Category Articles

The ICC and ICOC – An In Depth Distinction

This paper reviews five philosophical differences between the International Christian Churches (ICC) and the International Churches of Christ (ICOC). It utilizes a combination of Scripture, history, personal experiences, and lessons learned. Who is my audience? Anyone inside the ICOC, the ICC, or with any connection to our past who is curious as to where the two movements differ. The paper is also written as an informational bridge aiding those in the ICC considering a transition to the ICOC.

A mistake is made in comparing most movements. One is not necessarily this and the other that. The ICC is broadly uniform because the culture, methods and styles are determined by one man. Even the websites largely use all the same articles. The ICOC is consistent on core doctrine but varied on cultures, styles, and methodologies. And the vast majority of our churches cooperate and our leaders are increasingly collaborating within their flocks. In this way the ICOC possesses an uncontrived unity along with sometimes messy diversity, similar to what can be observed in the New Testament churches. Fortunately, it appears that both the ICC and the ICOC share the same core doctrines based on Matthew 28:18-20, Acts 2:36- 41, Ephesians 4:3-6 and other substantive doctrinal passages.

I am increasingly convinced that it is easy to lose touch with the state of a flock or movement until something comes along and gets its attention. Usually it is membership losses, crisis, conflict, widespread immaturity, low morale and tapered growth. The ancient Corinthian congregation had some of those things, prompting the apostle Paul to deliver assessments, directions and follow up.

Paul called upon members in Corinth to do three smart things: examine themselves to see if they were “in the faith” (2 Corinthians 13:5), ensure that they are learning from the past troubles that served “as warnings” (1 Corinthians 10:1-11), and confirm that “each one should build with care” (1 Corinthians 3:10-15). In other words, Christians should be really in, always learning, and mindful of their steps.

In the spirit of seeking sincere faith, learning and self-reflection, I’ve provided a historical backdrop that preceded the two movements and a breakdown of five philosophies of the ICC, contrasting them from the Bible and the ICOC.

The ICC and ICOC – A Concise Distinction

I was recently asked by two non-US evangelists in the International Churches of Christ about my answer to the question: “What are the main differences between the ICC and the ICOC?” No two people would answer this question the exact same way because we each have personal experiences. This paper was shaped by my: 1) 35 years as a Christian, 26 years of fulltime ministry, which includes the roles of elder, evangelists and teacher, 2) graduate education in New Testament, and in conflict management, and 3) my vocation as an organizational health and risk management consultant.

The ICOC has not published new positions concerning Kip McKean and his breakoff that led to the ICC since late 2005, when about eighty ministers affirmed a disciplinary position against Kip. Since that time the leading indicators of where the ICOC stands with the ICC has come from the writings of respected individuals such as Mike Taliaferro and Justin Renton. Like those papers, I am not inclined to write a paper that is merely us-versus-them, but to provide clarification.

One of the main ICC evangelists, Luis J. Martinez, aka “LuJack” posted the areas “the ICOC and the ICC agree on”:

1) that Jesus Christ is the Son of God; 2) that Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the third day; 3) that Jesus Christ called us to be his disciples; 4) that Jesus Christ called us to be born again, born of water and the Spirit;
5) that Jesus Christ called us to "go and make disciples of ALL nations, baptizing them--for the forgiveness of sins and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit--in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit";
6) that we must teach ALL disciples to OBEY EVERYTHING Jesus commanded us;
7) that the Bible contains the very Words of God;
8) that the church is the body of Christ and the kingdom of God;
9) that the acts of the sinful nature are obvious;
10) that we must confess our sins to each other and pray for each so that we may be healed;
11) that we must seek FIRST God's kingdom and his righteousness, and he will provide us everything we need for life and godliness;
12) that we must strive to evangelize the whole wide world while God gives us life to do so;

LuJack’s list of agreements are much appreciated. As readers will probably concur, the distinctions are not about core orthodox theology at the time of conversion to Christ, they fall under the category of philosophy and paradigms. These differences have a significant influence on the health of an individual and congregation, even after a short time.

I considered Kip McKean’s paper on the five differences between the ICC and the ICOC. I don’t think his explanations with the distinctions will satisfy a informed member of the ICOC. The following five statements more accurately contrast the two movements, in my mind, but not necessarily in any particular order.

From Survival To Revival

ABSTRACT: A brief history of a restoration movement’s evolution.
It was a watershed moment in the history of the International Churches of Christ. The conference meetings were long, and filled with tears. Church leaders were venting their years of pent-up frustration with each other. The conference began with the movement’s leader resigning, and by the end, everyone was uncertain about his or her own future. Two of the top leaders in the movement walked out together at the end of the last meeting, exhausted and emotionally spent. One ominously said to the other, “It’s over, we are done!” It was 2002, and many were predicting the end of the International Churches of Christ (the “ICOC”) 1 . The firestorm that started at a leadership conference in Long Beach spread rapidly through the ICOC fellowship. Everyone in the ICOC was about to experience God’s refining hand. Many predicted the end of the ICOC.

