Agenda - Disclaimer

It is obvious that becoming a member of a group is your choice and leaving it is also your choice and these two things (joining and leaving) depend exclusively on your decision. The “body” of a group are its members, as common sense indicates. In other words, the very essence of this debate lays on your ability to think critically and choose your course. In this website you are invited to make use of that critical thinking. There are people who count on you NOT making use of this ability. This is what impressed me while reading nccg_concern’s website: the fact that what he expects of the public to do is to use their own mind as little as possible while he presses their buttons. The less one uses their brain the better for him: the message he sends will come through much more easily if you cease to think critically.

In this website, you are encouraged to use your brain at your best capacity.

Also, in the same spirit, if you are a current member or investigator  of NCCG and have questions about this work and the evidence presented here, or just wonder what the fuss is all about, my suggestion is that you visit the MLT Reception Group group and find out for yourselves or visit the balance page of this website. This source being freely available, no e-mail address to reach me is provided as it is not needed; I have stated all my relevant opinions in this webpage.

In an effort to avoid making the same mistakes as the people I criticise, I decided to write down a little of who I am and make clear my intentions for building and publishing this work.

To begin with, I should state that I have university education in the medical field and have had practice with dealing with patients. I have also had seminars on psychology, counselling and in particular, counselling of medical patients.

Secondly, I will state the part of my moral code which is relevant to this. I believe in the freedom of choice, a freedom such as it is not blocked by prejudice, propaganda, and any other influence designed to use a person’s choices to someone’s own benefit. No one has the right to do the latter, in my opinion, without explaining their motivation and reasons straight out to begin with. I also believe that people’s hearts and feelings more or less steer them along their lives, therefore, they are not to be taken lightly or be tampered with. On this basis, I believe that people are free to choose the religion they will live by and the God they will worship, as this too is a function of the heart. Whether I believe in God or not, having made the above clear, is obviously besides the point.

What bothered me enough to do all the work you see here, come up with it, organise it and publish it was looking at an event of plain injustice taking place. To put it shortly, a tiny church group (NCCG), the work of a lifetime of one single person and his loved ones is being pushed to the edge of destruction by the work of another, anonymous and mysterious individual (nccg_concern). What bothered me most of all was that the latter did not disclose neither his identity nor his agenda. What also bothered me a great deal was that this individual was not making sense in his writings, using the criteria of reason, logic and common sense.

To these two things, the anonymity and lack of logic, added a third item, perhaps the most dangerous of all: the author of the “anti-cult” website, as time went by, would impregnate his work with more powerful feeling, more emotion, more loaded words speaking volumes, all of which did NOT aim at anyone’s reason but to their hearts. In other words, it seemed like very bad journalism, like the lies politicians tell: the pathetic and worst kind.

This made me angry. I found myself suspecting that the whole work this individual had done was nothing less than foul play. But even if he WAS intending to be foul and nothing but destructive, had he disclosed his agenda, had he shown his face, I would never have bothered with him. I suspect I would actually respect him. He sure did a lot of work. But what for?

As I was investigating this, I discovered that the practice of defamation and destruction of religious groups out of nowhere is all but a rare phenomenon in the Unites States. Rick Ross and his associates were brought to my attention, along with their nearly-totalitarian beliefs and power-hungry attitudes.

This work is not to defend the “poor little church”, it’s not to argue theologically, it’s not to restore the church’s leader’s reputation. This work has no other reason than to state the obvious, yet well hidden behind flaming layers of emotionally loaded language, fact, that this anonymous individual aims to destroy and not to edify/warn/save, as he claims. That he aims to say ANYTHING, regardless the implications it may have to people who might actually take his words to heart, for the sake of a secret agenda which in all probability is to blindly destroy that small church, whether it deserves it or not. I saw striking similarities between this person and Rick Ross and his associates.

To use nccg_concern’s own expression, what I aim to do here is to “debunk” his writings. I aim to set the record straight as objectively as I can. I am sure that this cult-hunter is a real person and has a real life like the rest of us. I don’t aim to cover him with mud. But his work, yes, I aim to cover with mud, because it deserves it. It makes little sense, and with that little sense hopes to upset people, worry them, make them hate another person whose motives are in all probability honest. Bad journalism, the really worst and pathetic kind, deserves all the mud it can carry. Besides, as the person in question is hiding behind the cloak of anonymity (ironic that he advices everyone do to the same, first thing in his web page) little harm will be done to his reputation, but hopefully a lot more to his ego.

In the Fast Facts page, I explain how I am going to work do find out what the truth is, and prove it to the public. In that page I explain that the truth has two faces in this story, which are whether the “anti-cult” individual has pure motives and whether the church he is after is a “dangerous and destructive cult” or not. My opinion is that this individual is after slander and blind destruction, as mentioned earlier. My opinion of NCCG is that they do not pose danger to the public or their followers in the terms that their deepest motivation is not to manipulate their followers but rather abide with what the Bible says as best as possible and encourage people to do as much. I believe they are passionate about this and they are not after personal gain, be it glory, money or even “additional wives”.

Finally, like you who read this right now, I too am human. When I see absurd things, I tend to either laugh at them or become angry. In neither of these cases do I intend to do harm to the person through whom the absurdity comes. But the absurdity itself with either get laughed at or covered in mud, or both. I’m aware I do this, and I do not apologise for it because I am not writing a law document here; this is but my opinion.

P.S. Due to the total lack of information about the person I have come against and those who might be supporting him (again assuming he is male), and other reasons too obvious to mention, I have chosen to remain anonymous. I would like also to make clear that I am not a member of the NCCG as a church, I have not been baptized to it in any way and C.C. Warren (the NCCG leader) is not my spiritual father.