- click here to hear this quote
in
RightCyberUp HOME search comment
"...everybody is expected to bring visitors every week. They don't bring a visitor we ask why. It's not pressure, I'm concerned about their soul..."
-- Kip McKean; see full quote
For a church with many controversial Bible interpretations, the International Churches of Christ (ICC) has ironically concluded, “There is no private interpretation of the Bible.” (1) But ICC leadership does interpret the Bible, and this section examines some of its questionable ones.
Those in the International Churches of Christ (ICC) who have said that the Bible can’t be interpreted draw this view from a passage in II Peter:
“Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” II Peter 1:20-21 (emphasis added)
We have shown the New International Version (NIV) translation above (as usual) because it is the ICC's preferred translation. Yet the conclusion that the Bible can't be interpreted does not follow from the NIV passage. Instead the text speaks of the origins of scripture -- the way it was written, not necessarily the way it is to be read. Even if scripture doesn’t originate from personal interpretation, this doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t use interpretation to understand scripture.
[Note: other Bible translations don't specify the prophet's interpretation in verse 20, although the overall context points to the same conclusion.]
Even a literalist uses some degree of interpretation when reading the Bible. Consider the verse Ecclesiastes 10: 19: “A feast is made for laughter, and wine makes life merry, but money is the answer for everything.” Most readers will interpret this verse as facetious to harmonize it with the Bible’s other statements about money. Ecclesiastes 10:19 can’t be properly understood without interpretation, illustrating that readers must sometimes interpret the Bible in order to understand it.
When the ICC teaches that “there is no private interpretation of the Bible,” the real point seems to be that the teachings of ICC leadership cannot be questioned: ICC leadership defines what certain Bible passages mean. Any other belief is considered questioning the Bible itself.
The ICC teaches that it is the “kingdom of God” on earth today, based on the questionable interpretation that the biblical “kingdom of God” means “church:”
“In Matthew Chapter 16, in issuing to Peter the keys of the kingdom, Jesus explains for the first time in all of biblical history – in fact, the first time in history – of the universe – that the kingdom of God and the church of God are one and the same thing... tying the whole package together you can say that the kingdom of Christ, the body of Christ, and the church of Christ, are all to be the same thing... that was the message of Christ.”
Steve Johnson (World Sector Leader), The Kingdom of God, audiotape, (n.d.).
Is the kingdom of God truly synonymous with the Christian church? While the New Testament sometimes refers to the kingdom in the present tense (Col 1:13, I Corinthians 4:20), other passages speak of the kingdom as something to be inherited, presumably after this life (Acts 14:22, I Corinthians 6:9, 15:50, Galatians 5:21, James 2:5). Let’s consider Acts 14:21-22:
They [Paul & Barnabas] preached the good news in that city [Derbe] and won a large number of disciples. Then they returned to Lystra, Iconium and Antioch, strengthening the disciples and encouraging them to remain true to the faith. ‘We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God,’ they said. Acts 14: 21-22 [emphasis added]
Acts 14 alone seems to obliterate the ICC’s particular view of the kingdom:
Acts 14’s humble reference to the “kingdom” contrasts sharply with the ICC’s frequent, almost self-congratulatory statements calling itself the kingdom of God on earth today.
Example 1:
“I just want to say it's great to be back in leadership in the kingdom of God.”
Byron Parson (Chicago Lead Evangelist), The Dream: Super Churches, Part 2, DPI Archive Cassette Series, Tape # 7763, 1992.
Example 2:
“Thank you very much for the extremely warm reception, this morning, tonight – it’s great to be in the kingdom of God, amen?”
Kip McKean (ICC founder), Indianapolis message, audio tape, March 17, 1994.
Example 3:
“Let me tell you something, there is nothing like dating in the kingdom, amen? And there's nothing like marriage in the kingdom, amen?”
Kip McKean, Purpose for Life, Pasadena, audiotape, November 7, 1998.