Fast-forward ten years and not only did the ICOC churches not disappear, but they are better situated to face the future than ever before. The International Churches of Christ have successfully reorganized and redefined themselves, beginning a whole new chapter in their history. Against all odds they have survived the firestorm and moved from survival to revival.

The history of the ICOC is a remarkable story. In one generation, hundreds of churches were planted around the world and tens of thousands were baptized into Jesus. With the rapid growth came tremendous spiritual and organizational challenges. The movement wrestled to meet the demands of a fast-growing body of young converts. These challenges were faced in countries and cultures all around the world as a system of leadership and organization developed over the years that initially produced highly effective results. Later, it became burdensome and overbearing. The ministry methods drew critics who attacked this movement from its earliest stages. As time went on, the movement became increasingly controversial and critics rose from within. In 2003 a firestorm of criticism from within burst across the fellowship that made it appear the movement had run its course and was finished. The firestorm exposed weaknesses in structure, methodology and leadership mistakes. From 2003 through 2004 most of the evangelists and elders of the ICOC made public apologies to their congregations and Interview Roger Lamb, March 30th, 2013acknowledged that God’s disciplining hand was upon them. Over the next four years the ICOC scrutinized and questioned itself in everything from doctrine to methodology. This led to a an amazing turnaround.

The following history is only a brief summary. As with any historical account, it is the responsibility of the writer to present what seem to be the most significant details for an accurate understanding of what transpired. This account is the result of numerous interviews of participants and eyewitnesses. Of course, it also reflects my own perspective as a participant for the last 30 years.

The International Churches of Christ Statement of Shared Beliefs

"May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me." John 17.23 NIV

The following longstanding biblical doctrines and cooperative ideals have already guided us well on our journey thus far. These statements begin with the highest historical Christian essentials and move toward our common aspirations to be well-connected in Christ.

The International Churches of Christ: A Historical Overview

1960-1968
Though "Chairs of Bible" were established by Restoration Movement churches at state universities as early as the nineteenth century, Churches of Christ became particularly active in sponsoring these arrangements between 1960 and 1968. These "chairs," as the name implies, were primarily academic in nature. They were designed to provide students at state schools with university level courses similar to those being offered at the time in church-related colleges. The directors of these chairs had graduate training in Bible and religious studies and were considered (and considered themselves) to be academics. Nevertheless, many of these ministries were eventually expanded to include worship services for students, opportunities for Christian interaction and community, and programs of evangelistic and benevolent outreach.

In the mid-sixties some staff members at the Broadway Church of Christ in Lubbock, Texas, not previously involved in state campus ministries but strongly influenced by the work of the evangelical organization Campus Crusade for Christ, conceived of a different model of campus ministry-one that would be almost entirely centered on evangelism. Calling themselves "Campus Evangelism" (CE), they sponsored a series of well financed and skillfully produced "seminars" designed to introduce this new model to those already involved in the Bible Chair movement and to encourage the initiation of new campus ministries based on a more evangelistic model. Bill Bright, president of Campus Crusade, was invited to speak at the first of these seminars (1966).

A second seminar was held in 1968 in Dallas, ambitiously called "The International Campus Evangelism Seminar." Over 1,000 people attended, the majority from congregations already supporting Bible Chairs. At this event CE announced it would sponsor a pilot project at the University of Florida in Gainesville, led by Chuck Lucas. Lucas had no prior connections with the Bible Chair movement.

The Greatest Commandment and the Great Commission

Something in the human DNA drives us to admire greatness. It is no wonder when we realize the greatness of the Creator. God has blessed humans with the desire to change the world around us and the ability to discern the priorities needed to take on that noble task. Of course, being humans of free will, we have alternately honored God with those gifts and distorted them to our shame. We strive for the greatness of curing cancer as we scurry about worshipping celebrity idols and performing unfathomable acts of corporate and personal violence. Our relationship with our Creator is the great drama of this world.

In writing the scripts of our lives, we have long sought the core of the eternal plot. What is most important? What is the greatest? God doesn't leave us hanging waiting for a panel of judges, call-in vote or even Oprah.

Jesus: Christ and Lord

Christian theology is fundamentally concerned with the issue of God and history and more specifically is rooted in Christo logy and the revelation of God in the person and the work of Jesus Christ. Christian theology is not a philosophy like Buddhism, though it addresses philosophical issues. It is not primarily about laws and morals like Islam, though it addresses standards and morality. It is not just about keeping a covenant relationship with God as in Judaism, though it takes that important theme to a higher level. Christian theology is all about the intersection of the present age with the age to come, the intersection of that which is of earth with that which is of heaven, the intersection of that which is temporal with that which is eternal, all in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.

Astonishingly, Christian theology, which is the foundation of the religion with the most adherents on the planet, is primarily about one person. More than that, it is about one person who lived a short life even by the standards of his day and had a public ministry that lasted three years or less. Thus every Christian group is concerned with Jesus to one degree or another, and each group is powerfully shaped by its view of Jesus and the elements in his lite, character and message that they choose to emphasize or ignore.

