An email comprised by the evangelists of Southern Africa is currently circulating regarding the tragic death of Rod. icoccommentary obtained permission to publish it in its full entity.
Start
2CO 1:3-5 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves have received from God. For just as the sufferings of Christ flow over into our lives, so also through Christ our comfort overflows.
It is with great sadness of heart that on Monday the 19th of November our brother and dear friend Rod Fick, took his own life.
Rod has served as the evangelist of the Port Elizabeth Church for the last 7 years and was known and loved by many disciples throughout Africa & the United States. He will always be remembered as an exceptional and faithful servant to God and his people.
His life was filled with adventure, from his days as a Peace Corp volunteer in the Central African Republic, to his time as a professional tri-athlete and ultra-marathon runner, and the years that he has served in the ministry in PE, Cape Town and Gauteng.
During this year Rod experienced a great amount personal and leadership pressure. To lighten his load and help him recover the PE leadership team offered him a 3 months sabbatical.
Shortly after taking the sabbatical Rod’s condition rapidly deteriorated and he admitted himself to hospital where he was diagnosed with a major depressive disorder. After being in hospital for 2 weeks he got a weekend pass to attend a family function in Pretoria.
Tragically on Monday morning, before returning to PE, Rod took a gun from a relative’s safe, and in this altered state of mind took his own life.
Many people from around the world knew and loved him deeply. He will be very sorely missed. Our prayers and deepest condolences go out to Linda, Mika, Jordan, their families and the PE church.
Please keep them in your prayers during this time of grief.
If you would like to write a note of encouragement to Linda and the family please hand it to your church leader tonight or on Sunday. You may also donate towards the outstanding medical bills this coming Sunday.
A private cremation will be held during the week. A time to fellowship to encourage the family will be held on Thursday from 7-8pm in the gardens of the Bird and Animal hospital at 494 Atterbury Rd, In Pretoria East. Please bring a candle and flower and a chair to sit on.
Two memorial services will be held. One in Johannesburg on Sunday 25th of November at 2pm at the Johannesburg Church building as well as in PE on Wednesday the 28th of November.
Much love
The evangelists of Southern Africa.
Stop
Commentary by Sarel de Wet—©2006. A former member (1990-2000) of the International Churches of Christ (ICOC) in South Africa. Commentary concerns McKeanism discipleship of the pro-McKean faction, officially known as the International Christian Churches (ICC) and anti-McKean faction, officially known as the ICOC Co-Operation Churches a.k.a. International Churches of Christ (ICOC).
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
The Herald Newspaper, Wednesday November 21, 2007
Herewith a report, entitled "Port Elizabeth's 'Ironman pastor' Rod Fick falls ill, commits suicide" published in The Herald newspaper on Wednesday, November 21, 2007 on page 4.
Herewith the link related to The Herald's coverage on Rod's death.
First and Foremost, Sarel de Wet is not responsible for being the source to The Herald. The news story in The Herald is copied from icoccommentary. How I don't know. A shoddy job. Cheap. And without professionalism. This matter I will take up with this paper's editor of news. The purpose for posting this newsclip is to provide clarity on the matter. Some "information" concerning Rod's death published in The Herald newspaper this morning need to be clarrified.
Firstly, the "information" published in The Herald's article is base on the "facts" derived from icoccommentary's article.
Secondly, in order to avoid any form of confusion. Rod Fick acted as an evangelist for the Port Elizabeth Church of Christ (ICOC South Africa) not to be confused with the mainstream church of Christ' branch also named Port Elizabeth (North) church of Christ.
Thirdly, the Herald Reporter's information regarding the "leaders of the PE Church of Christ" in paragraph 5 need to be corrected. The blog icoccommentary made a comment in paragraph 3 stating: "In the last year..." referring to the year 2007 and not 2006 as reported in The Herald's relevant story: "Last year...".
Finally, the controversial issue and fact concerning "different views on how the church should move forward" is inside news obtained from members of the P.E. congregation by icoccommentary. The Herald Reporter did not consult any one regarding this matter.
Background information and adjustments concerning the P.E. Church
The International Churches of Christ (ICOC) has broken up or decentralised since December 2002. What remain of the ICOC is two main groups namely the Portland 'discipling' Movement associated with the ICOC founder Kip McKean and a unity of 70% of ICOC congregations known as ICOC Co-opperation Churches.
It was earlier reported by icoccommentary" It is not certain if the Port Elizabeth Church of Christ (ICOC South Africa) have signed up to the Unity Proposal of the ICOC Co-operation Churches." They have not signed up. Also, it was earlier reported by icoccommentary" However, the P.E. church are part of the "ICOC churches" in South Africa." The P.E. Church is a church in transit. The Cape Town Church of Christ (ICOC South Africa) and Johannesburg (Joburg) Church of Christ (ICOC South Africa) have officially signed up with the Unity Proposal group, better known as the ICOC Co-operation Churches.
Mike Taliaferro have submitted on Monday, 19th November 2007 an article, entitled, "In Memory of Rod Fick" on the Cape Town Church of Christ webpage. It has been replaced with a new article, only submitted by Justin Renton (not the author), entitled, "In memory of Rod Fick...funeral arrangements...donations to the family" on Thursday 22nd November 2007.
The P.E. Church have released this statement submitted by Renton. Before that, the P.E. Church held a meeting on Monday evening, November 19, 2007, which was attended by icoccommentary. The P.E. Church does not have a website.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Monday, November 19, 2007
ICOC evangelist dies tragically
Rod Fick, lead evangelist of the Port Elizabeth Church of Christ (ICOC South Africa) died tragically this morning, Monday, 19th November 2007. He had been suffering from severe depression and had been undergoing treatment for this condition. His doctors were satisfied with his progress and he was released from hospital last Thursday. He accompanied his wife and children to a family function in Johannesburg, which was held over the weekend. Unfortunately while he was there, he had a relapse and committed suicide early this morning by shooting himself.
The Port Elizabeth Church of Christ congregation is devastated by his tragic death. Members of the congregation gathered together this Monday evening, where they were officially informed of the details of Rod's death as well as the funeral arrangements. It will be held in Johannesburg this weekend. A second service will be held in Port Elizabeth in two week's time. A Christian psycologist was present at the meeting and he encouraged members to express their feelings. Several members shared their feelings of guilt, sadness, anger and shock while others shared their gratitude and love for him.
In the last year the leaders of the Port Elizabeth Church of Christ have had different views on how the church should move forward. Rod was asked to go on a sabbatical. The resulting conflict no doubt added pressure.
Rod is survived by his wife and two children.
The Port Elizabeth Church of Christ congregation is devastated by his tragic death. Members of the congregation gathered together this Monday evening, where they were officially informed of the details of Rod's death as well as the funeral arrangements. It will be held in Johannesburg this weekend. A second service will be held in Port Elizabeth in two week's time. A Christian psycologist was present at the meeting and he encouraged members to express their feelings. Several members shared their feelings of guilt, sadness, anger and shock while others shared their gratitude and love for him.
In the last year the leaders of the Port Elizabeth Church of Christ have had different views on how the church should move forward. Rod was asked to go on a sabbatical. The resulting conflict no doubt added pressure.
Rod is survived by his wife and two children.
BREAKING NEWS
One of the prolific leaders in the Port Elizabeth Church of Christ has committed suicide. Details sketchy. Will post update as soon as possible.
Sunday, June 03, 2007
The James Lloyd Story: PART2a: An innate doctrinal difference cover-up on ICOC baptism practice flourishes
An introduction
Churches affiliated with the Portland “discipling” Movement led by World Missions Evangelist, Kip McKean and former International Churches of Christ (ICOC) congregations under the umbrella of the Unity Proposal Group still expect prospective members on either side to become a disciple first before receiving baptism.
This means the prerequisite for membership in either group in order to become “saved” is to become “a disciple first” with baptism to follow. The Boston Church of Christ, which under scribe to the Unity Proposal Group teaches this important step: And one must be committed to being a disciple prior to being baptized. However, Kip McKean’s fellowship accentuates the importance to become a sold-out baptized disciple.
Many ICOC’ers view their baptism policies as standard biblical doctrine as taught proper since the inception of the Boston movement days of 1979, but they are unaware of its deceptive origins and heresy.
The mere fact that the former ICOC were based on man-imposed doctrine cannot be stressed enough. Henry Kriete’s plea for reform within the ICOC has fallen on deaf ears: Movement wide, we have no choice but to admit and apologize, expose and expunge, denounce and dismantle.
In reality, the baptismal doctrinal outlook of the ICOC has not changed radically since the Kriete 2003 letter. Perhaps, the upheaval that occurred in the fellowship of the ICOC as events played out in the new millennium has blinded many church members from seeking truthful solutions concerning ICOC doctrine. Former members like myself were horrified to find ICOC members were totally apathetic in getting outside help for the ICOC dilemma. Even so, the 2004 Faithful Conversations with the Church of Christ have not promoted any workable solutions for the doctrinal heresies of the former ICOC. Amazingly, the former ICOC moved a little closer to the Church of Christ when one-on-one discipleship practices were temporarily abandoned in some congregations. The McKean’s were aghast.
However, in 2005 more and more neutral ICOC churches shifted towards discipleship relationships, which are now part and parcel of the standard practice of the United Co-operation Group. The reason is currently explained in the Boston Church of Christ Repentance and Discipleship study series: (http://www.bostoncoc.org/home/studyseries/index.htm/)
SEE NEW LINK:
Churches affiliated with the Portland “discipling” Movement led by World Missions Evangelist, Kip McKean and former International Churches of Christ (ICOC) congregations under the umbrella of the Unity Proposal Group still expect prospective members on either side to become a disciple first before receiving baptism.
This means the prerequisite for membership in either group in order to become “saved” is to become “a disciple first” with baptism to follow. The Boston Church of Christ, which under scribe to the Unity Proposal Group teaches this important step: And one must be committed to being a disciple prior to being baptized. However, Kip McKean’s fellowship accentuates the importance to become a sold-out baptized disciple.
Many ICOC’ers view their baptism policies as standard biblical doctrine as taught proper since the inception of the Boston movement days of 1979, but they are unaware of its deceptive origins and heresy.
The mere fact that the former ICOC were based on man-imposed doctrine cannot be stressed enough. Henry Kriete’s plea for reform within the ICOC has fallen on deaf ears: Movement wide, we have no choice but to admit and apologize, expose and expunge, denounce and dismantle.
In reality, the baptismal doctrinal outlook of the ICOC has not changed radically since the Kriete 2003 letter. Perhaps, the upheaval that occurred in the fellowship of the ICOC as events played out in the new millennium has blinded many church members from seeking truthful solutions concerning ICOC doctrine. Former members like myself were horrified to find ICOC members were totally apathetic in getting outside help for the ICOC dilemma. Even so, the 2004 Faithful Conversations with the Church of Christ have not promoted any workable solutions for the doctrinal heresies of the former ICOC. Amazingly, the former ICOC moved a little closer to the Church of Christ when one-on-one discipleship practices were temporarily abandoned in some congregations. The McKean’s were aghast.
However, in 2005 more and more neutral ICOC churches shifted towards discipleship relationships, which are now part and parcel of the standard practice of the United Co-operation Group. The reason is currently explained in the Boston Church of Christ Repentance and Discipleship study series: (http://www.bostoncoc.org/home/studyseries/index.htm/)
SEE NEW LINK:
Repentance and discipleship are the same thing. Discipleship is being committed to following Jesus in all areas of your life, and fishing for men. And one must be committed to being a disciple prior to being baptized."Repentance and Discipleship Study"
Friday, May 18, 2007
The James Lloyd Story: An Introspective - Part 1
One week after James Lloyd’s 'true baptism' (October 8, 1978), Douglas Arthur approached the minister's son and persuaded him to become a minister. Four years later, the Boston movement leadership commissioned them to start the first church planting outside the borders of the United States. They were responsible for the planting of the South London Church of Christ.
James' father had been a Baptist preacher for 25 years. Reading the 1990's multi-authored edition of "Shining Like Stars", he states: Mom was one of the most Christlike women I'd ever known. When James was only eleven years old his father baptised him the first time infront of his congregation. James grew up a Southern Baptist. As a minister's son he had been forced to attend every service in his father's church. Yet I knew hardly anything about the Bible. He knew that the church of his father would not be his own. It was not my spiritual home. However, not content with the church of my father - he sought religion. James declared in his own storyI had to explore other churches, other congregations, and other expressions of the Christian faith. Here, James prayed with the Methodists, sang with the Presbyterians, hallelujahed wih the Nazarenes, and shouted "Lawdy, Lawdy" with the spirit-filled of other churches.
However, his search intensified when that pistol was shoved up my nostril and James near death experience shook his confidence about his salvation. He felt he wasn't ready to die. Nor was he at peace with himself or with God. On the other hand, relatively unscathed James figured God gave him a second chance. James sincerely felt called by God.
James Lloyd search finally came to an end when he walked aided with his girlfriend into a Church of Christ congregation after being in many places of worship and attending several churches more than once. My search was over. I was home. I had found true Christianity!
However, this spiritual group was labeled according to James Lloyd by many as conservative, and even fundamentalist, the Church of Christ had been around for many years and had congregations throughout the world. But there was a dynamic new group of "radicals" affiliated with the Church of Christ. Headquarters in Gainesville, Florida, and calling themselves the "Campus Ministry", this group sent out ministry teams to begin congregations near college campuses all throughout the United States.
James, at first, did not know where this new found teachings of this so-called true Christianity would lead him. He hurry home each evening in anticipation of studying the Bible four to five hours, fervently highlighting and underlying scriptures. Reading the Bible, from cover to cover, from Genesis to Revelation. Taking copious notes. Sermon notes...personal notes...questions...scrawled down the side and middle columns and across the top and bottom of every page in his Bible. Seated on the front row, focusing intently, taking notes, and hanging on every word the minister preached.
It was at the Duke University in Durham, North Carolina where James struck up a friendship with Douglas Arthur. I studied the Bible with Douglas Arthur, relate James in "Shining Like Stars", in 1978. As we studied, we drew close to God. I enjoyed Douglas' company and our Bible studies immensely until one night it all hit me. My mom and dad were, according to the scriptures, lost. This was extremely difficult for me, as Dad had been a Baptist preacher for 25 years, and Mom was one of the most Christlike women I'd ever known. I remember going to Douglas Arthur's home one night exclaiming, "I cannot accept that my parents are lost! I have no problem seeing my own lostness, but not my parents'." After much study, prayer, and discussion, this situation was finally resolved. But I had already violated the first principle. 1. Accept the Truth Sometimes we say in our speech "My relatives are lost," but have enormous difficulty accepting that fact in our hearts. It is crucial that we accept the harsh reality of their condition if we expect to have the urgency to help them."