ICC leadership's shallow interpretation fails to capture the subtleties of Bible passages about the kingdom. Luke 17:20-21, for example, discourages any attempt to define the kingdom of God tangibly:
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, ‘The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you. Luke 17:20-21 [emphasis added]
Also problematic is the ICC’s application of Matthew 6:33, “seek first his kingdom”:
“If we seek to be right with God and to advance the cause of his kingdom, the church, here on earth, then everything else will be given to us by God. That's a promise. It's a promise from God.”
Lisa Chacon (Region Leader – Women), I Can't Do All This!, acesonline.org, November 2, 1998.
Through this interpretation the ICC commands devotion to the International Churches of Christ in a way that New Testament authors did not intend – and promises members reward from God in return. Considering the ICC’s teaching that the kingdom = the church, statements like the following become troubling:
“Certainly, a true kingdom-first attitude always brings radical results. Everything is to become prioritized in relationship to the kingdom [church] immediately – our education, our professions, our family, our relationships and our recreation.”
Randy McKean (World Sector Leader), “First... the Kingdom” in First... the Kingdom, Ed. Thomas & Sheila Jones, DPI, Woburn, MA, 1994, p. 87.
ICC members are expected to subsume their education, their careers, their family, romantic relationships and recreation in relation to the ICC and its leadership – motivated by leadership's fundamentally flawed view of the “kingdom.”
[To see analysis of the ICC's Kingdom Study, click here.]
While some ICC leaders like DPI editor Thomas Jones have drawn a distinction between criticism and persecution, (3) other leaders have written off all criticism as “persecution:”
“Persecution may come in the form of TV shows, newspaper articles, or exit counselors.”
Randy McKean, “Lordship” in The Disciple’s Handbook, Ed. Thomas Jones, DPI, Woburn, MA, 1997, p. 46.
But is the ICC really "persecuted" in the western world, as it so often claims to be? We should examine "persecution" in the New Testament by comparison.
New Testament examples of persecution show extreme and often physical mistreatment. Paul wrote that he had "persecuted" the church before his conversion (Acts 22:4, Galatians 1:3, Philippians 3:6). What did his persecution entail? He went house-to-house dragging believers off to prison (Acts 8:3), breathed murderous threats against them (Acts 9:1), and even approved of their death by stoning (Acts 8:1).
Paul later suffered persecution himself as a Christian: "...what kinds of things happened to me in Antioch, Iconium and Lystra, the persecutions I endured." (II Timothy 3:11) What happened to Paul in these three cities? In Iconium he was plotted against to be mistreated and stoned (Acts 14:5) and in Lystra he was stoned and left for dead by instigators who had travelled from Antioch and Iconium (Acts 14:19). [There is no description of Paul's persecution in Antioch.]
Other New Testament persecution also tends to involve physical or material mistreatment. Hebrews 10 addresses believers who "were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property..." (Hebrews 10: 33-34) In another example, King Herod in Acts 12:1 "arrested people who belonged to the church, intending to persecute them." Herod’s intentions were carried out: had the Apostle James killed (Acts 12:2).
Today, the ICC would have members believe that media stories or voluntary family interventions are persecution. But there are simply no New Testament examples which equate criticism with persecution.
ICC founder Kip McKean and other leaders have prohibited public debate of their teachings. In the following quote, McKean misapplied a passage from Titus to justify his anti-debate position:
“The Bible teaches right here that Titus had the charge over several churches... And he was not to get involved in controversies – not to get involved in a debate. Debate would just continue to injure people's hearts and lives... a debate won't help people. It confuses them – that's why Paul says don't get involved in a debate. As an evangelist, I’ve got to obey the word of God. To get involved in a debate would be sinful, wrong and injurious... I'm telling you, according to the Bible, I’m not allowed to debate. I'm not going to debate.”
Kip McKean, Indianapolis message, 1994.
What Paul actually wrote to Titus was this:
"But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless." (Titus 3:9)
In this verse, Paul asks Titus to avoid “foolish” (unimportant) controversies, “genealogies” (generational lines of descent), and “quarrels about the law” (Old Testament Mosaic Law). But the main controversies about ICC doctrine fit none of these three categories. Titus 3:9 does not forbid public discussion of doctrine.
