as normal behavior and I'm sure that they would love for it to go away. We all know this is not normal and most of us are completely disgusted with it.
Don and Ange
Anonymous said,
"People used to beat their slaves and thought it was quite normal too; but that doesn't mean it was right!"
Come on! Comparing a teenager willingly getting married to an older man with slavery!!!????
Not even in the same category! Especially when one involved the consent of a parent, and one involves the humiliation of "property"! Have a little sensitivity to those whose ancestors were in chains!
ns
1 NCO 2 Another said...
Point understood and well taken, but mike was not 18 he was 24 and part of a holiness organization that preaches hell and damnation to all who don't fall into their definition of Christianity.
Jeff said...
And that is exactly the problem that I have with the whole event. I know that Mike was 24 and as I stated that is quite questionable to say the least. My daughter wouldn't be doing it; certainly not with my approval. It's a double standard, bunch of hypocrisy. In this case the NTCC promotes it so I'll give Mike some slack.
Jeff
People used to beat their slaves and thought it was quite normal too; but that doesn't mean it was right!
that doesn't mean it was right!
that doesn't mean it was right!
that doesn't mean it was right!
that doesn't mean it was right!
The "pedophile" and "molester" labels are the only thing I have a problem with, because as Jeff has explained, there is a huge difference between a person succumbing to temptation and making out with his 15 year old fiance, and a creepy predator in a trench coat hiding in the bushes waiting to snatch a grade schooler, which is the image such words conjure. And Tanya was quite forward and flirtatious at that time, so you shouldn't make any assumptions about who may have initiated this behavior. I would speculate that, under the circumstances and in the context in which these events occurred, not many other BS students would have resisted either.
Here is the definition of "sexual contact" from section of the Missouri statutes (which are the only ones relevant in this matter) dealing with child molestation:
"(3) "Sexual contact", any touching of another person with the genitals or any touching of the genitals or anus of another person, or the breast of a female person, or such touching through the clothing, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire of any person;"
In order to be guilty of child molestation, one has to have engaged in this behavior. Mike did not go into sufficient detail to specifically admit any of that, so there is no evidence that he violated the statute, and therefore to paint him as a pedophile is speculatory. You are free to speculate all you want, but you present your accusations as fact, not speculation. The only fact we actually know is that Mike boasted about making out with Tanya. That's it. To go beyond is to embellish, and to play fast and loose with the truth. I would hope you value your credibility more than to do so. I'm sure the National Enquirer gets lots of circulation too, but do you really want to emulate that model? Think about it on your sabbatical.
"This is off subject, I know, but I just read on facebook that RW Davis has a winter home in Arizona!"
Wonder what kind of mansion he has down there? And are there others? Maybe he has a villa or two in Europe, for all we know.
"Wow... a House divided!"
Another thing--there is no "house." We're all individuals post-NTCC (I know that's a hard concept for a borg drone to absorb).
I guess Jesus was a Borg drone then
Jeff,
Did you hear that RW Davis has a winter home in Arizona? Someone that is linked to my facebook left a comment that they are glad to be in Arizona coz RW Davis has a winter home there and he's there a lot. I sent MC Kekel an email asking him who paid for that? And if RW Davis paid for it, how did he pay for it if he told me he only took around $3,000 from the organization for himself? It will be interesting to see if he comes up with an answer, and how long it takes, or if we will catch him in a lie. Their statements keep putting them in a corner so that they must have to be very careful what they say. It's no wonder they would take so long to answer hard questions while I was in. They probably have to check with each other to see what one another has said about something so their stories are all straight.
Or I wonder if Rev. Briggs has a perfectly good explanation for this one that will put all our minds to rest about where the funds came from to build RW Davis a house in Arizona.
Anonymous said I wonder what else he has. So do I. How many things does he have? If you stick around for a long time, little things just pop up here and there that he doesn't think he needs to tell anybody about, like the mansion that just appeared one day in Bonco, and the plane that he told me had, and now a "winter home" in Arizona. Jeff, I am more convinced that you are right when you say that this man must be LOADED!
And the people just love him. They are perfectly happy to know that he has a "vacation home" in Arizona, just tickled to know that "God is blessing him." They just go to Conferences, take their pictures together with their friends, and say "what a wonderful conference," and don't even think that RW Davis sees dollar signs over every one of their heads.
Kris....
RWD has a lot of money. That is no mystery. He owns plenty of his own rental properties and he's invested for years. Now I still think he uses people but at this point he has enough money that he doesn't even need a paycheck from the org. I'm sure he's been financially secure for years. He can easily afford a home in Az. He can probably afford 50 of them if he wanted.
Everyone understands that RWD has invested everyone elses money ever since the inception of the NTCC and I'm sure he is a multi-millionaire. Church owners with few exceptions are very well off. I've read two separate articles on Yahoo which said that church ownership falls in the top ten business to own in the United States.