After James had accepted the harsh reality of the teachings of the Church of Christ, concerning his parents condition... he was truly baptized (not-rebaptized) on October 8, 1978. Despite the fact that his dad had been a Baptist preacher for 25 years and his Mom was one of the most Christlike women he had ever known... they were in his mind according to the scriptures, lost. This effectively meant, if they would die they will go to hell!
James set out to reverse this spiritual condition for his family. He consistently prayed that [his] family would become Christians. He also recruited other people to pray for [his] family. He believed in this cause. His parents spiritual condition could be altered. They too needed to see their lostness. They too needed to be truly baptized. They too, needed to accept the harsh reality for their parents condition!
Perhaps the driving force behind Lloyd's motives to save his family was helped along by Douglas Arthur one week after his Church of Christ immersion. About a week after my baptism, Douglas told me he would be moving to Boston to train under a powerfully effective minister. After asking me if I'd be willing to move to Massachusetts with him, he persuaded, "It'll be the chance of a lifetime. We can both become ministers!"
At that time, James didn't give it a second thought.
James' father had been a Baptist preacher for 25 years. Reading the 1990's multi-authored edition of "Shining Like Stars", he states: Mom was one of the most Christlike women I'd ever known. When James was only eleven years old his father baptised him the first time infront of his congregation. James grew up a Southern Baptist. As a minister's son he had been forced to attend every service in his father's church. Yet I knew hardly anything about the Bible. He knew that the church of his father would not be his own. It was not my spiritual home. However, not content with the church of my father - he sought religion. James declared in his own storyI had to explore other churches, other congregations, and other expressions of the Christian faith. Here, James prayed with the Methodists, sang with the Presbyterians, hallelujahed wih the Nazarenes, and shouted "Lawdy, Lawdy" with the spirit-filled of other churches.
However, his search intensified when that pistol was shoved up my nostril and James near death experience shook his confidence about his salvation. He felt he wasn't ready to die. Nor was he at peace with himself or with God. On the other hand, relatively unscathed James figured God gave him a second chance. James sincerely felt called by God.
James Lloyd search finally came to an end when he walked aided with his girlfriend into a Church of Christ congregation after being in many places of worship and attending several churches more than once. My search was over. I was home. I had found true Christianity!
However, this spiritual group was labeled according to James Lloyd by many as conservative, and even fundamentalist, the Church of Christ had been around for many years and had congregations throughout the world. But there was a dynamic new group of "radicals" affiliated with the Church of Christ. Headquarters in Gainesville, Florida, and calling themselves the "Campus Ministry", this group sent out ministry teams to begin congregations near college campuses all throughout the United States.
James, at first, did not know where this new found teachings of this so-called true Christianity would lead him. He hurry home each evening in anticipation of studying the Bible four to five hours, fervently highlighting and underlying scriptures. Reading the Bible, from cover to cover, from Genesis to Revelation. Taking copious notes. Sermon notes...personal notes...questions...scrawled down the side and middle columns and across the top and bottom of every page in his Bible. Seated on the front row, focusing intently, taking notes, and hanging on every word the minister preached.
It was at the Duke University in Durham, North Carolina where James struck up a friendship with Douglas Arthur. I studied the Bible with Douglas Arthur, relate James in "Shining Like Stars", in 1978. As we studied, we drew close to God. I enjoyed Douglas' company and our Bible studies immensely until one night it all hit me. My mom and dad were, according to the scriptures, lost. This was extremely difficult for me, as Dad had been a Baptist preacher for 25 years, and Mom was one of the most Christlike women I'd ever known. I remember going to Douglas Arthur's home one night exclaiming, "I cannot accept that my parents are lost! I have no problem seeing my own lostness, but not my parents'." After much study, prayer, and discussion, this situation was finally resolved. But I had already violated the first principle. 1. Accept the Truth Sometimes we say in our speech "My relatives are lost," but have enormous difficulty accepting that fact in our hearts. It is crucial that we accept the harsh reality of their condition if we expect to have the urgency to help them."
After James had accepted the harsh reality of the teachings of the Church of Christ, concerning his parents condition... he was truly baptized (not-rebaptized) on October 8, 1978. Despite the fact that his dad had been a Baptist preacher for 25 years and his Mom was one of the most Christlike women he had ever known... they were in his mind according to the scriptures, lost. This effectively meant, if they would die they will go to hell!
James set out to reverse this spiritual condition for his family. He consistently prayed that [his] family would become Christians. He also recruited other people to pray for [his] family. He believed in this cause. His parents spiritual condition could be altered. They too needed to see their lostness. They too needed to be truly baptized. They too, needed to accept the harsh reality for their parents condition!
Perhaps the driving force behind Lloyd's motives to save his family was helped along by Douglas Arthur one week after his Church of Christ immersion. About a week after my baptism, Douglas told me he would be moving to Boston to train under a powerfully effective minister. After asking me if I'd be willing to move to Massachusetts with him, he persuaded, "It'll be the chance of a lifetime. We can both become ministers!"
At that time, James didn't give it a second thought.
Monday, April 09, 2007
The McKean's comeback years - Part 3
The following is a letter from the McKean's to the Eugene Church shortly after their arrival in Los Angeles Sunday, March 18, 2007.
Friday, April 06, 2007
The McKean's comeback years - Part 2
Question: Today, we have to ask the question concerning the legacy of the ICOC leadership - especially those who continue with the procession of discipleship. Are they cured?
Not too long ago, the fellowship of the International Churches of Christ (ICOC) could uniformly declare Who We Are - but now members of this divided church group ask themselves Who Are We?
In 1992, Dr. Albert W. Baird commonly known as Al Baird, evangelist, elder, teacher, editor and media spokesperson for the ICOC confidently supported McKean's two-part series entitled Revolution Through Restoration (RTR). Baird stated in his first preface of RTR1: This article explains who we are as God's modern-day movement and where we came from, better than any other single piece of which I am aware. For this reason I frequently give a copy to someone with whom I am studying the Bible or to someone from the media who wants to know more about us.
That now has changed. These infamous articles who were once part and parcel of former ICOC websites are all withdrawn from church websites supporting the United Cooperation Group. They can only be viewed in its entirety on church websites rallied behind the founder of the Portland Discipling Movement.
Henry Kriete released in February 2, 2003, a counter revolution article, entitled, Honest to God: Revolution Through Repentance and Freedom in Christ, in which he asks: On what grounds do we now claim that we are "God's Modern Day Movement"? Kriete pulverised the notion that the ICOC is the kingdom of God. And so I ask again - are we - 'THE ICOC', 'THE KINGDOM', 'THE ONE TRUE CHURCH' - still the remnant chosen by grace? Or was that claim itself simply too much for God?
Kriete, like many other heroic men and women before him refuse to buy into the notion that the emperor's clothes had the wonderful quality of becoming invisible to anyone who was not fit for his office or who was unpardonably stupid. Therefore, no one wished to admit that he could see nothing, for then he would have been unfit for his office or else a fool.
It is disconcerting to read follow-up material from Henry Kriete such as a Response to a friend, September 6, 2005 with regards to the powerful delusion which still plagues those hearts and minds entrapped with the life and doctrine of the former ICOC. To this day, tens of thousands of our members still think that to leave the ICOC is to leave God. Or at least believe it is probably so. And now that same kind of hubris has spawned a calling out of the remnant from within the ICOC itself! Shame. Shame. Shame. That my friend, is the real reason for the damage, the 'human wreckage'.
In the same article, Kriete state: The ICOC was built, not on the pure foundation of Christ alone, but on a seriously inadequate version of the person and work of Christ, and on a very deficient understanding of the grace and truth of Christ. In short: a different Jesus, a different gospel. Kip's version of Jesus. As we followed Kip's leadership in the ICOC, this was the 'different' Jesus that he himself was following... and follows to this day.
Today, we have to ask the question concerning the legacy of the ICOC leadership - especially those who continue with the procession of discipleship. Are they cured?
Steve Johnson, editor of issues 4 & 5, January 1993, UpsideDown magazine commented From the editor stating: we are believers in leadership; and our belief in leadership is very common sense. Steve emphasises: Kip is our leader not because of a puff of smoke from a Vatican balcony or a twisted theology. He's simply further out front than anyone else I know; so we follow and God has blessed us.
In the following year, 1994, Al Baird's article as editor for the LA Story's 'A Man for All Seasons' affirms: Throughout the pages of the Bible and history God raised up one person to lead his people, and for our day it is unquestionably Kip. He is not infallible, he is not an apostle, he is not perfect, but he is an incredible leader. Baird continues: People outside the movement sometimes ask me, "Why is Kip the leader?" I simply reply that he is the leader because he is far out in front leading!
However, we all know the dutiful courtiers - our highests ranking evangelists have caught up with their front man.
The final straw was during the proceedings early September of 2005, during a forum organized by the 2005 International Leadership Conference in which the coordinators in Seattle barred Kip McKean from attending a vital meeting. Here, a group of nine brothers, were elected by ballot to serve as a Unity Proposal Group. Although there was certainly not a puff of smoke visible from any balcony they were elected by ballot. Thus, McKean was excluded from an unique historical process for this church group.
As a result, a new document was released in March 11, 2006. A ratified plan that serves their dual Christian interests with its background firmly emplaced in the first century; ideally rooted in the New Testament dogma of the Church of Christ and truths and emphases derived from the Crossroads campus ministry days. From page four: The Unity Proposal Group are striving both to articulate the theological framework of "the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints" (Jude 3) and to reaffirm those truths and emphases that have particularly shaped our branch of God's movement, from the campus ministry days until now.
The United Cooperation Group, like their counter group, the Portland Discipling Movement spawn these Crossroads principles as core truths - truths we want to defend.
In reality, these two opposing groups do all our thinking and our agenda setting and many just limp lamely behind it.
Let us note: The leadership of the Unity Proposal Group, guided by the input of the whole ICOC except by Kip McKean did not attempt to overthrow the temples as Kriete suggests, or at least dump the baby along with the bath water, or allow the pendulum to spin madly. By refusing to re-examine the Campus ministry disciple approach is one of the main reasons we fear loosing our identity Who We Are especially our discipleship methodologies of the past. We are very afraid of what we will become once our collective brain is taken away.
How did we get here? Is it because we follow an emperor type of leadership without clothes?
Perhaps the sense to belong, to be part of something, to have an identity Who We Are has short-changed the ICOC.
Here, the presure for leadership to establish a church culture or an identity Who We Are during those neutral years of 2003-2005 often called the pendulum-swinging years have reached a breaking point in most churches. This is evident on page seven of the Unity Proposal document - before the reactions among us define us.
Already, the Unity Proposal document of March 11, 2006, since the ICOC group decentralised in December 2002 have succesfully pulled together over 70% of the former ICOC churches, thus securing some form of anchorage to those who wants to define themselves Who We Are. The majority look for light relief. In so much of 70% of the former ICOC now suspend their thinking capacity by embracing discipleship as those truths and emphases that have particularly shaped our branch of God's movement, from the campus ministry days until now.
However, in reality McKean will keep on probing for ICOC churches made up only of disciples. Kip is back. The McKean's leadership sins - although real - are temporary distractions. In due time their philosophy on the disciple approach will rise above mediocre attempts of others. The possibility for people to defect is tangible. The probability to demonise Kip will continue.
The McKean's have established a church culture, ever since the release of Kip's third revolution article, in July 13, 2003, entitled From Babylon to Zion - Revolution Through Restoration III. The comeback years of the McKeans does not hang in the balance when men and women once more start embracing discipleship principles.
A dry period usually follows after a fire storm. Eventually, dormant seeds of discipleship will sprout again, whether they were hidden underground in the cave of Adullam or being protected by elders guarding their discipling churches against Kip's comeback.
Seeds will sprout and there is nothing one can do to stop the cross-pollination.
Seasoned veterans of the ICOC knows Kip McKean is A Man For All Seasons.
Sunday, April 01, 2007
The McKean's comeback years - Part 1
Question: Will people on April 1st support the couple God once raised up to lead his people to reach the world again in one generation?
The founder and trendsetter of the Boston movement better known as the International Churches of Christ (ICOC), Thomas Wayne McKean, commonly known as Kip McKean is down but not out after been rebuffed by former ICOC colleagues for "calling out of the remnant disciples" from dying, former ICOC Churches in order to start an exciting Episode 2 - now officially termed the Portland Discipling Movement.
The beginning stage of an Episode 1 begun in 1979 when Kip supported by his wife, Elena Gracia-Bengochea moved to the Lexinton Church of Christ, later renamed the Boston Church of Christ. The move was encouraged by Elena's innitiative for Kip's dreams. Let's follow your dream. That dream entailed implementing methodologies based on the the disciple approach acquired from Charles 'Chuck' Lucas' Crossroads movement one-another passages rather relying entirely on Church of Christ dogma.
In 1967 the Church of Christ started a pilot programme called Campus Advance modelled after Campus Crusade for Christ in order to impact the campusses. Chuck Lucas was a campus minister in the 14th Street Church of Christ (later renamed the Crossroads Church of Christ). This new undertaking started in several Church of Christ congregations focussing on shepherding of Christians by other Christians - primarily from students basing their techniques on the one-another passages.
The Crossroads movement was the product of Chuck Lucas teachings after modifying discipleship principles observed in certain Christian groups such as The Navigators, Campus Crusade for Christ and InterVarsity Christian Fellowship. Lucas was also influenced by Robert E. Coleman's book The Master Plan of Evangelism first published in 1963. Although Chuck was the pioneer of this faith after a sabbatical he left the ministry for personal and spiritual reasons in 1985. McKean become the perfector of this faith. Chuck Lucas' idea of discipleship was modified by Kip. Prayer partners became discipling partners and soul talks became known as bible talks.
McKean was 18 years old when he was taught to give up everything for Christ and be baptized for the remission of sins to become a Christian. This commitment he made in April 11, 1972 at the 14th Street Church of Christ, Gainesville, Florida. At the same congregation, Elena was 17 when she was baptized into Christ on August 8, 1972. The following year, 1973, they "dated steady" for three years and were married by Chuck Lucas and Sam Laing December 11, 1976. From here on the McKean's common dream of working together in the ministry started in Charleston, Illinois where Kip was the campus minister for the Heritage Chapel Church of Christ (Roger Lamb was the preacher). Again this was made possible due to Chuck Lucas powerful preaching along with his associate Sam Laing that has convinced Kip in 1975 to become a minister. This he did when he come of age.