Paul never used prohibited debate, as Kip McKean claimed. In fact, the Bible says that Paul entered into “sharp dispute and debate” over circumcision controversies in Antioch along with Barnabas in Acts 15:1-2. Another New Testament hero, Apollos, “vigorously refuted the [non-believing] Jews in public debate” at Achaia, which was considered “a great help” to the believers (Acts 18:26-27).
The Bible did not prohibit debate, Kip McKean did -- even though McKean’s teachings should have been open to scrutiny just like Paul’s (Acts 17:11).
The following articles examine ICC Bible interpretations used to enforce mandatory evangelism for members.
[Note: the purpose of these articles is not to discourage people from voluntarily sharing their beliefs, but to refute those who would coerce people to evangelize/recruit, making it a legalistic obligation.]
ICC leadership’s doctrine of “fruit” has been upside down for years, despite recent adjustments. The ICC has historically taught that “bearing fruit” for Christians means converting other people to the church:
- click here to hear this quote in
“I want to ask this crowd this year, as I’ve done in the past several years, and as I will continue to do. Have you been you personally fruitful, and let me define it for you: Someone you met, someone you studied with, and someone you personally baptized. Who’s been personally fruitful since last year? Raise your hand. . . . you that don’t [have hands up], you need to be rebuked. You’re in sin. The sin of cowardice, the sin of unbelief, and the sin of laziness. And you need to talk to someone right after this message.”
Kip McKean, Preach the Word, World Missions Leadership Conference, Johannesburg, audio tape, August 9, 1995. (about audio clips)
This unsound interpretation of fruit was derived from John 15:
This is to my Father's glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples. John 15:8
McKean plainly taught that John 15 was speaking about evangelism:
“You know, I think it needs to be spelled out and I think we need to be theologically of one mind and one heart on what is the fruit that Jesus speaks of in John 15... He’s not going to be unclear about something he’s appointed for the apostles and us to do... He says, ‘Here’s the bottom line, guys. I have chosen you to go and bear fruit, fruit that will last.‘ You know, there’s one – only one other command in all of scripture that says to ‘go’ and do anything, it’s go and make disciples, amen.”
Kip McKean, Follow-Up Study 4: The Mission, DPI Archive Cassette Series, Tape # 10079, recorded circa 1989.
Although McKean tried to parallel “go and bear fruit” (John 15:16) with “go and make disciples of all nations” (from Matthew 28:19), the two verses use entirely different Greek words for “go” – hypago in John 15:16 and poreuomai in Matthew 28:19. Nothing in the context of John 15:1-17 points to evangelistic “fruit.”
Meanwhile, other New Testament passages together point to a much broader interpretation of “fruit”:
Clearly, there is more to “bearing fruit” than just converting other people to Christianity. Yet ICC leaders made “bearing fruit” the ultimate proof of members’ discipleship. Stretching this interpretation of “fruit” to the story of Jesus and the fig tree (Matthew 21:19), McKean taught that people who didn’t make converts were in grave spiritual danger:
“Every member of our [Los Angeles] church is in a Bible Talk, they are expected to bring visitors every week – everybody is expected to bring visitors every week. They don't bring a visitor we ask why. It's not pressure, I'm concerned about their soul – you're not fruitful, you’ll be sawed off the vine.”
Kip McKean, The Dream: Super Churches, Part 1, DPI Archive Cassette Series, Tape # 7762, 1992.
After having the errors of its fruit interpretation pointed out since the 1980s (4), the finally began adjusting it. In a 1997 newsletter article, Kip McKean revised his teaching on “fruitfulness,” saying that a member would no longer need to be personally involved in all stages of a conversion in order to be considered “fruitful”:
“...we have redefined personal fruitfulness as either ‘planting’ or ‘watering.’ Therefore, let me encourage each disciple to not be a dead-end disciple, but to strive to be personally fruitful in one of three ways: One, meet someone who becomes a disciple. Two, study and become best friends with someone who becomes a disciple. Or three, to baptize your child into Christ.”