If you own a church in the US and it grows, you are probably fairly well off. If you want to make money, start a church and be the owner, get a few good orators and baby people will come and pay. RWD may be an abusive jerk but he ain't no dummy. He is a shrewd business man. You must know that and I don't guess that requires Kekel's explanation.
You understand Kris I'm sure.
Jeff
Kris said...
RW Davis sees dollar signs over every one of their heads.
Jeff said...
There could be no truer statement. It has nothing to do with saving souls where RWD is concerned and that is no exaggeration. You are no more than dollar signs to RWD.
Jeff
Jeff,
Ya, at this point for me to go back to NTCC, I might as well just put a sign on my back that says "KICK ME!" or just wear a hat that says, "SUCKER!" and just suck on a "Dummy" lolilop in every service.
RW Davis lauds the KJV, except for one tiny word that always seemed to bug him that he wanted RIPPED OUT of the King James Version that was believed by the organization to be inspired by God as God's english translation to us on earth.
That word was CHARITY, which comes from the greek word, AGAPE, as many already know. But in light of my new revelation that RW Davis has, in addition to other things, a WINTER HOME in ARIZONA besides his MANSION in Graham, I thought I would point out one of the meanings of agape. One of them is benevolence, and it means CHARITY, in a nutshell. Here is my dictionary's definition of benevolence:
2. charitable: performing good or charitable acts AND NOT SEEKING TO MAKE A PROFIT!!!! (emphasis obviously added by me).
It is no wonder he did not bat an eye in humility before telling us that CHARITY was not the correct translation of the word agape in 1 Cor 13 (the LOVE chapter). I contend that it most certainly is a viable translation, RW Davis, but apparently to accept it, you apparently have to also accept that you do not LOVE your congregation, if you seek to make a PROFIT from them. And I say that all pastors who open up a church like they are opening up a BUSINESS (in ANY denomination), NTCC or not, are all false PROPHETS.
Kris said...
It is no wonder he did not bat an eye in humility before telling us that CHARITY was not the correct translation of the word agape in 1 Cor 13.
Jeff said...
You better believe it. RWD does not want to give money away, he wants to get it all. If he can figure out a way to twist a scripture into supporting yet another way to make money he certainly will. To RWD, Christianity somehow always surrounds one event. Making money and I'm not talking about his pastors making money either. It's about his organization making money off of his pastors hard work.
If you are an NTCC pastor here are a few things you'll never do if you want to remain right with the NTCC...
1. Own your own church.
2. Have total control over the revenue that comes into the church you pastor.
3. Keep all the money that comes into your church at your church without sending substantial amounts of it to Graham.
4 Spend more than $50 without asking permission if you are the pastor of a serviceman's home.
5. Keep track of the money that comes into your church without constantly sending reports to Graham.
6. Be your own man.
7. Tell RWD where he can get off at when he decides to give you the hairy eyebrow.
8. Be your own man in control of your own church without having to answer to Olson every time he decides to call at 2:00 am.
I lived long enough with those control freaks. Right or wrong, now I make my own decisions just like RWD and Kekel. If Olson calls me at 2:00 am I'd tell him to kiss my butt, call him an inconsiderate jerk and hang up on him.
Jeff
This old business of Olson calling folks at 2:00 am rubs me the wrong way. I know what the NTCC would say to justify such inconsiderate conduct.
"Olson is in Graham on the west coast on a different time zone and he gets out of church late and he is so busy."
Jeff says...
Here is a novel concept. CALL THE NEXT DAY YOU JERK. The stupid money and numbers report can wait you jerk. The world won't stop turning if you get it the next day. Who knows. Maybe they send it by email now but they certainly didn't used to. You got a call at 2:00 am so Olson could act like he was the most important person on earth. I always thought that was so inconsiderate and it was and if they still do it it is and anyone who doesn't think so is a jerk also.
You are not that important. It's not like it's a national security matter.
Jeff
Here is an eye opener:
BIN LADEN IS DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bro Johnson
Whats up Bro J!!!!!!
Are you back? What do you mean Bin Laden is dead? Do you know something that we don't know? I trust everything is fine. Take care.
Jeff
Hey Jeff,
You should have added two more and made it like a David Letterman's top ten list!
I know the answer now. Bin Laden is in fact dead. This is a great day for Americans. Unfortunately despite his significance, he is just one man. Psychologically this is important but at this point I'm not sure how big of a role he continued to play on the stage of world terrorism.
The bottom line is the guy is dead and we won't be worried about him any longer.