Since 1975 Kip's concern for the spiritual state of affairs in the Church of Christ intensified. Here he saw how uncommitted many of the so called "Christian" students were: drugs, drunkenness, prejudice and immorality were prevalent. His resolve to revolutionise the Church of Christ followed over a period between 1975-1979. Here, the truth as set out by the dogma of the Church of Christ was in conflict with his convictions about the truth.
Here, the reader must understand that Kip McKean's introduction to the "set-up" of the Church of Christ is completely different comparatively to many former ICOC colleagues with a traditional Church of Christ background who have joined McKean during the Boston era. They all had to unlearn their past traditions and misconceptions before they could really learn how to build churches. In other words each individual had to re-think his former theology as observed in the Church of Christ before becoming a proven builder in the Boston churches. But this did not deter ambitious Church of Christ leaders or men aspiring leadership. From an account of James Lloyd, who along with Doug Arthur planted the London Church of Christ (1982) describe the youthful Kip McKean at an age of 25 as a powerfully effective minister. Lloyd wrote: About a week after my baptism, [October 8, 1978] Douglas told me he would be moving to Boston to train under a powerfully effective minister. After asking me if I'd be willing to move to Massachusetts with him, he persuaded, "It'll be the chance of a lifetime. We can both become ministers!
In years to come, Roger Lamb described Kip as God's man.
Perhaps Lamb was the last author to lavish such praise on to the founder of the ICOC in an article entitled God's man, Message and Movement in the LA Story magazine, From Here To Eternity, August 1999, p3 before the curtain abruptly dropped on the couple as they entered the new millenium. God raised up Kip McKean and gave him a radical message that would start a revolution in the lives of people all over the world in our era. Lamb also stated: No other Christian movement since the first century has spread this far, this fast. None has grown this quickly during the lifetime of its founder. God has raised up a couple to lead his people to reach the world again in one generation.
To conclude part 1.
The ICOC had a founder - Kip Thomas Wayne McKean. He based his philosophy on the disciple approach methodologies rather on Church of Christ dogma. Here, the truth as set out by the dogma of the Church of Christ was in conflict with his convictions about the truth. His followers had to unlearn their past traditions and misconceptions before they could really learn how to build churches. His followers described Kip as God's man. This fellowship believed God has raised up a couple to lead his people to reach the world again in one generation.
In reality these very elements are fuel for the McKean's comeback.
Next week: McKean's comeback years - Part 2.
The founder and trendsetter of the Boston movement better known as the International Churches of Christ (ICOC), Thomas Wayne McKean, commonly known as Kip McKean is down but not out after been rebuffed by former ICOC colleagues for "calling out of the remnant disciples" from dying, former ICOC Churches in order to start an exciting Episode 2 - now officially termed the Portland Discipling Movement.
The beginning stage of an Episode 1 begun in 1979 when Kip supported by his wife, Elena Gracia-Bengochea moved to the Lexinton Church of Christ, later renamed the Boston Church of Christ. The move was encouraged by Elena's innitiative for Kip's dreams. Let's follow your dream. That dream entailed implementing methodologies based on the the disciple approach acquired from Charles 'Chuck' Lucas' Crossroads movement one-another passages rather relying entirely on Church of Christ dogma.
In 1967 the Church of Christ started a pilot programme called Campus Advance modelled after Campus Crusade for Christ in order to impact the campusses. Chuck Lucas was a campus minister in the 14th Street Church of Christ (later renamed the Crossroads Church of Christ). This new undertaking started in several Church of Christ congregations focussing on shepherding of Christians by other Christians - primarily from students basing their techniques on the one-another passages.
The Crossroads movement was the product of Chuck Lucas teachings after modifying discipleship principles observed in certain Christian groups such as The Navigators, Campus Crusade for Christ and InterVarsity Christian Fellowship. Lucas was also influenced by Robert E. Coleman's book The Master Plan of Evangelism first published in 1963. Although Chuck was the pioneer of this faith after a sabbatical he left the ministry for personal and spiritual reasons in 1985. McKean become the perfector of this faith. Chuck Lucas' idea of discipleship was modified by Kip. Prayer partners became discipling partners and soul talks became known as bible talks.
McKean was 18 years old when he was taught to give up everything for Christ and be baptized for the remission of sins to become a Christian. This commitment he made in April 11, 1972 at the 14th Street Church of Christ, Gainesville, Florida. At the same congregation, Elena was 17 when she was baptized into Christ on August 8, 1972. The following year, 1973, they "dated steady" for three years and were married by Chuck Lucas and Sam Laing December 11, 1976. From here on the McKean's common dream of working together in the ministry started in Charleston, Illinois where Kip was the campus minister for the Heritage Chapel Church of Christ (Roger Lamb was the preacher). Again this was made possible due to Chuck Lucas powerful preaching along with his associate Sam Laing that has convinced Kip in 1975 to become a minister. This he did when he come of age.
Since 1975 Kip's concern for the spiritual state of affairs in the Church of Christ intensified. Here he saw how uncommitted many of the so called "Christian" students were: drugs, drunkenness, prejudice and immorality were prevalent. His resolve to revolutionise the Church of Christ followed over a period between 1975-1979. Here, the truth as set out by the dogma of the Church of Christ was in conflict with his convictions about the truth.
Here, the reader must understand that Kip McKean's introduction to the "set-up" of the Church of Christ is completely different comparatively to many former ICOC colleagues with a traditional Church of Christ background who have joined McKean during the Boston era. They all had to unlearn their past traditions and misconceptions before they could really learn how to build churches. In other words each individual had to re-think his former theology as observed in the Church of Christ before becoming a proven builder in the Boston churches. But this did not deter ambitious Church of Christ leaders or men aspiring leadership. From an account of James Lloyd, who along with Doug Arthur planted the London Church of Christ (1982) describe the youthful Kip McKean at an age of 25 as a powerfully effective minister. Lloyd wrote: About a week after my baptism, [October 8, 1978] Douglas told me he would be moving to Boston to train under a powerfully effective minister. After asking me if I'd be willing to move to Massachusetts with him, he persuaded, "It'll be the chance of a lifetime. We can both become ministers!
In years to come, Roger Lamb described Kip as God's man.
Perhaps Lamb was the last author to lavish such praise on to the founder of the ICOC in an article entitled God's man, Message and Movement in the LA Story magazine, From Here To Eternity, August 1999, p3 before the curtain abruptly dropped on the couple as they entered the new millenium. God raised up Kip McKean and gave him a radical message that would start a revolution in the lives of people all over the world in our era. Lamb also stated: No other Christian movement since the first century has spread this far, this fast. None has grown this quickly during the lifetime of its founder. God has raised up a couple to lead his people to reach the world again in one generation.
To conclude part 1.
The ICOC had a founder - Kip Thomas Wayne McKean. He based his philosophy on the disciple approach methodologies rather on Church of Christ dogma. Here, the truth as set out by the dogma of the Church of Christ was in conflict with his convictions about the truth. His followers had to unlearn their past traditions and misconceptions before they could really learn how to build churches. His followers described Kip as God's man. This fellowship believed God has raised up a couple to lead his people to reach the world again in one generation.
In reality these very elements are fuel for the McKean's comeback.
Next week: McKean's comeback years - Part 2.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
PE Church of Christ participation in the Ironman South Africa 2007
Sunday 18 March 2007 will be an extraordinary day for the Port Elizabeth Church of Christ because their "pastor" Rod Fick participated along with Jabu Mpengesi, a member of the church in the Spec-Savers Ironman South African 2007, which includes a 3,8km swim, 180km cycle and 42,2km run, to be completed within 17 hours. An article, posted on March 17th in the Weekend Post newspaper provides all the details. How about it? ICOC churches can generate some positive news, but more so, is it not remarkable for "pastors" in the ICOC churches to take Sundays off for sport? Just too show how drastic "kingdom" priorities over the last few years have changed!
From the article:
Inspiring pastor and protege set to pit strengths
At tomorrow's Ironman race one Port Elizabeth man will pit his strength against the pastor who first inspire him to take up the sport.
Jabu Mpengesi was so moved by US pastor Rod Fick's passion for the sport that he tried it out himself, and soon was also hooked.
Fick, a pastor at the Port Elizabeth Church of Christ, last did an Ironman 20 years ago when, by fluke, he landed himself a slot in the much-coveted Ironman Hawaii on the island of Kona - where the current World Ironman Championships are held.
"When I last did an Ironman in 1987, there were only two Ironman races in the world, Kona and Canada," said Fick.
The pastor explained how he met and motivated Mpengesi, who was one of the first development triathletes in Ironman to be nutured bt SA Triathlon Development director Paul Wolff.
After Kona, from 1989 to 1992, he joined the Peace Corp and went to the former Zaire (now Democratic Republic of Congo) to teach people how to farm.
He then returned to the US and became a Christian - and triathlon and Ironman seemed a long way away.
In 1996, he returned to Africa to work at a mission in Johannesburg. Then with his wife Linda, a former Free State radiographer, he settled in Port Elizabeth to lead the church.
"At this stage triathlon was a distant memory for me, although it's funny, when I preach I bring up triathlon quite a lot as an example for perseverance."
The passionate way he spoke about the sport piqued the interest of Mpengesi, a member of his congregation. And in 2002, when a group from the church signed on for the Redhouse River Mile, Mpengesi was there to have a go at the swim.
He was "sold on the sport of triathlon". He borrowed Fick's bike, entered races and started to excel.
As one of few black athletes in sport then, he caught the eye of Wolff, who started to help him with training.
With Mpengesi well on his way, Fick felt the urge to take up triathlon again.
In 2004, he and Mpengesi raced the half-Ironman in Port Elizabeth and were on par until Fick dropped out to go and preside at a friend's wedding.
On Fick's 45th birthday last year, a congregation member challenged him to do the Ironman in 2007. "I thought, why not? It's been 20 years, it's an anniversary."
Friday, March 09, 2007
The Dividing Years
Kip said it. They denied it. Who's dividing who?
"Gone, I believe, is the ICOC," stated McKean, A Great Light Has Dawned, June 2004, "I mean it's a name we invented in 1994 anyway. Many churches have renounced the name International Church of Christ and just going back to Church of Christ because they want to be identified with the Church of Christ." McKean might be right, but a large contingent of the "former" International Churches of Christ (ICOC) perhaps better known as the Cooperation Group still appraise "the name".
They retaliated soon after Kip and Portland leadership dared to begin "a progressive 'calling-out of the remnant of disciples' from dying, former ICOC Churches." The Portland Story burst unto the scene stating: "August 2005 is not a new beginning but an exciting Episode 2!" It hoped to kick start "valiant but wiser, past leaders of His [God's] movement to meld with young Spirit-filled leaders to forge a new brotherhood leadership to spearhead the evangelization of the world in the 21st century."
But McKean's unrepented "leadership sins" and "character sins" twarted cooperation between himself and those "valiant but wiser, past leaders" who want to heal him from his spiritual deficiency. Since Kip's Resignation letter, according to the first Brothers' letter addressed to him by "key leaders who led the planting and the building of churches of the International Churches of Christ" they've noticed that McKean "have acknowledged these sins, but we do not see change in you beyond mere surface change to satisfy people for the moment."
The drama intensified over the years since November 2002 as Kip singlemindedly tries to outwit - outlast and tries to outplay his former collegues concerns for him in order to reach "cities where former 'ICOC churches' have abandoned discipling and world vision." McKean is more anxious to get the former ICOC back on track rather than worrying about his anxious counterparts concern for his spiritual wellbeing. Here both groups face a terrible dilemma. How could the weaklings of the present rebuild what the giants of the past had been unable to uphold? Secondly, both groups think they are like David's mighty men, thinking they too "understood the times and knew what Israel should do" (1 Chronicles 12:32 NIV). McKean's "same short-term attractive results" serve as a catalyst for conflict between himself and other leadership groups within the ICOC. Kip have been warned many times not to revamp the "structure" of Episode 1. "Yet, when asked what your ideas are for unifying us once again and helping our churches to heal, mature and return to our mission, your answer is to go back and do what you did in the 1980's. You are in fact attempting to do just that. If you continue on this course, you will build some churches. And you will reap the same short-term attractive results and the same long-term painful results. You must repent and learn how to work with other leaders in true adult to adult relationships. You are no longer a young man with lack of experience for an excuse."
The excuse ultimately came from Kip's own support base - the Portland International Church of Christ. In an international letter of appeal, Portland acknowledges "there have been numerous letters of warnings and markings for divisiveness from former International Churches of Christ (ICOC) leaderships against the McKeans and the Portland Church. On October 3, 2005, Kip McKean received a letter signed by over sixty evangelists and elders which had grave concerns and accusations about his character, his motives and his ministry building skills. Once again divisiveness was a central issue."
Their appeal for Concern For All The Churches is neatly sandwished between the two Brothers' letters designed for the purpose to show concern for Kip McKean "to appeal for Kip's repentance and to protect the flock." These serious letters of admonishment, rebuke and disfellowship were respectively signed by more than 60 and 80 international signatories. Here, McKean's philosophy or "persuasive talents" provided Roger Lamb no other alternative in December 2006 to remark: "If they agree with Kip's teachings, they apparently also do not believe that any other churches are godly churches. Though our family of churches desire fellowship with them, they have separated themselves from our family of churches." He justified his statement on the following facts.
"In an October 8th sermon entitled 'You Might Be Fighting God' McKean stated: You see we believe our congregation is unique here in Portland. Now I think there are other baptized disciples in other fellowships. But I don't think there is any other fellowship that is composed solely of sold-out baptized disciples. From this proclamation, we are hearing the old refrain that proved disastrous once before among us - that the Portland Church and the others in their movement are the One True Church. This is a false premise and elitist claim. To us this is more of the same judgemental, divisive teaching that serves to draw people to himself as the only truly godly leader of the only true church. Sadly, the arrogance and the divisive spirit have not changed. These are all the signs of one who 'loves to be first.' This is not the narrow road of Matthew 7: 13-14. This is a tight, elitist circle."
Furthermore, Lamb offers an explaination on Kip's lack of cooperation. "The common requirement is being under Kip's control. This is the very reason he is not willing to work among our churches or any other group of churches. Kip was offered to work as a team player with the other brothers, but his response was that he was the star. We must follow God first, not men."