Kip McKean, “A Letter to the LA Church”, LA Story, December 1997, p. 3.
Once McKean softened his stance on fruit, other leaders followed, even contradicting McKean’s earlier position that John 15 was only about evangelistic “fruit:”
“John 15 is broader than winning others to Christ, as essential as that is... In brief, fruit means productivity, leading productive lives, and the specific meaning of fruit must be determined through a careful study of the context of the passage.”
Doug Jacoby (Kingdom Teacher), ACES e-mail #178, ACES World Sector, February 9, 2000.
However, leadership still teaches that a member must be successful at evangelism in order to be considered truly “fruitful.” Jacoby goes on, remarking “this is not to say that evangelism is somehow optional...we will need to be ‘bearing fruit’ in every area specified in the Word of God.” (5)
So ICC leadership’s interpretation of John 15 has changed, yet its policy remains the same: no matter how productive ICC members are in other areas of life, leadership will still consider them “unfruitful” unless they have a hand in making converts.
The ICC interpretation of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20) includes a circularity of disciple making. This “circular” interpretation says that in order to “obey everything” that Jesus commanded the apostles, converts must make disciples of their own:
“Jesus says, ‘You teach them to obey everything I have commanded you [the apostles].’ Well, what’s the last thing he commanded them? The last thing he commanded them was to go and make disciples, so one of the things that we teach every person that we baptize is to go and make disciples. So, every single Christian, every single disciple has been given the charge by Jesus to go and make disciples, who can make disciples, who can make disciples, who can make disciples...”
Kip McKean, First Principles: Discipleship, DPI Archive Cassette Series, Tape # 10072, recorded circa 1989.
This ICC interpretation rests on the flawed assumption that all of Christ’s commands to the apostles apply to all believers:
“...the passage shows that we are to teach them (the baptized ones) to obey everything that Jesus commanded the apostles.”
Gordon Ferguson (Kingdom Teacher), Discipling: God’s Plan to Train and Transform His People, DPI, Woburn, MA, 1997, p. 53.
But all of Jesus commands to the apostles cannot apply to all believers, since the apostles had unique gifts and responsibilities (I Corinthians 12: 28-29). [Note: one of the movement's early critics called discipling "apostling" for this reason. (6)]
Commands specific to the apostles include healing the sick, raising the dead and casting out demons (Matthew 10: 8). If we can’t require the believers to obey every command given the apostles, then the interpretation of circularity is false (7) – apostleship cannot be a test for discipleship.
Many Christian churches use the phrase “share your faith” when speaking about evangelism, and the ICC uses it more than most. Whether this usage is biblically accurate is questionable.
It may surprise ICC members that there is only one obtuse reference to the phrase “share your faith” in the entire Bible, and that it might not even be about evangelism. This verse lies in Philemon, a short letter it is commonly understood that Paul wrote “to convince Philemon to forgive his runaway slave, Onesimus, and to accept him as a brother in the faith.” (8) Scholar James Burton Coffman writes in his commentary that the slave Onesiumus is crucial to understanding all of Philemon:
The name of Onesimus, not yet mentioned by Paul, is nevertheless in the background of all that Paul wrote in these verses. A part of the delicacy and charm of the epistle lie in the very hesitation on the part of Paul in bringing up what must have been considered to be a very unpleasant subject with his friend Philemon. (9)
With this context in mind, let’s look at verse 6 itself:
“I pray that you may be active in sharing your faith, so that you will have a full understanding of every good thing we have in Christ.” (Philemon 6)
This verse's true meaning is more elusive, and as Coffman notes, “somewhat difficult to understand.” (10) If Philemon freed his slave as Paul requested (Philemon 8-16), this could be considered a way of “sharing his faith” by freeing his brother in Christ. There’s nothing in context that points to evangelism, making it likely that Philemon 6 was not written at all with evangelism in mind.