In this article, after an overview of Jesus, particularly as found in the Gospels, I will share my perspective on the view of Jesus found in the International Churches of Christ (ICOC) going back to its formative years, and how that view has affected this movement.

KINGDOM INAUGURATOR
"The time has come," [Jesus] said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!" (Mark 1.15 NASB). Given that his earliest statements, like this one, indicated he was bringing in the long-awaited kingdom of God, it seems fair to say that the Gospel writers see Jesus as the kingdom inaugurator.  In this role, Jesus does not satisfy popular and nationalistic expectations found among the Jews, but he does something more important: he fulfills the law and the prophets (Matt 5.17). He does not come, as most Jews expected, as a man of force to expel or destroy the Gentiles, but rather as a suffering servant seeking to include in the kingdom both Jews and Gentiles (Luke 24.47).

In another surprise, he does not come to bring history to an end, judge the unrighteous and replace the present age with the age to come. He comes bringing the age to come into the present age as we see in Matthew 12.28: "But when I force out demons by the power of God's Spirit, it proves that God's kingdom has already come to you" (CEV).

The same message is seen in Luke 17.20-21. The Pharisees asked Jesus when the kingdom of God would come, to which he answered, "The kingdom of God is not coming with something observable; no one will say, 'Look here!' or ' There!' For you see, the kingdom of God is among you" (HCSB).

While Jesus would eventually speak of another and future coming when the kingdom would be brought to complete fulfillment, his primary focus was on living a "kingdom life" in the present age and calling his disciples to do the same (Matt. 6.10). He promised that when his followers lived this countercultural life, more or less as aliens from the future, they would often receive the same response that Jesus received. This meant those that accepted the summons of the kingdom must expect to be persecuted in this world (Matt 5.10-12). This fact was given a surprising amount of emphasis in Jesus' teaching, but is really not so surprising, when we consider that the kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world are so diametrically opposed (John 18.36)-a truth increasingly ignored in post-Constantine Christendom.

In the minds of some thinkers, Jesus has been seen as primarily a great ethical teacher, but they often miss the fact that his moral principles all are rooted in his understanding of the kingdom and the concept of doing God's will on earth as it is in heaven (Matt 6.10). Without an understanding and acceptance of his eschatology, so much that he says seems foolish and defies what we call common sense.

Maybe the best summary of Jesus' message is found in Matthew 4.23 where we are told he "went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people."

Revolution Through Restoration III: From Babylon to Zion

To my brothers and sisters in all the congregations of the International Churches of Christ:

PART I: BABYLON

By the Rivers of Babylon We Wept

By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept when we remembered Zion. There on the poplars we hung our harps, for there our captors asked us for songs, our tormentors demanded songs of joy; they said, "Sing us one of the songs of Zion!" How can we sing the songs of the LORD while in a foreign land? If I forget you, O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you, if I do not consider Jerusalem my highest joy. Remember, O LORD, what the Edomites did on the day Jerusalem fell. "Tear it down," they cried, "tear it down to its foundations!" Psalm 137:1-7

Tears flow as my heart is crushed with pain and anguish at the condition of most of our churches around the world. We are fragmenting as a fellowship. Many disciples are in agony, caused by years of feeling unable to measure up to the "law" and judged as not "doing well spiritually." They have been weakened by spiritual malnourishment, fulfilling Paul's words, "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." Surely the hand of God is against us for not taking care of the weak. Many of God's evangelists have grown weary and are losing heart because of criticism from those they have loved, served and baptized. In most of our larger congregations in the United States, over half of the full-time ministry and administrative staff have left the ministry in the past year and a half.

God has also allowed churches in other countries to be "torn down to their foundations." For example, 90% of the full-time ministry staff of nearly 100 people in the British Isles' churches either resigned or have been asked to step down. The former 2,000 member flock in London is deeply divided, spiritually damaged and many of the members have been scattered. Like the walls of Jerusalem, the walls of the world sectors are burned and crumbled because of unrighteousness. There has been a reactionary dismantling of the leadership structure of our brotherhood that once joyfully cooperated to finance the evangelization of every part of the world. Congregations, which at one time annually baptized hundreds, are now experiencing very few baptisms. Persecution, Satan's attack from the outside, has rarely caused our churches long-term damage. However, grumbling and bitterness by both leaders and members have allowed the Devil to enter our sacred fellowship and begin to destroy it from within.

Though the issue of church "autonomy" obviously needs much discussion, study, and prayer, the decision at the November 2002 Unity Meeting in Los Angeles for the world sectors to operate individually has resulted in the dismantling of a central leadership. In the ensuing months, many of our individual congregations have likewise declared their own autonomy. The implementation of these decisions has already reaped disastrous results on the mission field. Funding for third world churches in many places has sharply decreased or is no longer available.