The history and narrative of the Portland Story, according to the majority of key leaders is reintegrated from "a simplistic, misleading and self-advancing way". Here, the Brothers' Statement to Kip McKean, November 2, 2005, mentions: "The Portland response paints [Kip's] resignation in noble colors, something completely inconsistent with what actually took place."
However, the entire Portland leadership viewpoint differs considerably from the major ICOC stakeholders opinion concerning McKean's resignation. They say: "By November 2002 at the Los Angeles Unity Meeting, Kip officially resigned as the World Missions Evangelist, not because he felt he was disqualified for his role, but in an effort to preserve unity between the leaders and the churches. As Kip and others have testified before, the 'irony' of the LA Unity Meeting was that a gathering that was supposed to bring unity, in the end produced widespread disunity. Sadly, all the World Sector Leaders were called to resign. This resulted in the visionary central leadership of the International Churches of Christ being dissolved. It must be noted at this point in time, the ICOC as we knew it ceased to exist."
Whereupon, the second Brothers' letter quickly seized on this opportunity to point out that Portland's "response shows no acknowledgement of the hand of God and our learning from him. The issue is reduced to a discussion of structure and organization. This is the real heart behind what went wrong with our churches in the 1990s. We are glad that the church organization that valued structure over spirituality and maturity has ceased to exist."
The issue about the "dying, former ICOC Churches" is a lie. They stated: "But the church is God's. He is still leading us. He has disciplined us. We are still learning from his discipline. We are seeking his will in how we should work together in the future. This is why there was such unity in forming the Brotherhood Proposal Group. We are glad that God is still working through us as a family of churches called the International Churches of Christ."
Sandwished between these two letters from the Brothers, Portland ponders: "One must pause and ponder as to what has happened to our fellowship of churches during these last four years in the absence of Kip's influence and a central leadership?"
Clearly, the house of Renovation, alias the Portland "discipling" movement emphasise something completely different than the house of Innovation or United Cooperation Group. In February 2003, the principle of “Continual Restoration - Man, Message, Momentum, Maintenance, and Monument” has reached an “unavoidable fork in the road” in the outcome of Kriete’s ‘Honest to God’ letter. Mature Christians no longer think “to work the plan” or “pack a bag, go any where, do anything, give up everything” for the sake of “leaders in the Boston movement.” Rather, mature Christians go by faith “doctrinally and practically" when they have seen the truth in the Scriptures. How shortsighted are those who follow a failed and tried doctrine of “God’s man, Message and Movement.”
Here, the articles of Revolution Through Restoration, Part 1-3; The Mandate of God for World Evangelism series; The Portland Story and Partners in the Gospel Part 1-3 written by Kip McKean do not carry innovative schemes but renovate dreams of God’s ‘former’ modern-day movement a.k.a. the Boston movement better known as the International Churches of Christ.
Clearly this ICOC is dead. It no longer exist. It is gone. But there are others who will fill her shoes. What remains is a divided frontier.
"I am sad", replies Kip in an article entitled A Divided Kingdom, March 2007, "that many of my former colleagues and me continue to be unable to resolve our issues. But as for me and my house, we are serving the Lord and 'moving' on." Elsewhere in the same article he states: "But of this I am sure, I am teaching the same thing 'everywhere in every church' as I have for more than three decades. Therefore, the Portland family of churches has been called the 'Sold-Out Movement,' the 'Portland Movement,' the 'International Christian Church Movement' and my choice, the 'Portland Discipling Movement."
The purpose for this "new movement" is ultra clear when the following question is asked to Kip McKean: "Why have several ICOC Churches disfellowshipped you, the father of faith for all the ICOC Churches, for being divisive?"
Here we must conclude why the dividing years... and who is responsible?
"We in the Portland Discipling Movement are calling out a remnant from the ICOC, the mainline Churches of Christ, the conservative Christian Churches as well as those who have 'walked away' from the ICOC. God is using this rapidly multiplying remnant to form a new movement of churches, which are distinguished by our sold-out commitment to God and our love for one another through discipling. Each disciple's love of Christ compels us to collectively dream of evangelizing the world in this generation. These were our original teachings in 1979 which God used to form the Boston Movement, which officially became the ICOC in 1994. Now we considered divisive, because the present ICOC church leaders no longer fully embrace these teachings. We are not drawing people away from God, but are unapologetically calling everyone to repent of lukewarmness, bitterness and unbelief and return to God as sold-out disciples. Bottom line, the question must be asked to the present leaders of the ICOC, 'Who divided from whom?" Source: Super Bowl Sunday in Las Vegas!
McKean and the Portland Discipling Movement refuse to "draw a line of fellowship. We want there to be a genuine 'bridge of fellowship' to visit our congregations to see what God is doing among us. Daily we pray that more individuals and whole congregations will join us."
Let us note; they themselves don't want to cross over! The reason is simple Old Testament tactics. People defected slowly to David's side! No wonder in every opposing ICOC church group concerned leaders notices "two separate churches trying to please God in different ways." In deed it's becoming all the more "a cloudy situation."
At best the years of dividing will last a long time. The battle will intensifies with the McKean's "move" to the City of Angels International Christian Church.
"Gone, I believe, is the ICOC," stated McKean, A Great Light Has Dawned, June 2004, "I mean it's a name we invented in 1994 anyway. Many churches have renounced the name International Church of Christ and just going back to Church of Christ because they want to be identified with the Church of Christ." McKean might be right, but a large contingent of the "former" International Churches of Christ (ICOC) perhaps better known as the Cooperation Group still appraise "the name".
They retaliated soon after Kip and Portland leadership dared to begin "a progressive 'calling-out of the remnant of disciples' from dying, former ICOC Churches." The Portland Story burst unto the scene stating: "August 2005 is not a new beginning but an exciting Episode 2!" It hoped to kick start "valiant but wiser, past leaders of His [God's] movement to meld with young Spirit-filled leaders to forge a new brotherhood leadership to spearhead the evangelization of the world in the 21st century."
But McKean's unrepented "leadership sins" and "character sins" twarted cooperation between himself and those "valiant but wiser, past leaders" who want to heal him from his spiritual deficiency. Since Kip's Resignation letter, according to the first Brothers' letter addressed to him by "key leaders who led the planting and the building of churches of the International Churches of Christ" they've noticed that McKean "have acknowledged these sins, but we do not see change in you beyond mere surface change to satisfy people for the moment."
The drama intensified over the years since November 2002 as Kip singlemindedly tries to outwit - outlast and tries to outplay his former collegues concerns for him in order to reach "cities where former 'ICOC churches' have abandoned discipling and world vision." McKean is more anxious to get the former ICOC back on track rather than worrying about his anxious counterparts concern for his spiritual wellbeing. Here both groups face a terrible dilemma. How could the weaklings of the present rebuild what the giants of the past had been unable to uphold? Secondly, both groups think they are like David's mighty men, thinking they too "understood the times and knew what Israel should do" (1 Chronicles 12:32 NIV). McKean's "same short-term attractive results" serve as a catalyst for conflict between himself and other leadership groups within the ICOC. Kip have been warned many times not to revamp the "structure" of Episode 1. "Yet, when asked what your ideas are for unifying us once again and helping our churches to heal, mature and return to our mission, your answer is to go back and do what you did in the 1980's. You are in fact attempting to do just that. If you continue on this course, you will build some churches. And you will reap the same short-term attractive results and the same long-term painful results. You must repent and learn how to work with other leaders in true adult to adult relationships. You are no longer a young man with lack of experience for an excuse."
The excuse ultimately came from Kip's own support base - the Portland International Church of Christ. In an international letter of appeal, Portland acknowledges "there have been numerous letters of warnings and markings for divisiveness from former International Churches of Christ (ICOC) leaderships against the McKeans and the Portland Church. On October 3, 2005, Kip McKean received a letter signed by over sixty evangelists and elders which had grave concerns and accusations about his character, his motives and his ministry building skills. Once again divisiveness was a central issue."
Their appeal for Concern For All The Churches is neatly sandwished between the two Brothers' letters designed for the purpose to show concern for Kip McKean "to appeal for Kip's repentance and to protect the flock." These serious letters of admonishment, rebuke and disfellowship were respectively signed by more than 60 and 80 international signatories. Here, McKean's philosophy or "persuasive talents" provided Roger Lamb no other alternative in December 2006 to remark: "If they agree with Kip's teachings, they apparently also do not believe that any other churches are godly churches. Though our family of churches desire fellowship with them, they have separated themselves from our family of churches." He justified his statement on the following facts.
"In an October 8th sermon entitled 'You Might Be Fighting God' McKean stated: You see we believe our congregation is unique here in Portland. Now I think there are other baptized disciples in other fellowships. But I don't think there is any other fellowship that is composed solely of sold-out baptized disciples. From this proclamation, we are hearing the old refrain that proved disastrous once before among us - that the Portland Church and the others in their movement are the One True Church. This is a false premise and elitist claim. To us this is more of the same judgemental, divisive teaching that serves to draw people to himself as the only truly godly leader of the only true church. Sadly, the arrogance and the divisive spirit have not changed. These are all the signs of one who 'loves to be first.' This is not the narrow road of Matthew 7: 13-14. This is a tight, elitist circle."
Furthermore, Lamb offers an explaination on Kip's lack of cooperation. "The common requirement is being under Kip's control. This is the very reason he is not willing to work among our churches or any other group of churches. Kip was offered to work as a team player with the other brothers, but his response was that he was the star. We must follow God first, not men."
The history and narrative of the Portland Story, according to the majority of key leaders is reintegrated from "a simplistic, misleading and self-advancing way". Here, the Brothers' Statement to Kip McKean, November 2, 2005, mentions: "The Portland response paints [Kip's] resignation in noble colors, something completely inconsistent with what actually took place."
However, the entire Portland leadership viewpoint differs considerably from the major ICOC stakeholders opinion concerning McKean's resignation. They say: "By November 2002 at the Los Angeles Unity Meeting, Kip officially resigned as the World Missions Evangelist, not because he felt he was disqualified for his role, but in an effort to preserve unity between the leaders and the churches. As Kip and others have testified before, the 'irony' of the LA Unity Meeting was that a gathering that was supposed to bring unity, in the end produced widespread disunity. Sadly, all the World Sector Leaders were called to resign. This resulted in the visionary central leadership of the International Churches of Christ being dissolved. It must be noted at this point in time, the ICOC as we knew it ceased to exist."
Whereupon, the second Brothers' letter quickly seized on this opportunity to point out that Portland's "response shows no acknowledgement of the hand of God and our learning from him. The issue is reduced to a discussion of structure and organization. This is the real heart behind what went wrong with our churches in the 1990s. We are glad that the church organization that valued structure over spirituality and maturity has ceased to exist."
The issue about the "dying, former ICOC Churches" is a lie. They stated: "But the church is God's. He is still leading us. He has disciplined us. We are still learning from his discipline. We are seeking his will in how we should work together in the future. This is why there was such unity in forming the Brotherhood Proposal Group. We are glad that God is still working through us as a family of churches called the International Churches of Christ."
Sandwished between these two letters from the Brothers, Portland ponders: "One must pause and ponder as to what has happened to our fellowship of churches during these last four years in the absence of Kip's influence and a central leadership?"
Clearly, the house of Renovation, alias the Portland "discipling" movement emphasise something completely different than the house of Innovation or United Cooperation Group. In February 2003, the principle of “Continual Restoration - Man, Message, Momentum, Maintenance, and Monument” has reached an “unavoidable fork in the road” in the outcome of Kriete’s ‘Honest to God’ letter. Mature Christians no longer think “to work the plan” or “pack a bag, go any where, do anything, give up everything” for the sake of “leaders in the Boston movement.” Rather, mature Christians go by faith “doctrinally and practically" when they have seen the truth in the Scriptures. How shortsighted are those who follow a failed and tried doctrine of “God’s man, Message and Movement.”
Here, the articles of Revolution Through Restoration, Part 1-3; The Mandate of God for World Evangelism series; The Portland Story and Partners in the Gospel Part 1-3 written by Kip McKean do not carry innovative schemes but renovate dreams of God’s ‘former’ modern-day movement a.k.a. the Boston movement better known as the International Churches of Christ.
Clearly this ICOC is dead. It no longer exist. It is gone. But there are others who will fill her shoes. What remains is a divided frontier.
"I am sad", replies Kip in an article entitled A Divided Kingdom, March 2007, "that many of my former colleagues and me continue to be unable to resolve our issues. But as for me and my house, we are serving the Lord and 'moving' on." Elsewhere in the same article he states: "But of this I am sure, I am teaching the same thing 'everywhere in every church' as I have for more than three decades. Therefore, the Portland family of churches has been called the 'Sold-Out Movement,' the 'Portland Movement,' the 'International Christian Church Movement' and my choice, the 'Portland Discipling Movement."
The purpose for this "new movement" is ultra clear when the following question is asked to Kip McKean: "Why have several ICOC Churches disfellowshipped you, the father of faith for all the ICOC Churches, for being divisive?"
Here we must conclude why the dividing years... and who is responsible?
"We in the Portland Discipling Movement are calling out a remnant from the ICOC, the mainline Churches of Christ, the conservative Christian Churches as well as those who have 'walked away' from the ICOC. God is using this rapidly multiplying remnant to form a new movement of churches, which are distinguished by our sold-out commitment to God and our love for one another through discipling. Each disciple's love of Christ compels us to collectively dream of evangelizing the world in this generation. These were our original teachings in 1979 which God used to form the Boston Movement, which officially became the ICOC in 1994. Now we considered divisive, because the present ICOC church leaders no longer fully embrace these teachings. We are not drawing people away from God, but are unapologetically calling everyone to repent of lukewarmness, bitterness and unbelief and return to God as sold-out disciples. Bottom line, the question must be asked to the present leaders of the ICOC, 'Who divided from whom?" Source: Super Bowl Sunday in Las Vegas!
McKean and the Portland Discipling Movement refuse to "draw a line of fellowship. We want there to be a genuine 'bridge of fellowship' to visit our congregations to see what God is doing among us. Daily we pray that more individuals and whole congregations will join us."
Let us note; they themselves don't want to cross over! The reason is simple Old Testament tactics. People defected slowly to David's side! No wonder in every opposing ICOC church group concerned leaders notices "two separate churches trying to please God in different ways." In deed it's becoming all the more "a cloudy situation."