But terminology is only one issue with ICC “faith-sharing.” Another is organizationally focused evangelism: many members have been taught that inviting people to ICC services is synonymous with “sharing their faith:”
Kip McKean in a 1994 sermon addressed this idea – in the process betraying a disturbing emphasis of his own:
“I need to say something right here – what does it really mean to share our faith? Is inviting someone to church sharing our faith? Well it is to a degree. But I think too many of us stop right there and that’s why we don’t get a lot of our friends there, is because we don’t start saying, ‘Hey, you’ve got to come to this church, it changed my life, the way they preach the Bible, the way they live their lives. It’s not hypocritical, they’re really trying -- they’re not perfect, but they’re really trying. This is a group of people that have a dream. They want to change LA, they want to change the world, they want to make a difference with their life. Your life can be changed.’ You know, I think that’s why a lot of us don’t get people to church... See all we’re doing is inviting people to church, we’re not sharing our faith, sharing our lives.”
Kip McKean, Evangelization Proclamation, DPI Archive Cassette Series, Tape #8275, 1994.
In this instruction about “faith sharing,” there was not a single mention of God, but there are over a dozen mentions of the church and its people. If telling people about the church is considered “sharing one’s faith,” then we should ask: is this really sharing faith in God, or faith in the church? Getting new members into the church is the ICC’s ultimate measure of faith sharing.
The ICC makes evangelism compulsory for members:
“Evangelism is nothing to be ashamed of, it’s not religious, and no, it’s not optional.”
Frank & Erica Kim (World Sector Leaders), How to Share Your Faith, DPI, Woburn, MA, 1998, p. 11
However, many or all of the Bible passages cited by ICC leadership to make evangelism mandatory have been taken out of context (we have already seen three such passages in John 15:8, Matthew 28:18-20 and Philemon 6).
Additional passages used by leaders for the same purpose include these:
These directives were actually given to specific New Testament church leaders.
Switch to the ICC. Members are continually pressured to evangelize on campuses, at work, in public places, etc. and to report the results of their efforts to disciplers and leaders (note: leaders also evangelize). Members unsuccessful at making converts are often subjected to pressure, scorn and rebuke – or are even told that they will go to hell.
The entire ICC system of evangelism by compulsion contrasts sharply with the New Testament. What the Bible doesn’t say is revealing: there are simply no rebukes, exhortations, quotas, etc. concerning evangelism in the New Testament.
The ICC has further interpreted the Great Commission to say that the Christian church is commanded to evangelize the world in one generation:
“We affirm and assert that Jesus' last command to the eleven faithful disciples was to evangelize the world in their generation. Obeyed by the apostles, this guiding command extends to each succeeding generation, yet has not been accomplished again for almost two millennia.”
Kip McKean & World Sector Leaders, “The Evangelization Proclamation,” Upside Down, August, 1994, centerfold.
ICC leaders have declared that this one-generation goal comes from God, and even “marks us as God’s true and only modern-day movement...” (11)
Actually, the Bible does not command one-generation evangelism: it is a man-made goal, not a biblical one. If we look at Matthew 28:18-20 – or its parallel account in Mark 16:15-20 – we so no deadline attached to the completion of Jesus’ Great Commission. (12) We also see no quota that every political nation be systematically reached to fulfill the commission.
The Greek indicates that the command was:
disciple/teach (verb: matheteuo) the peoples of the world (noun: ethnos)
The ICC seems to interpret the verse to mean:
make (create) disciples (members) in every nation (country).
The difference is striking: the first reads like a Great Commission, the latter like a Great Quota: the ICC has pursued a self-imposed quota of establishing a church in every nation.
Where, then, did McKean and the ICC get the idea that one generation evangelism is a command of God? Quite possibly, it arose from the Discipleship Study. This ICC study mathematically projects the growth potential of a discipling ministry in which each member converts one other person a year, vs. a preacher-oriented ministry that converts one person per day:
"Year Preacher Discipler 1 365 2 3 1095 8 13 4745 8192 32 11680 the world, 5 billion plus"
Kip McKean, “Discipleship”, First Principles, DPI, Woburn, MA, 1993, p. 7.
It seems McKean and the ICC decided that because it could be done, it must be done (13) – and that it must be a command of God to do it in a single generation.