Jeff
The Big Phoenix Church:
http://www.maricopa.gov/Assessor/ParcelApplication/Detail.aspx?ID=144-65-085-E
Of course there is another church in the Phoenix/Glendale area and you can go back to the Maricopa county and do a search under Last Name "New Testament". To prove was Kris said was true -
http://www.maricopa.gov/Assessor/ParcelApplication/Detail.aspx?ID=148-15-007-A
Deed Recorded:
http://156.42.40.50/UnOfficialDocs/pdf/20110016659.pdf
Interesting that Grant was mentioned on RWD's deed...
Wow, RWD is leaving his property to a quote, "sinner" who didn't attend the NTCS. Knowing this, you'd be a complete idiot not to take care of your family. Why would you forsake your brother or sister or siblings or parents just because they are not a part of the NTCC? RWD and the Kekels won't!!!!
Having this information, you NTCCers are complete idiots, who forsake your so called non saved family members. RWD ain't forsaking Grant. You are an idiot if you leave worldly belongings to the NTCC or an NTCC pastor. Leave it to your family just like RWD does. I don't care if they are considered saved or not. RWD doesn't care. I've been told by an NTCC minister that the Kekels don't consider Grant to be saved.
For the record, I don't know if that is true but it would be likely being that he is attending a secular CATHOLIC college.
The NTCC leadership has duped people. They've taught and demanded that you forsake your family while totally failing to do it themselves. RWD is leaving his worldly possessions to a young man who clearly falls in the catagory of what the NTCC calls a sinner.
Becky is crazy to forsake her sister Deb. RWD wouldn't do it. So when he kicks the bucket, Grant gets a house, compliments of the hard working NTCC tithe payers. It's not like RWD has never received compensation from the NTCC INC because he has. Some of the money spent on that house was the result of revenue which came into the NTCC from hard working tithe payers.
So Grant gets a house. Know this you are an idiot if you give the NTCC your money. So Grant got the best high school education, (your dollar), he is getting a great college degree, (your dollar) and he will get a nice house bought and paid for, (YOUR DOLLAR).
Just thinking about it makes me sick. Are you NTCC people complete idiots? Grant is attending a Secular CATHOLIC college and your hard earned money is going to support him. I have my OWN children who need my money. It makes me sick that I ever gave one dime to the NTCC but I was a sucker just like those who remain.
JEFF
According to my measurements the house Grant is inheriting is approximately 4200 sq ft. Purchased in October 2010 for $350,000.00...must be nice being related to "pastor" Davis...lol
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/8027-North-59th-Avenue_Glendale_AZ_85302_M26963-36262?source=web#/baths-2/beds-4/sqft-15
If you would like to verify, her is the link
TB
Btw- the link shows an updated picture with a nice new in-ground pool...hmmm...holiness?
You can get it on Google Maps streetview and can see the pool on Birds-eye view on Bing and Google Earth.
3 bedroom and 5 baths, I'd think it would be the other way around but I guess you gotta stay clean on vacation.
I went by the house today and saw it firsthand for myself. Electronic gates and plenty of shrubs. I saw some people out there doing something in the driveway and one of the women had long hair in a beehive and she was wearing pants.
Mark didn't know that it was alright to do housework and yardwork in pants now. I wonder who the caretakers are for that property...
Anonymous said...
Mark didn't know that it was alright to do housework and yard work in pants now.
Jeff said...
ARE YOUR SERIOUS????????!!!!!! Are you just saying that or is that an understood NTCC standard now that is practiced by all women who are interested in wearing pants? I really hope you are just being sarcastic? I get mad enough about the NTCC without learning of anymore double standards.
Jeff
Anonymous said...
Mark didn't know that it was alright to do housework and yard work in pants now.
Maybe Ntcc is changing their practices and actually hiring people to do their work and not using church folks.
but he said the woman had a "beehive" hairdo.
I would be very interested to know if NTCC has "compromised" on this too, and started allowing women to do yardwork in PANTS! Can anyone in the NTCC confirm this?
Jeff mentioned multiple times about women can wear pants at the gym, so what's the logical progression? Gym, in your house, out of your house in the yard, and on and on. They'll be wearing them to Walmart before you know it...
This site has some good inside pictures -
http://www.trulia.com/homes/photos/Arizona/Glendale/sold/939571-8027-N-59th-Ave-Glendale-AZ-85302
Most black women in NTCC don't wear "beehives", so it probably wasn't the Halls. The mystery of the caretakers continues...
Most black women in NTCC don't wear "beehives", so it probably wasn't the Halls. The mystery of the caretakers continues...
Maybe they are using hired help now, and not imposing on the good graces of the ntcc proletariat.
May be the house in AZ will be a retirement home for some of the old NTCC ministers.
Anonymous said...
Maybe the house in AZ will be a retirement home for some of the old NTCC ministers.
Jeff said...
I don't know how that would be possible with it being willed to Grant? Not very likely in my book.
Jeff
Post a Comment