At best the years of dividing will last a long time. The battle will intensifies with the McKean's "move" to the City of Angels International Christian Church.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
The Count Out Years
Seven years have past since the dawn of the new millenium. The first three years - 2001-2002-2003 - were the literal "go down for the count" for the indomitable International Churches of Christ (ICOC). It took only three well directed blows aimed at the World Missions Evangelist to finish off the ICOC structure. But who knocked out who?
The first blow was the Sabbatical in late 2001.
The McKeans oldest child "stopped attending church." She was heiled according to the LA Story 'From Here To Eternity' (August 1999) as "the first of the 2nd generation disciples born, raised and baptized in the movement." The status of the three children of the McKeans were more pronounced than any other "Kingdom kids." They were groomed to "become disciples and leaders in the kingdom;" a "godly offspring". They were the frontrunners for the ICOC youth - Revolution X. In fact, the young Miss McKean (name witheld) is a product from Generation Y. "They", according to 'From Here To Eternity' videotape, August 1999, "represent the renewed emphasis of the Kingdom in the campus and teen ministries, as they lead us into the next generation of disciples."
Nothing of this sort was accomplished when the McKeans oldest child bravely walked away. "This single event", reported Kip McKean.org,"caused uncertainty in McKean's leadership among some of the World Sector Leaders. In the later part of 2001 the World Sector Leaders then forced McKean to go on sabbatical, though some later regretted the decision."
However, Kip and Elena McKean expressed a more honest opinion in their statement released in 11/11/2001. They provide sound reasons for taking a sabbatical, of special note, they view it as "God's will". It read as follows: "During these days, Elena and I have been coming to grips with the need to address some serious shortcomings in our marriage and family. After much counsel with the Gempels and Bairds and other World Sector Leaders as well as hours of prayer, we have decided it is God's will for us to take a sabbatical and to delegate, for a time, our day-to-day ministry responsibilities so that we can focus on our marriage and family."
The consistency issue for ICOC leadership children to remain faithful to God (ICOC) were rigorously applied to the McKean's dilemma. This legalistic requirement instituted by Kip derailed relationships between himself and some upper class leaders who were in "sin" because their children no longer fellowship with the ICOC (God). In due time, the McKeans were forced "to address some serious shortcomings in [their] marriage and family" after the McKeans oldest child "stopped attending church." Their sabbatical were announced with two written statements: one by the McKeans; and another by World Sector Leaders Al Baird and Bob Gempel on November 11, 2001.
The second blow was the Announcement in late 2002.
Kip McKean's resignation on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 did not only technically paved the way for a new beginning for church polity in the ICOC, but more so, caused a scandal! Kip's hypocrisy aghasted friend and foe alike. The "shortcomings" were serious. Simply put, McKean pretended to be a disciple.
Kip's "character sins" led to his resignation. It was unavoidable, therefore a personal decision. "I have decided to resign from my role as World Missions Evangelist and leader of the world sector leaders." At the time, Kip did the right thing - he stepped down because of his personal "character sins". Nothing more sinister than that. There was no plot, no take-over, no threats and above else no "forced" resignation!
Kip admitted to arrogance. "God through His Word, through circumstances and through true brothers has made it clear that my leadership in recent years has damaged both the Kingdom and my family. My most significant sin is arrogance - thinking I am always right, not listening to the counsel of my brothers, and not seeking discipling for my life, ministry and family. I have not followed Jesus' example of humility in leadership."
Kip also admitted to anger . "Other sins manifested themselves through my anger. My anger has often shut people down and, worse yet, fostered an environment where people were afraid to speak up."
Kip was never a team player. "Additionally, I failed to build strong, mutually helpful relationships. I did not respect those whose leadership gifts could have complemented my own."
Kip manifested typical symptoms found in Diotrephes - who loves to be first (3 John 9). "I was insensitive to the needs of weaker Christians and churches. I also caused some to operate from wrong motives and other to stumble because I focused more on numeric goals than on pleasing God. To my shame I allowed myself to be glorified more than calling everyone to give God all the glory."
Kip's Resignation Letter briefly touched on future plans for a "new governance." He stated: "A new governance is being discussed and formed by the world sector leaders and other leading evangelists, elders and teachers. I shall give them my full support as they strive to follow the Scriptures and the principles of our Father in heaven." Perhaps, purely from a speculative point of view. This was McKean's final official proclamation, until mid 2003 McKean writes to oppose the new direction of the ICOC in 'Revolution Through Restoration Part 3: From Babylon to Zion.'
The final blow was the Decentralization of the ICOC in late 2002.
It merits to revisit McKean's thoughts on this matter. Almost five years ago - Kip asked for prayers and guidance during his resignation. But quickly changed his mind in supporting the "new direction"! In his letter of resignation McKean asked: "Please pray for me that someday these tears, which are no longer shed in self-pity but because I have hurt God and His people, will give birth to a joyous harvest of righteousness."
Today, every one involved with the ICOC can vouched this day is still long off!
Kip McKean.org tries to shed some inside perspectives regarding what actually happened at the Resignation. Here, the World Sector Leaders are first portrayed as the culprits who "forced McKean to go on sabbatical, though some later regretted the decision." Then we are told during the sabbatical period, "the most influential leaders in the International Church of Christ became the 'Kingdom Teachers' and the 'Kingdom Elders'." These secondary groups "influenced the rest of the leaders of the ICOC at the Long Beach Unity Meeting, November 2002, to dissolve the structured, central leadership." They "forced" McKean and all the World Sector Leaders "to resign". To an innocent bystander it sounds just like a mutiny, a take-over! On the other hand how unbelievable when we compare Kip McKean's carefully drafted documents regarding his sabbatical and resignation with these revisionist propoganda on Kip McKean.org! Did he not state before? "A new governance is being discussed and formed by the world sector leaders and other leading evangelists, elders and teachers."
Clearly the ICOC leadership with or without McKean's prior-knowledge have experienced a change of heart regarding the concept of church polity (church rule). A document 'ICOC Unity Conference' (November 15, 2002) shed some light concerning the mood in which the "humble resignation of our world missions evangelist" and the "decision to dissolve the world sector leaders group" come about. "The first night of our meeting we had a powerful worship service of singing, scripture reading, and prayer. This set the tone for the humble and apologetic resignation of our world missions evangelist." The leadership shake-up has effectively done away with the popular watchword "God's man, message and movement." Before, so much emphasis was on Kip McKean. These attributes have persuaded many critics that the ICOC is a cult despite being believers in leadership. The termination of having a form of positional authority in the ICOC have done away with the role - world missions evangelist - the role - world sector leader - and subsequently the role - geographic sector leader. Ultimately, these decisions stripped away the elemetary role - bible talk leader. All these titles were drafted by Kip McKean. The mastermind behind these schemes.
"This reaction", according to Kip McKean.org, "produced a reactionary 'new vision' of autonomous congregations, consensus leadership with no lead evangelists, the elimination of structured outreach (Bible Talks) and the elimination of discipleship partners." The ICOC "lost its distinctiveness and identity." Most importantly the organization was not ready to steer the ship unaccustomed into unfamiliar waters without a rudder! For the first time ever, McKean was not recognised as the sole arbiter of orthodoxy in the ICOC. This drastic action was to be repeated during the September 2005 Seattle Leadership Conference. "Several key decisions made at this meeting," states McKean.org "went against the basic convictions of Kip McKean, the Boston Movement's founder."
The "new era of leadership for the kingdom" was a dramatic breakaway from the former leadership model since 1988. Kip McKean appointed in 1988 his "chosen few" as World Sector Leaders. Six years later, Geographic Sector Leaders were appointed. The former leadership model relied on an oppresive authoritarian tactics as observed in McKean's letter of Resignation. McKean was surrounded by "fallible men" serving as Kip's "focused few" in the role of World Sector Leaders who had relied on a system where "one official is eyed by a higher one, and over them both are others higher still (Ecc 5:8 NIV)." As a unit they could tap into huge Kingdom resources available on their finger tips. The rest of the membership worked the plan and provided the much needed Kingdom cash to finance it. But a new dispensation of "spirit of unity, teamwork, and consensus" overruled all that. It apparantly took the Holy Spirit only 36 hours, according to the 'ICOC Unity Conference' document, in order to transform the former 23-year pyramidal system, also institutionalize by God, into a brand new system of church rule. No wonder because of this absurdness, thousands later jumped ship!
The doctrine of autonomy has clearly struck a nerve. It was never addressed as such by name. The right of self-rule were never properly addressed. This concept of having "a right of self-government" is totally foreign to any members of the former ICOC. According to Henry Kriete's article: "Local church autonomy is practically viewed as heresey."
Furthermore, the ICOC fast becoming an unstable vessel. The dramatic plunge occured two months after the Long Beach Unity Meeting in February 2003 after Kriete releases a letter, entitled 'Honest to God'. By now the colossus of Episode 1 was down... but not out! No official mentioning was made about Kip McKean other than promised "a full-time ministry position with the South Region of the Los Angeles International Church of Christ." Or the rumour to "go back to the Third World and spend [their] remaining years there."
But who knocked out who?
It's too early to reveal the scorecard. Technically, McKean should be down... but he is not out!
The first blow was the Sabbatical in late 2001.
The McKeans oldest child "stopped attending church." She was heiled according to the LA Story 'From Here To Eternity' (August 1999) as "the first of the 2nd generation disciples born, raised and baptized in the movement." The status of the three children of the McKeans were more pronounced than any other "Kingdom kids." They were groomed to "become disciples and leaders in the kingdom;" a "godly offspring". They were the frontrunners for the ICOC youth - Revolution X. In fact, the young Miss McKean (name witheld) is a product from Generation Y. "They", according to 'From Here To Eternity' videotape, August 1999, "represent the renewed emphasis of the Kingdom in the campus and teen ministries, as they lead us into the next generation of disciples."
Nothing of this sort was accomplished when the McKeans oldest child bravely walked away. "This single event", reported Kip McKean.org,"caused uncertainty in McKean's leadership among some of the World Sector Leaders. In the later part of 2001 the World Sector Leaders then forced McKean to go on sabbatical, though some later regretted the decision."
However, Kip and Elena McKean expressed a more honest opinion in their statement released in 11/11/2001. They provide sound reasons for taking a sabbatical, of special note, they view it as "God's will". It read as follows: "During these days, Elena and I have been coming to grips with the need to address some serious shortcomings in our marriage and family. After much counsel with the Gempels and Bairds and other World Sector Leaders as well as hours of prayer, we have decided it is God's will for us to take a sabbatical and to delegate, for a time, our day-to-day ministry responsibilities so that we can focus on our marriage and family."
The consistency issue for ICOC leadership children to remain faithful to God (ICOC) were rigorously applied to the McKean's dilemma. This legalistic requirement instituted by Kip derailed relationships between himself and some upper class leaders who were in "sin" because their children no longer fellowship with the ICOC (God). In due time, the McKeans were forced "to address some serious shortcomings in [their] marriage and family" after the McKeans oldest child "stopped attending church." Their sabbatical were announced with two written statements: one by the McKeans; and another by World Sector Leaders Al Baird and Bob Gempel on November 11, 2001.
The second blow was the Announcement in late 2002.
Kip McKean's resignation on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 did not only technically paved the way for a new beginning for church polity in the ICOC, but more so, caused a scandal! Kip's hypocrisy aghasted friend and foe alike. The "shortcomings" were serious. Simply put, McKean pretended to be a disciple.
Kip's "character sins" led to his resignation. It was unavoidable, therefore a personal decision. "I have decided to resign from my role as World Missions Evangelist and leader of the world sector leaders." At the time, Kip did the right thing - he stepped down because of his personal "character sins". Nothing more sinister than that. There was no plot, no take-over, no threats and above else no "forced" resignation!
Kip admitted to arrogance. "God through His Word, through circumstances and through true brothers has made it clear that my leadership in recent years has damaged both the Kingdom and my family. My most significant sin is arrogance - thinking I am always right, not listening to the counsel of my brothers, and not seeking discipling for my life, ministry and family. I have not followed Jesus' example of humility in leadership."
Kip also admitted to anger . "Other sins manifested themselves through my anger. My anger has often shut people down and, worse yet, fostered an environment where people were afraid to speak up."
Kip was never a team player. "Additionally, I failed to build strong, mutually helpful relationships. I did not respect those whose leadership gifts could have complemented my own."
Kip manifested typical symptoms found in Diotrephes - who loves to be first (3 John 9). "I was insensitive to the needs of weaker Christians and churches. I also caused some to operate from wrong motives and other to stumble because I focused more on numeric goals than on pleasing God. To my shame I allowed myself to be glorified more than calling everyone to give God all the glory."
Kip's Resignation Letter briefly touched on future plans for a "new governance." He stated: "A new governance is being discussed and formed by the world sector leaders and other leading evangelists, elders and teachers. I shall give them my full support as they strive to follow the Scriptures and the principles of our Father in heaven." Perhaps, purely from a speculative point of view. This was McKean's final official proclamation, until mid 2003 McKean writes to oppose the new direction of the ICOC in 'Revolution Through Restoration Part 3: From Babylon to Zion.'
The final blow was the Decentralization of the ICOC in late 2002.
It merits to revisit McKean's thoughts on this matter. Almost five years ago - Kip asked for prayers and guidance during his resignation. But quickly changed his mind in supporting the "new direction"! In his letter of resignation McKean asked: "Please pray for me that someday these tears, which are no longer shed in self-pity but because I have hurt God and His people, will give birth to a joyous harvest of righteousness."
Today, every one involved with the ICOC can vouched this day is still long off!
Kip McKean.org tries to shed some inside perspectives regarding what actually happened at the Resignation. Here, the World Sector Leaders are first portrayed as the culprits who "forced McKean to go on sabbatical, though some later regretted the decision." Then we are told during the sabbatical period, "the most influential leaders in the International Church of Christ became the 'Kingdom Teachers' and the 'Kingdom Elders'." These secondary groups "influenced the rest of the leaders of the ICOC at the Long Beach Unity Meeting, November 2002, to dissolve the structured, central leadership." They "forced" McKean and all the World Sector Leaders "to resign". To an innocent bystander it sounds just like a mutiny, a take-over! On the other hand how unbelievable when we compare Kip McKean's carefully drafted documents regarding his sabbatical and resignation with these revisionist propoganda on Kip McKean.org! Did he not state before? "A new governance is being discussed and formed by the world sector leaders and other leading evangelists, elders and teachers."