But one issue remains: how to define a generation (note: Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Watchtower Society has been defining and redefining a “generation” for years). As the ICC neared completion of its “Evangelization Proclamation” to plant a church in every nation, Kip McKean defined a “generation” as being 30 years in length:
“Here we are, 20 years in the movement, we’re two-thirds of the way through a generation... No, we can’t say the Gospel’s been preached to every nation. But we’re in 153 nations, that’s awesome... let me tell you something. I believe that as disciples, if we have the faith, if we have the diligence, if we have the perseverance, if we have the commitment, we’re going to be able to say on the 30th anniversary of God’s modern-day movement, just like Paul: This is the Gospel you heard, in Singapore, in Mexico City, in Moscow, in LA, that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven. Does that fire you on up, or not?”
Kip McKean, Singapore sermon, RealMedia file, February 24, 1999.
The 30th anniversary of the ICC/Boston Movement will be on June 1, 2009. By the end of the first decade of the new millennium, the ICC arbitrarily plans to complete the evangelization of the world.
Recently an ICC "Kingdom Teacher" corrected one of the ICC's long-standing Bible misinterpretations -- that the Bible encourages Christians and especially leaders to be "forceful" people.
This wrong interpretation was gleaned from Matthew 11: 12 of the New International Version of the Bible, which says, "From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it.' " (emphasis added) Before we look at this verse in context, let's review how ICC leadership has misused it.
Pedro Garcia-Bengochea, who more recently became Co-Lead Evangelist of the Los Angeles International Church of Christ, concluded in one year-2000 article that this scripture indicates John the Baptist was a "forceful man" and that ICC members needed to be the same:
"What kind of men and women do we need to be? Verse 12 calls us to be forceful men and women... John was a forceful man!"
"...What kind of man or woman are you? Are you a forceful individual?"
Pedro Garcia-Bengochea, Forceful Men and Women, CSA Website, August 2000.
Like many misinterpretations, this one came many years earlier from Kip McKean, the ICC's founder. McKean not only misunderstood Jesus' words in Matthew 11 by calling members to be "forceful"; he also concluded that Jesus himself was "forceful" and even "ruthless":
"...If indeed the words of Jesus [in Matthew 11:12] was that the movement continued to be forcefully advancing after that moment, how was it forcefully advancing? Because of Jesus. He was forcefully advancing the kingdom. He was the most forceful man that ever lived. "
"....Not only was Jesus a revolutionary, not only was Jesus radical, Jesus was ruthless. Matthew 21. He had to be. He wanted to forcefully advance the kingdom. "
"....Let's get this congregation ready to forcefully advance the kingdom of God like it's never been forcefully advanced before. "
Kip McKean, Forcefully Advancing the Kingdom, DPI Archive Cassette Series, Tape #4013, 1987.
So what's wrong with this interpretation about forceful men and women? It makes the mistake of reading something into the Bible that is not there (eisegesis), rather than using context and all other considerations to determine what Matthew 11:12 really means (exegesis).
Now let's look at this verse in context:
7 "As John's disciples were leaving, Jesus began to speak to the crowd about John [the Baptist]: 'What did you go out into the desert to see? A reed swayed by the wind?
8 If not, what did you go out to see? A man dressed in fine clothes? No, those who wear fine clothes are in kings' palaces.
9 Then what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet.
10 This is the one about whom it is written: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you."
11 I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it.' " (Matthew 11:7-12 - New International Version)
But notice how another Bible translation more accurately renders the last verse:
12 "And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force.' " (Matthew 11:12 - New American Standard Bible)
As Doug Jacoby pointed out in a recent ICC article, any amount of scholarly investigation shows that "force" in Matthew 11 was being used against God's kingdom, and was spoken of negatively by Jesus (to see Jacoby's full article, click here). It was therefore wrong and reckless to use this passage to encourage forcefulness in ICC leaders and members, as if it were supported by the Bible.
Wrote Jacoby about Matthew 11:12:
"I believe the NIV mistranslation has unfortunately led to wrong theology. People have been hurt because of the wrong use of this Matthew 11:12.