Clearly the ICOC leadership with or without McKean's prior-knowledge have experienced a change of heart regarding the concept of church polity (church rule). A document 'ICOC Unity Conference' (November 15, 2002) shed some light concerning the mood in which the "humble resignation of our world missions evangelist" and the "decision to dissolve the world sector leaders group" come about. "The first night of our meeting we had a powerful worship service of singing, scripture reading, and prayer. This set the tone for the humble and apologetic resignation of our world missions evangelist." The leadership shake-up has effectively done away with the popular watchword "God's man, message and movement." Before, so much emphasis was on Kip McKean. These attributes have persuaded many critics that the ICOC is a cult despite being believers in leadership. The termination of having a form of positional authority in the ICOC have done away with the role - world missions evangelist - the role - world sector leader - and subsequently the role - geographic sector leader. Ultimately, these decisions stripped away the elemetary role - bible talk leader. All these titles were drafted by Kip McKean. The mastermind behind these schemes.
"This reaction", according to Kip McKean.org, "produced a reactionary 'new vision' of autonomous congregations, consensus leadership with no lead evangelists, the elimination of structured outreach (Bible Talks) and the elimination of discipleship partners." The ICOC "lost its distinctiveness and identity." Most importantly the organization was not ready to steer the ship unaccustomed into unfamiliar waters without a rudder! For the first time ever, McKean was not recognised as the sole arbiter of orthodoxy in the ICOC. This drastic action was to be repeated during the September 2005 Seattle Leadership Conference. "Several key decisions made at this meeting," states McKean.org "went against the basic convictions of Kip McKean, the Boston Movement's founder."
The "new era of leadership for the kingdom" was a dramatic breakaway from the former leadership model since 1988. Kip McKean appointed in 1988 his "chosen few" as World Sector Leaders. Six years later, Geographic Sector Leaders were appointed. The former leadership model relied on an oppresive authoritarian tactics as observed in McKean's letter of Resignation. McKean was surrounded by "fallible men" serving as Kip's "focused few" in the role of World Sector Leaders who had relied on a system where "one official is eyed by a higher one, and over them both are others higher still (Ecc 5:8 NIV)." As a unit they could tap into huge Kingdom resources available on their finger tips. The rest of the membership worked the plan and provided the much needed Kingdom cash to finance it. But a new dispensation of "spirit of unity, teamwork, and consensus" overruled all that. It apparantly took the Holy Spirit only 36 hours, according to the 'ICOC Unity Conference' document, in order to transform the former 23-year pyramidal system, also institutionalize by God, into a brand new system of church rule. No wonder because of this absurdness, thousands later jumped ship!
The doctrine of autonomy has clearly struck a nerve. It was never addressed as such by name. The right of self-rule were never properly addressed. This concept of having "a right of self-government" is totally foreign to any members of the former ICOC. According to Henry Kriete's article: "Local church autonomy is practically viewed as heresey."
Furthermore, the ICOC fast becoming an unstable vessel. The dramatic plunge occured two months after the Long Beach Unity Meeting in February 2003 after Kriete releases a letter, entitled 'Honest to God'. By now the colossus of Episode 1 was down... but not out! No official mentioning was made about Kip McKean other than promised "a full-time ministry position with the South Region of the Los Angeles International Church of Christ." Or the rumour to "go back to the Third World and spend [their] remaining years there."
But who knocked out who?
It's too early to reveal the scorecard. Technically, McKean should be down... but he is not out!
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Best Quote of the Week
"We in the Portland Discipling Movement are calling out a remnant from the ICOC, the mainline Churches of Christ, the conservative Christian Churches as well as those who have “walked away” from the ICOC. God is using this rapidly multiplying remnant to form a new movement of churches, which are distinguished by our sold-out commitment to God and our love for one another though discipling." - Kip McKean (February 2007)
Also. "The Portland Leadership sees itself as a restoration movement within the former ICOC churches." Click here to read 'The Portland Movement' article on Kip's official website
Also. "The Portland Leadership sees itself as a restoration movement within the former ICOC churches." Click here to read 'The Portland Movement' article on Kip's official website
Friday, February 09, 2007
Next article: "Your contribution" on the ICOC
Commentary is free - below are some pointers for my next article. If you want to contribute drop me an email. I can read Afrikaans / English and with some help: Dutch / French and German. Lets see if we can post an article by end February 2007.
A lack of understanding - a nation falls. No one can ever accurately guess how many tens of thousands of people have left this organisation overtime. Nevertheless, the revolving door always welcomes new faces - no matter who is coming or going - and at best what they teach from the pulpit. The majority of ICOC elders, evangelists, people in leadership roles have not a degree or diploma in theology! Does it matter?
The disciple approach - dismantled for a short time in the history of the ICOC since 2003 is fast becoming a popular methodology within the ICOC. Why did the majority of the ICOC never revert to the traditional Church of Christ viewpoint on this matter? For example; who is paying attention to Roy Davison's lesson on "Errors of Hierarchical Discipleship"? How liberated are the "new lot" concerning the disciple approach? Does one need to be a disciple before baptism? Date and marry only ICOC disciples? Fellowshipping only with the ICOC disciples? Is salvation found only with the ICOC disciples?
Is there a difference - what is different from Kip McKean's Boston movement a.k.a. the ICOC and his newly founded Portland movement? Do they offer newcomers a choice in style of worship/doctrine? Which church is the Temple? Which fellowship is more sacred? Who worship in spirit and truth? Who is to blame for our divisions? McKean? Kriete? Our brain dead "followship"?
The Church of Christ - heritage goes back much further than the Campbells and Stone "founders"- as a matter of fact - this church group believe their origin begins with the day of Pentecost in Acts 2:42! Is this form of transference literal or spiritual? What about the "denominational churches"? On the other hand, Catholics belief in their Pope's lineage - all the way to the apostle Peter!? How should one view the traditional Church of Christ claim based on Acts 2:42? What did the former ICOC believe to this regard? Moreso, will the "new" Unity Cooperation Group and the "new" Portland movement avoid the Acts 2:42 blunder? Is it a blunder?
What's your questions?
Commentary is free.
A lack of understanding - a nation falls. No one can ever accurately guess how many tens of thousands of people have left this organisation overtime. Nevertheless, the revolving door always welcomes new faces - no matter who is coming or going - and at best what they teach from the pulpit. The majority of ICOC elders, evangelists, people in leadership roles have not a degree or diploma in theology! Does it matter?
The disciple approach - dismantled for a short time in the history of the ICOC since 2003 is fast becoming a popular methodology within the ICOC. Why did the majority of the ICOC never revert to the traditional Church of Christ viewpoint on this matter? For example; who is paying attention to Roy Davison's lesson on "Errors of Hierarchical Discipleship"? How liberated are the "new lot" concerning the disciple approach? Does one need to be a disciple before baptism? Date and marry only ICOC disciples? Fellowshipping only with the ICOC disciples? Is salvation found only with the ICOC disciples?
Is there a difference - what is different from Kip McKean's Boston movement a.k.a. the ICOC and his newly founded Portland movement? Do they offer newcomers a choice in style of worship/doctrine? Which church is the Temple? Which fellowship is more sacred? Who worship in spirit and truth? Who is to blame for our divisions? McKean? Kriete? Our brain dead "followship"?
The Church of Christ - heritage goes back much further than the Campbells and Stone "founders"- as a matter of fact - this church group believe their origin begins with the day of Pentecost in Acts 2:42! Is this form of transference literal or spiritual? What about the "denominational churches"? On the other hand, Catholics belief in their Pope's lineage - all the way to the apostle Peter!? How should one view the traditional Church of Christ claim based on Acts 2:42? What did the former ICOC believe to this regard? Moreso, will the "new" Unity Cooperation Group and the "new" Portland movement avoid the Acts 2:42 blunder? Is it a blunder?
What's your questions?
Commentary is free.
Sunday, February 04, 2007
Holy crumbs! Portland is a Movement!
Jesus said: "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs." Whereupon, the Canaanite woman replied: "Yes, Lord, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from the master's table."
The new year - 2007 - is well under way. New agendas await for those dining on the long extendible table of the once-unified-ICOC and those dogs snatching at the crumbs underneath it. I am a bottom feeder. What's happening on top is only news when bits and pieces fly off the topside into my mouth. Honestly, I am very happy with the crumbs! However, when dogs like myself bite back, the master's table is quick to reply: "You only fight our dust!"
Jesus, at the time, considered it wasteful in order to deliberately entertain dogs - the act of tossing bread - rather than the child starved through neglect. And those doggies were the non-Jews of his time! They were not considered "family". However, the Canaanite woman, was aware that even the crumbs are holy! When it mingled with dirt on the floor or saliva of other hungry competitors under the table - it didn't matter - the crumbs were holy!
So what do I make of the scrap?
It's official in my humble opinion - since feeding of the crumbs, starting this blog a year ago, that the PORTLAND MOVEMENT is an official term for the Portland family of churches, also described here, as the House of Renovation. Kip McKean made that announcement in his article: A Modern Day Jethro. "Truly, there is so much good news to report concerning the PORTLAND MOVEMENT OF CHURCHES." [4th February 2007] Furthermore, Kip McKean has an official website [www.kipmckean.org] which, now describes the Portland family of churches as the PORTLAND MOVEMENT. Their aim is summarised as follows from McKean's official website regarding the PORTLAND MOVEMENT: "McKean and the other leaders of the Portland Movement saw a tremendous wave of evangelism sweep the world in the days of the Boston Movement (ICOC). Their conviction is to learn from the past and to build a church growth movement that will far surpass any of the previous efforts of the ICOC."
I think it is very signifigant, because again in my humble opinion, McKean is the only person that can bring about reconciliation in the family of the once-unified-ICOC. No other former ICOC leader has achieved by himself what Kip has done regarding tearing down relationships and re-building new friends on a scale his life demonstrates persisting with the message of the disciple approach. Perhaps it is Kip's intention "to rebuild the churches", but never again will the ICOC be put back together again. The lesson of Humpty Dumpty: All the kings horses and all the kings men could never put back together Humpty Dumpty again.
It is now a matter of attitude. Those of us under the table will assuredly be fed from the table top like never before when McKean and his millenium friends move down this coming April to L.A. If he is not settled to unify or "keep bridges there" meaning to act in a role as an appeaser to those long-forgotten associates in L.A. ICOC then heaven help us! This trip definitely is all to familiar whith the 1990 Boston trip to L.A. but with a twist! Back then, in the Boston days, in their opinion there was in that great city no "God's fellow-workers". Today, it is a different ball game. If so much memories swamped McKean's mind in his recent visit to the University of Florida football stadium then Kip will surely choke on his oatmeal reaching L.A! On the other hand, it seems his move seems like a sort of demonstration of will. Perhaps a contest. The former L.A. church will rise from the metaphorical ashes. Here we'll see the former World Missions Evangelist of a bygone era in Episode 1 rise to the occasion doing exactly what he has done before in the capacity of World Mission Evangelist now as the proud bearer of that title in the Portland Movement.
So how can Kip possibly improve his attitude and bring about reconciliation?
Impossible. If unchanged, he'll remain a contemptible person in 2007.
If we can return to Jesus' story. The crumbs that fell merely from the table or from the childrens mouth fed faith! The Canaanite woman not only benefitted for herself, but her daughter was healed from that very hour when the Holy Crumb, filled up her empty room. Jesus also said: "In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you."
As Gentiles, let us not fight each other for the crumbs on the dirty floor. Like dogs, snarling, biting and devouring each other whole. What do we achieve by eating flesh and blood? If we feast on tables, let us not make light of the Bread of Life. Let us consider the mere fact of a Holy Crumb. It can raise life through FAITH!
In conclusion. If your are not part of the "ICOC family" or if you are part of a "new movement" or established one - does your faith heal or does it send people away? What is happening in your very hour?
The new year - 2007 - is well under way. New agendas await for those dining on the long extendible table of the once-unified-ICOC and those dogs snatching at the crumbs underneath it. I am a bottom feeder. What's happening on top is only news when bits and pieces fly off the topside into my mouth. Honestly, I am very happy with the crumbs! However, when dogs like myself bite back, the master's table is quick to reply: "You only fight our dust!"
Jesus, at the time, considered it wasteful in order to deliberately entertain dogs - the act of tossing bread - rather than the child starved through neglect. And those doggies were the non-Jews of his time! They were not considered "family". However, the Canaanite woman, was aware that even the crumbs are holy! When it mingled with dirt on the floor or saliva of other hungry competitors under the table - it didn't matter - the crumbs were holy!
So what do I make of the scrap?
It's official in my humble opinion - since feeding of the crumbs, starting this blog a year ago, that the PORTLAND MOVEMENT is an official term for the Portland family of churches, also described here, as the House of Renovation. Kip McKean made that announcement in his article: A Modern Day Jethro. "Truly, there is so much good news to report concerning the PORTLAND MOVEMENT OF CHURCHES." [4th February 2007] Furthermore, Kip McKean has an official website [www.kipmckean.org] which, now describes the Portland family of churches as the PORTLAND MOVEMENT. Their aim is summarised as follows from McKean's official website regarding the PORTLAND MOVEMENT: "McKean and the other leaders of the Portland Movement saw a tremendous wave of evangelism sweep the world in the days of the Boston Movement (ICOC). Their conviction is to learn from the past and to build a church growth movement that will far surpass any of the previous efforts of the ICOC."
I think it is very signifigant, because again in my humble opinion, McKean is the only person that can bring about reconciliation in the family of the once-unified-ICOC. No other former ICOC leader has achieved by himself what Kip has done regarding tearing down relationships and re-building new friends on a scale his life demonstrates persisting with the message of the disciple approach. Perhaps it is Kip's intention "to rebuild the churches", but never again will the ICOC be put back together again. The lesson of Humpty Dumpty: All the kings horses and all the kings men could never put back together Humpty Dumpty again.
It is now a matter of attitude. Those of us under the table will assuredly be fed from the table top like never before when McKean and his millenium friends move down this coming April to L.A. If he is not settled to unify or "keep bridges there" meaning to act in a role as an appeaser to those long-forgotten associates in L.A. ICOC then heaven help us! This trip definitely is all to familiar whith the 1990 Boston trip to L.A. but with a twist! Back then, in the Boston days, in their opinion there was in that great city no "God's fellow-workers". Today, it is a different ball game. If so much memories swamped McKean's mind in his recent visit to the University of Florida football stadium then Kip will surely choke on his oatmeal reaching L.A! On the other hand, it seems his move seems like a sort of demonstration of will. Perhaps a contest. The former L.A. church will rise from the metaphorical ashes. Here we'll see the former World Missions Evangelist of a bygone era in Episode 1 rise to the occasion doing exactly what he has done before in the capacity of World Mission Evangelist now as the proud bearer of that title in the Portland Movement.
So how can Kip possibly improve his attitude and bring about reconciliation?
Impossible. If unchanged, he'll remain a contemptible person in 2007.
If we can return to Jesus' story. The crumbs that fell merely from the table or from the childrens mouth fed faith! The Canaanite woman not only benefitted for herself, but her daughter was healed from that very hour when the Holy Crumb, filled up her empty room. Jesus also said: "In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you."
As Gentiles, let us not fight each other for the crumbs on the dirty floor. Like dogs, snarling, biting and devouring each other whole. What do we achieve by eating flesh and blood? If we feast on tables, let us not make light of the Bread of Life. Let us consider the mere fact of a Holy Crumb. It can raise life through FAITH!
In conclusion. If your are not part of the "ICOC family" or if you are part of a "new movement" or established one - does your faith heal or does it send people away? What is happening in your very hour?
Friday, December 15, 2006
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Married to the Mob?
Henry Kriete has exposed many fallacies of the International Churches of Christ (ICOC) in his long forgotten letter, ‘Honest to God: Revolution Through Repentance and Freedom in Christ’ (February 2nd 2003), but not a word was said about “the romantic and marriage relationships of Christians” within the ICOC. Many outsiders are unaware of the complex of the wall ICOC rules concerning the intimate aspects of male-female, husband-wife relationships.
This issue of dating and marriage will become the ultimate storm that will bring more heartbreak to this divided Christian community more than any other doctrinal matter since Kriete’s Letter. In general, prolific ICOC leadership in both camps gives the impression on the topic of relationships that they have “cross a line from genuine shepherding to control.”
“Where there’s an intrusion”, according to Ron Enroth, “into the personal lives of parishioners in the name of God, in the name of shepherding, you begin to move in a direction that I think is unhealthy.” The new reformed groups of the former ICOC have done that since May 2005 and March 2006.
The policy on dating and marriage, for the most part, remains like this: ‘A disciple marries a disciple’. Therefore since we can “marry only disciples (2 Cor 6:14, 1 Cor 7:39), it stands to reason that we should date only disciples. Dating non-Christians messes motives up our motives and theirs, and is extremely unwise.” – Shining Like Stars, ii Edition, 1990, Lesson 9: Counting the Cost, p234/316.
Unfortunately, I do not possess, the latest edition on Shining Like Stars. I doubt very much if anything has changed to this regard since 1990.
The question is can these splinter groups of the former era accommodate a future for youngsters? May (ICOC) members, since the awakening of the worldwide ICOC fellowship, marry other Christians, who do not share the same convictions? For example, would the respected family of churches in the ICOC, in practice, forbid intermarriage between a Presbyterian, Methodists or Roman Catholic? And if so, why?
Marrying a Christian is correctly argued from Scripture. Christians must marry only Christians (1 Corinthians 7:39). However, some family of churches in the post-HKL era compromised the organisation’s ideal of marrying only ICOC members – whereupon Kip McKean retaliated by asking in his article, entitled ‘The Honor of God’ (May 2005): “What should we do in our worldwide fellowship of churches?”
Kip stated [emphasis mine]: “Of consideration even the Catholics teach you should MARRY ONLY CATHOLICS, the Mormons believe in ONLY MARRYING MORMONS, and the Muslims have been known to kill a Muslim that DOES NOT MARRY A MUSLIM. Though these groups do not follow the Scriptures’ teaching on salvation, they understand THE CONCEPT OF MARRIAGE in relation to “their view” of “God’s people”. Are Jesus’ TRUE DISCIPLES to be less convicted?”
This means, in a roundabout way, “true disciples” like those fellowshipping with the Portland family of churches (The Portland movement) might not marry Christians in other groups who do not share an equal understanding regarding “their view” on the concept of marriage. On the other hand, “true disciples” who fellowship with the “International family of churches” (United Cooperation Group) might not marry those in McKean’s “new movement”? Who is exactly less convicted?
Nevertheless, the United Cooperation Group, in their document since March 11th 2006, shares McKean’s convictions on marriage. “With holiness in mind, the romantic and marriage relationships of Christians are to be pursued with ONLY THOSE who “belong to the Lord” as defined by Scriptures (2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1, 1 Corinthians 7:39).”
What exactly will these families of churches teach youngsters on “romantic relationships and marriage”? It is my opinion that both groups will revert to former ICOC doctrine – marrying only “in the mob”. The frightening consideration of this “concept of marriage” is three fold. If we; number one, allow people to “marry only in the mob”, then we; number two, say we are the “one true church” and therefore; number three, the “only biblically saved”!
In the post-HKL era, Enroth’s outlook on unhealthy abuse by leadership by intruding “into the personal lives of parishioners in the name of God, in the name of shepherding” has materialised during the Seattle September 2005 leadership conference. Here, we have evidence to what extend the marriage concept can lead people to trust. Mike Taliaferro, one of the nine brothers selected to serve with the Unity Proposal Group, together with Chris Ogbonnaya shared a lesson entitled, Pulling Your Church Together.
Here, Taliaferro, during his lesson “cross a line from genuine shepherding to control.”
He said: “…we began to call people back to decisions, and we did it one by one. We called the church back to discipling relationships. We called the church back to sacrificial giving… We made that decision. We resurrected church discipline… We confronted people that were divisive; some of them left the church. We resurrected confession of sin in the church… We reminded people of their commitment to all the services… Who’s lost, who’s saved – we had a talk about it.”
But more importantly, on the topic of marriage/church/salvation, Chris Ogbonnaya, shows how it is done to intrude “into the personal lives of parishioners in the name of God.”
Here, Chris expanded on the idea of Mike “Who’s lost, who’s saved” in the same lesson by stating: “WE CANNOT MARRY A NON-CHRISTIAN. WE’RE NOT GOING TO HAVE MARRIAGES BETWEEN US AND A CATHOLIC. You want to do that, hey, you’re welcome as A VISITOR. We had to do it… Is this authority? I say, ‘Yes’. It’s authority, and IT’S AUTHORITY THAT WE HAVE FROM GOD AS LEADERS, to pull ourselves together, so that the church can march forward.”
Clearly, the bible teaches against marrying a non-Christian. However, I wonder if Chris toyed with the idea that Christians in the Roman Catholic Church are condemned? But I will give him the benefit of my doubt.
Which brings us to the next question: who belongs to the Lord?
Kip McKean rightly points to other religious groups (notice the strong presence of established cults) that forbid their members to marry outside their particular group even to the point of death. However, this inclusive viewpoint leads only to the belief in being the “one true church”. It is a form of spiritual apartheid.
If “romantic and marriage relationships of Christians” in the ICOC congregations become regulated, then we need to know how they perceive other Christian groups outside their particular “view”. Clearly, Chris Ogbonnaya’s viewpoint is extreme: “WE’RE NOT GOING TO HAVE MARRIAGES BETWEEN US AND A CATHOLIC. You want to do that, hey, you’re welcome as A VISITOR.”
What does the New Testament teach on marriage between Christians? Here young people who are on the verge to join the former ICOC family of churches need to consult the Scriptures without interference from them. Youngsters need to go back to their parents, families, friends and pastors before getting baptised in either former ICOC “family of churches”.
The Apostle Paul made several contributions on the topic of marriage as requested by the Corinthians. Here individuals are free to choose who they want to marry, but they must belong to the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:39). If an individual becomes a Christian while the other is not, and the non-Christian partner wants to leave, it is allowed. However, individuals in the Lord may not divorce. If they divorce they are not permitted to marry other individuals. It is permitted for such a couple to get back together. Individuals are free to marry anyone in the Lord after a death of a spouse.
Let us note: The Apostle Paul’s advise on “the romantic and marriage relationships of Christians” makes no distinction between “all the churches”. The same rule applies to all. (1 Corinthians 7:17) Perhaps not entirely to the Jerusalem Church (Acts 21:21). Here the Jewish traditions and customs of the elders as observed in the Jerusalem church would not tolerate Jewish marriages with Gentiles. However, the Apostle made it very clear that we all belong to the Lord. “You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men.” (1 Corinthians 7:23 NIV)
In his time some “forbid people to marry” (1 Timothy 4:3). In later times some forbid people to marry if they’re not in the same church group! The Roman Catholic Church policy was marrying only Catholics.
Today “slaves of men” favours one church group over another. Many Christian groups do not include a subsequent step that members MUST EMBRACE DISCIPLESHIP. Therefore this pre-requisite for the ICOC fellowship enforces “romantic and marriage relationships of Christians” in the Portland movement and United Cooperation Group to observe a type of “slaves of men” rule: “marrying only ICOC members”. If this rule is not applicable, people in the ICOC are free to choose whomever they want to “marry in the Lord” no matter what “Christian” that belongs to a biblically converted affiliation.
So where do they stand?
Many ICOC leaders TEACH AGAINST a disciple marrying someone who did not have these same convictions on embracing discipleship. However, these teachers, for now, will NOT FORBID a disciple from marrying a “biblically converted Christian in another group.”
Let us consider former rules of a bygone era in Episode 1. If we; number one, allow people to marry only in “the mob”, then we; number two, say we are the “one true church” and therefore; number three, the “only biblically saved”!
For your benefit, here are the former rules of marrying to the mob in a bygone era.
Number one.
A South African ICOC study guide, known as ‘Equipping Syllabus’ teaches, “Jesus is Lord of our Dating Life or Marriage” according to implication five:
e. Implication 5: Lord of our Dating Life or Marriage
“Marry only a Christian – obviously will marry someone you date, therefore best to date only disciples. (Exception: an existing dating relationship. Handle with care and wisdom, Not a must to break up – a must to stop sin, if any, and a must to discipline it and a must to make a decision that if a person is not really interested in becoming a Christian or is pulling person down spiritually, will break it off immediately. 1 Corinthians 7:39 – must marry in the Lord – no double standards between first and second marriage.”
Internationally, this teaching is encouraged since the early 1990’s with Douglas Jacoby’s multi-authored book, “Shining Like Stars,” ii edition, 1990.
“Marry a Christian! (2 Cor 6:14ff, 1 Cor 7:39)” – Shining Like Stars, ii Edition, 1990, Study 12: Christian Marriage: Cord of Three Strands, p.258/316.
“Dating and marriage”
a) Since we can marry only disciples (2 Cor 6:14, 1 Cor 7:39), it stands to reason that we should date only disciples.
b) Dating non-Christians messes motives up our motives and theirs, and is extremely unwise.” – Shining Like Stars, ii Edition, 1990, Lesson 9: Counting the Cost, p234/316.
Number two.
A South African ICOC study guide, known as ‘Equipping Syllabus’ teaches, “Jesus is Lord of One Church” according to implication four:
d. Implication 4: Lord of One Church
“Ephesians 4:4 – only those who are scriptural Christians are members of the true church. Church of Christ – only major group I know that baptizes those willing to be disciples for the forgiveness of sins.”
Internationally, this teaching is encouraged since the early 1990’s with Douglas Jacoby’s multi-authored book, ‘Shining Like Stars,’ ii edition, 1990.
6) New Testament Church
a) Explain that we must attend only a church, which follows the Bible.
e) Make sure he understands that it is not God’s will for him to attend any other church.
Number three.
A South African ICOC study guide, known as ‘Equipping Syllabus’ teaches, “Jesus is Lord and Savior of only the Biblically Saved” according to implication three:
c. Implication 3: Lord and Savior of only Biblically Saved
Must have deep convictions of who is lost and who is saved. You are lost (person you are studying with). Others like you are lost – family, friends, old church friends, etc.
Church groups do “differ in their doctrines”. However, the ICOC makes damning statements towards other church groups by stating they are false churches, teaching false doctrine, thus not biblically saved.
Back Tracking [An A4 sheet ‘back tracks’ issues before a prospective member “counts the cost” to become a disciple in the ICOC]
False Doctrines & Denominations
- Is it wrong to baptise babies?
- What is wrong in praying Jesus into your heart to be saved?
- What is wrong with getting baptised after being saved?
- Is there anyone in the churches where any of these false doctrines are taught who is saved?
- Is there any member of your family who is saved?
- Do you know anyone who is a true Christian?
- Is it okay for a Christian to worship at a denominational church?
- What churches will you attend when you visit your homeland?
Internationally, this teaching is encouraged since the early 1990’s with Douglas Jacoby’s multi-authored book, ‘Shining Like Stars,’ ii edition, 1990.
4) Implication of baptism
a) Ask him if he knows other true Christians (e.g. in his old church, at home, in his country, at work, family…)
11) Taking a stand with family and friends
a) Does he understand that they are lost?
b) Is he willing to firmly (and lovingly) take a stand, share his faith with them, and hold to his conviction?
c) Ask him how he would react if they opposed him?
If ICOC leadership hardly compromise on point one, where does it leave them on the other points?
This issue of dating and marriage will become the ultimate storm that will bring more heartbreak to this divided Christian community more than any other doctrinal matter since Kriete’s Letter. In general, prolific ICOC leadership in both camps gives the impression on the topic of relationships that they have “cross a line from genuine shepherding to control.”
“Where there’s an intrusion”, according to Ron Enroth, “into the personal lives of parishioners in the name of God, in the name of shepherding, you begin to move in a direction that I think is unhealthy.” The new reformed groups of the former ICOC have done that since May 2005 and March 2006.
The policy on dating and marriage, for the most part, remains like this: ‘A disciple marries a disciple’. Therefore since we can “marry only disciples (2 Cor 6:14, 1 Cor 7:39), it stands to reason that we should date only disciples. Dating non-Christians messes motives up our motives and theirs, and is extremely unwise.” – Shining Like Stars, ii Edition, 1990, Lesson 9: Counting the Cost, p234/316.
Unfortunately, I do not possess, the latest edition on Shining Like Stars. I doubt very much if anything has changed to this regard since 1990.
The question is can these splinter groups of the former era accommodate a future for youngsters? May (ICOC) members, since the awakening of the worldwide ICOC fellowship, marry other Christians, who do not share the same convictions? For example, would the respected family of churches in the ICOC, in practice, forbid intermarriage between a Presbyterian, Methodists or Roman Catholic? And if so, why?