"Many brothers and sisters through the years have asked me about Matthew 11:12, through e-mails and in person, and I would now like to respond....
"Nowhere in scripture are men commended for being forceful. This is not to deny that leaders should be dynamic and determined. But Matthew 11:12 really has nothing to do with leadership at all! In our desperate search for verses to back up our theology, have we not plucked a passage (and a mistranslated one, at that), out of its context and forced it to say something it never meant in the first place? We have overlooked spirituality in favor of personality."
Doug Jacoby (Kingdom Teacher), ACES e-mail #638, ACES World Sector, January 20, 2003.
While it's encouraging that the ICC has cleared up this misinterpretation -- one that has been used to support an overly forceful (and abusive) ICC leadership style -- it is hoped that leadership will go much further and and throw out the many other misinterpretations it has used to control and manipulate people.
In a damning open letter, respected ICC author and evangelist Henry Kriete mentioned that many of the ICC's official teachers (of which Jacoby is one) have been discredited in today's movement -- either by their inability to persuade top leaders to reform, or by their avoidance (past and present) of the ICC's real issues:
"I say this with a sad heart, but the reputation of several of our teachers has also been discredited to some extent. For two simple reasons: [One:] They have spoken Biblically about our abuses and systemic evils and theological issues but have not been heeded. In that case, all of my arguments for the preservation of 'our system' by unscrupulous men have been validated. Or two: They have chosen not to speak prophetically against heresy, systemic evils or leadership abuses, but have rather concerned themselves with less urgent academic issues. In that case they have been cowards."
Honest to God: Revolution through repentance and freedom in Christ, open letter from Henry Kriete, London, February 2, 2003.
(1) Kip McKean (ICC founder), “The Word of God”, First Principles, DPI, Woburn, 1993, p. 8.
(2) Greater Philadelphia Church of Christ, “The Kingdom of God,” Equipping Class for Young Disciples, Fall 1991.
(3) Thomas Jones (Senior Editor), Letters to New Disciples, DPI, Woburn, MA 1997, p. 99.
(4) Maruice Barnett, The Discipling Movement, self-published, Phoenix, 1989 (2nd Ed.), pp. 42-48.
(5) Doug Jacoby (Kingdom Teacher), ACES e-mail #178, ACES World Sector, February 9, 2000.
(6) Maruice Barnett, The Discipling Movement, 1989 (2nd Ed.).
(7) Consider this example from John 13: "Now that I your Lord and teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you." (John 13: 14-15) Using a “circular” interpretation of the Great Commission, a religious group could actually conclude that they are the only true believers – if they made a practice of washing feet as Jesus instructed the apostles, and other groups did not. Of course, no reasonable Bible interpretation will require believers to wash others’ feet to prove they are genuine Christians.
(8) Life Application Bible, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, IL and Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI, p. 2213.
(9) James Burton Coffman, Commentary on 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus & Philemon, Firm Foundation Publishing House, Austin, TX, 1978, p. 369.
(10) Ibid.
(11) Kip McKean, "The Evidence of Grace: Growth," Revolution Through Restoration, Part II, The Twentieth Century Church, icoc.org, 1994.
(12) One weak argument for the “Great Quota” would be that Jesus said in Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30 and Luke 21:32 that "this generation" would not pass away until all his prophecies had been fulfilled, therefore the whole world must hear the Gospel in a single generation. However, common interpretation has it that Jesus was referring to the time when the signs were would be fulfilled, and not necessarily his immediate generation. (Furthermore, Jesus said in Matthew 24:36 that he did not know the timing of his return.) A second argument might rest on Paul’s words in Colossians 1:23 that the Gospel had been proclaimed to "every creature under heaven.” However, Paul’s words were not phrased as a command, and should be taken somewhat figuratively, considering the limitations of First Century transportation for reaching distant continents.
(13) Anonymous, “’In One Generation’? Where does this come from?”, alt.religion.christian.boston-church, February 15, 2000.
Copyright © 2001, 2003 Dave Anderson. All rights reserved.