Marrying a Christian is correctly argued from Scripture. Christians must marry only Christians (1 Corinthians 7:39). However, some family of churches in the post-HKL era compromised the organisation’s ideal of marrying only ICOC members – whereupon Kip McKean retaliated by asking in his article, entitled ‘The Honor of God’ (May 2005): “What should we do in our worldwide fellowship of churches?”
Kip stated [emphasis mine]: “Of consideration even the Catholics teach you should MARRY ONLY CATHOLICS, the Mormons believe in ONLY MARRYING MORMONS, and the Muslims have been known to kill a Muslim that DOES NOT MARRY A MUSLIM. Though these groups do not follow the Scriptures’ teaching on salvation, they understand THE CONCEPT OF MARRIAGE in relation to “their view” of “God’s people”. Are Jesus’ TRUE DISCIPLES to be less convicted?”
This means, in a roundabout way, “true disciples” like those fellowshipping with the Portland family of churches (The Portland movement) might not marry Christians in other groups who do not share an equal understanding regarding “their view” on the concept of marriage. On the other hand, “true disciples” who fellowship with the “International family of churches” (United Cooperation Group) might not marry those in McKean’s “new movement”? Who is exactly less convicted?
Nevertheless, the United Cooperation Group, in their document since March 11th 2006, shares McKean’s convictions on marriage. “With holiness in mind, the romantic and marriage relationships of Christians are to be pursued with ONLY THOSE who “belong to the Lord” as defined by Scriptures (2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1, 1 Corinthians 7:39).”
What exactly will these families of churches teach youngsters on “romantic relationships and marriage”? It is my opinion that both groups will revert to former ICOC doctrine – marrying only “in the mob”. The frightening consideration of this “concept of marriage” is three fold. If we; number one, allow people to “marry only in the mob”, then we; number two, say we are the “one true church” and therefore; number three, the “only biblically saved”!
In the post-HKL era, Enroth’s outlook on unhealthy abuse by leadership by intruding “into the personal lives of parishioners in the name of God, in the name of shepherding” has materialised during the Seattle September 2005 leadership conference. Here, we have evidence to what extend the marriage concept can lead people to trust. Mike Taliaferro, one of the nine brothers selected to serve with the Unity Proposal Group, together with Chris Ogbonnaya shared a lesson entitled, Pulling Your Church Together.
Here, Taliaferro, during his lesson “cross a line from genuine shepherding to control.”
He said: “…we began to call people back to decisions, and we did it one by one. We called the church back to discipling relationships. We called the church back to sacrificial giving… We made that decision. We resurrected church discipline… We confronted people that were divisive; some of them left the church. We resurrected confession of sin in the church… We reminded people of their commitment to all the services… Who’s lost, who’s saved – we had a talk about it.”
But more importantly, on the topic of marriage/church/salvation, Chris Ogbonnaya, shows how it is done to intrude “into the personal lives of parishioners in the name of God.”
Here, Chris expanded on the idea of Mike “Who’s lost, who’s saved” in the same lesson by stating: “WE CANNOT MARRY A NON-CHRISTIAN. WE’RE NOT GOING TO HAVE MARRIAGES BETWEEN US AND A CATHOLIC. You want to do that, hey, you’re welcome as A VISITOR. We had to do it… Is this authority? I say, ‘Yes’. It’s authority, and IT’S AUTHORITY THAT WE HAVE FROM GOD AS LEADERS, to pull ourselves together, so that the church can march forward.”
Clearly, the bible teaches against marrying a non-Christian. However, I wonder if Chris toyed with the idea that Christians in the Roman Catholic Church are condemned? But I will give him the benefit of my doubt.
Which brings us to the next question: who belongs to the Lord?
Kip McKean rightly points to other religious groups (notice the strong presence of established cults) that forbid their members to marry outside their particular group even to the point of death. However, this inclusive viewpoint leads only to the belief in being the “one true church”. It is a form of spiritual apartheid.
If “romantic and marriage relationships of Christians” in the ICOC congregations become regulated, then we need to know how they perceive other Christian groups outside their particular “view”. Clearly, Chris Ogbonnaya’s viewpoint is extreme: “WE’RE NOT GOING TO HAVE MARRIAGES BETWEEN US AND A CATHOLIC. You want to do that, hey, you’re welcome as A VISITOR.”
What does the New Testament teach on marriage between Christians? Here young people who are on the verge to join the former ICOC family of churches need to consult the Scriptures without interference from them. Youngsters need to go back to their parents, families, friends and pastors before getting baptised in either former ICOC “family of churches”.
The Apostle Paul made several contributions on the topic of marriage as requested by the Corinthians. Here individuals are free to choose who they want to marry, but they must belong to the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:39). If an individual becomes a Christian while the other is not, and the non-Christian partner wants to leave, it is allowed. However, individuals in the Lord may not divorce. If they divorce they are not permitted to marry other individuals. It is permitted for such a couple to get back together. Individuals are free to marry anyone in the Lord after a death of a spouse.
Let us note: The Apostle Paul’s advise on “the romantic and marriage relationships of Christians” makes no distinction between “all the churches”. The same rule applies to all. (1 Corinthians 7:17) Perhaps not entirely to the Jerusalem Church (Acts 21:21). Here the Jewish traditions and customs of the elders as observed in the Jerusalem church would not tolerate Jewish marriages with Gentiles. However, the Apostle made it very clear that we all belong to the Lord. “You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men.” (1 Corinthians 7:23 NIV)
In his time some “forbid people to marry” (1 Timothy 4:3). In later times some forbid people to marry if they’re not in the same church group! The Roman Catholic Church policy was marrying only Catholics.
Today “slaves of men” favours one church group over another. Many Christian groups do not include a subsequent step that members MUST EMBRACE DISCIPLESHIP. Therefore this pre-requisite for the ICOC fellowship enforces “romantic and marriage relationships of Christians” in the Portland movement and United Cooperation Group to observe a type of “slaves of men” rule: “marrying only ICOC members”. If this rule is not applicable, people in the ICOC are free to choose whomever they want to “marry in the Lord” no matter what “Christian” that belongs to a biblically converted affiliation.
So where do they stand?
Many ICOC leaders TEACH AGAINST a disciple marrying someone who did not have these same convictions on embracing discipleship. However, these teachers, for now, will NOT FORBID a disciple from marrying a “biblically converted Christian in another group.”
Let us consider former rules of a bygone era in Episode 1. If we; number one, allow people to marry only in “the mob”, then we; number two, say we are the “one true church” and therefore; number three, the “only biblically saved”!
For your benefit, here are the former rules of marrying to the mob in a bygone era.
Number one.
A South African ICOC study guide, known as ‘Equipping Syllabus’ teaches, “Jesus is Lord of our Dating Life or Marriage” according to implication five:
e. Implication 5: Lord of our Dating Life or Marriage
“Marry only a Christian – obviously will marry someone you date, therefore best to date only disciples. (Exception: an existing dating relationship. Handle with care and wisdom, Not a must to break up – a must to stop sin, if any, and a must to discipline it and a must to make a decision that if a person is not really interested in becoming a Christian or is pulling person down spiritually, will break it off immediately. 1 Corinthians 7:39 – must marry in the Lord – no double standards between first and second marriage.”
Internationally, this teaching is encouraged since the early 1990’s with Douglas Jacoby’s multi-authored book, “Shining Like Stars,” ii edition, 1990.
“Marry a Christian! (2 Cor 6:14ff, 1 Cor 7:39)” – Shining Like Stars, ii Edition, 1990, Study 12: Christian Marriage: Cord of Three Strands, p.258/316.
“Dating and marriage”
a) Since we can marry only disciples (2 Cor 6:14, 1 Cor 7:39), it stands to reason that we should date only disciples.
b) Dating non-Christians messes motives up our motives and theirs, and is extremely unwise.” – Shining Like Stars, ii Edition, 1990, Lesson 9: Counting the Cost, p234/316.
Number two.
A South African ICOC study guide, known as ‘Equipping Syllabus’ teaches, “Jesus is Lord of One Church” according to implication four:
d. Implication 4: Lord of One Church
“Ephesians 4:4 – only those who are scriptural Christians are members of the true church. Church of Christ – only major group I know that baptizes those willing to be disciples for the forgiveness of sins.”
Internationally, this teaching is encouraged since the early 1990’s with Douglas Jacoby’s multi-authored book, ‘Shining Like Stars,’ ii edition, 1990.
6) New Testament Church
a) Explain that we must attend only a church, which follows the Bible.
e) Make sure he understands that it is not God’s will for him to attend any other church.
Number three.
A South African ICOC study guide, known as ‘Equipping Syllabus’ teaches, “Jesus is Lord and Savior of only the Biblically Saved” according to implication three:
c. Implication 3: Lord and Savior of only Biblically Saved
Must have deep convictions of who is lost and who is saved. You are lost (person you are studying with). Others like you are lost – family, friends, old church friends, etc.
Church groups do “differ in their doctrines”. However, the ICOC makes damning statements towards other church groups by stating they are false churches, teaching false doctrine, thus not biblically saved.
Back Tracking [An A4 sheet ‘back tracks’ issues before a prospective member “counts the cost” to become a disciple in the ICOC]
False Doctrines & Denominations
- Is it wrong to baptise babies?
- What is wrong in praying Jesus into your heart to be saved?
- What is wrong with getting baptised after being saved?
- Is there anyone in the churches where any of these false doctrines are taught who is saved?
- Is there any member of your family who is saved?
- Do you know anyone who is a true Christian?
- Is it okay for a Christian to worship at a denominational church?
- What churches will you attend when you visit your homeland?
Internationally, this teaching is encouraged since the early 1990’s with Douglas Jacoby’s multi-authored book, ‘Shining Like Stars,’ ii edition, 1990.
4) Implication of baptism
a) Ask him if he knows other true Christians (e.g. in his old church, at home, in his country, at work, family…)
11) Taking a stand with family and friends
a) Does he understand that they are lost?
b) Is he willing to firmly (and lovingly) take a stand, share his faith with them, and hold to his conviction?
c) Ask him how he would react if they opposed him?
If ICOC leadership hardly compromise on point one, where does it leave them on the other points?
Thursday, November 23, 2006
The Blogger and the Shape-shifter movement
My worst fears about the religious exploits of my former church, the International Churches of Christ (ICOC) are shaping up nicely since this blog started in February 2006.
It’s quite overwhelming!
At least it’s official, Douglas Arthur, will not act as Kip’s “right hand cranker”! McKean may have the “glue of the World Sector Leaders” – Steve Johnson – by his side, but on the whole, it’s a sticky issue concerning unifying the former brotherhood.
I am certain, since McKean probably no longer has to be tied to “lifelong friends who used to support” his leadership, the opportunity will come for him to re-introduce former leadership structures of the ICOC in the Portland family of Churches. McKean to the determent of his life long friends, still reasons “there are no Scriptures against World Sector Leaders, Lead Evangelists, Women’s Ministry Leaders, Bible Talks and Discipleship Partners.” Perhaps now Pope Benedict XVI feels more comfortable with his leadership role in the Catholic Church! And Archbishop Tutu can safely hold his title!
In my article, entitled, A Renovator, not an Innovator, “Kip’s current ministry is about renovation, renovation and more renovation from here to eternity!” I was amazed to compare my notes with McKean’s ideals as stipulated in Partners in the Gospel – Part 1-3. Here I strongly recommend all concerned parties to view Roy Davison’s treatise (Check the sidebar) concerning Kip McKean’s “own version” that “we are free to implement any methodology that is not explicitly forbidden in the Bible” based on Kip’s own reformed slogan “Speak where the Bible is silent!”
Interestingly, many ICOC’ers like the “mainliners” now start to see Kip McKean as a type of “boogieman”! But we must not lose sight of leaders who have signed up their churches with the ratification plan of the United Cooperation Group that now “embraces discipleship”. The majority of these churches are not as visible as the Portland movement. They are in my opinion still locked up in an old wardrobe. The lowered standards comparatively to the Portland family of churches zeal will steadily rise over time. Anyone practising the principles held by the disciple approach (generally representing the findings of Robert E. Coleman’s Master Plan of Evangelism) will quickly realise there is no time for a slacker in the Kingdom. The disciple approach knows no half measures! Many supporters of the United Cooperation Group or “our international family of churches” will have to “agree” on certain biblical principles uphold by McKean, like the Jethro’s principle, which ties in with the disciple approach. Here, the “persecution” Portland faces not only from outsiders in other church communities but from “flesh and blood” relations within the ICOC will befall the United Cooperation Group in the near future.
Alas, more fears, despite Arthur’s optimism: “Clearly our best and brightest days are ahead as we reengage in winning our cities and this world for Christ.” I say, it’s about time for those in the wardrobe to come out!
Personally I can deal with the “boogieman”. In fact, for ten years I had given my brain to that former “movement”. Today, it is relatively easy to anticipate where the Portland movement is heading officially. On the other hand, it’s the Boggart in the old wardrobe that scares me the most. Ever heard of it?
In one of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books, Professor Lupin poses a question to his third-years studying Defence Against the Dark Arts. Standing next to him is an old wardrobe “in which the teachers kept their spare robes.” Only this time something more sinister has “moved in”. A Boggart. “So, the first question we must ask ourselves is, what is a Boggart?” Hermione put up her hand. “It’s a shape-shifter”, she said. “It can take the shape of whatever it thinks will frighten us most.”
“Nobody” as the story continues with Professor Lupin, “knows what a Boggart looks like when he is alone, but when I let him out, he will immediately become whatever each of us most fears.” “This means”, said Professor Lupin lecturing the class, “that we have a huge advantage over the Boggart before we begin. Have you spotted it, Harry?”
Harry replied, “there are so many of us, it won’t know what shape it should be?” “Precisely,” said Professor Lupin. “He becomes confused.”
Lupin explains, “The charm that repels a Boggart is simple, yet it requires force of mind. You see, the thing that really finishes a Boggart is laughter. What you need to do is force it to assume a shape that you find amusing. We will practise the charm without wands first. After me, please … riddikulus! Riddikulus!” said the class together.”
A shape-shifter. “It can take the shape of whatever it thinks will frighten us most.”
If I was in Lupin’s class standing next to Harry Potter. My fear would be to see young people, become entrapped by the methodologies that “embrace discipleship”. So, “laughter” can make it go away, Professor Lupin?
I thought it over. I have become a Blogger. In the old wardrobe is a Boggart – a shape-shifter. I blogg about my experiences in the ICOC … and my fears for her future! But I am not alone! There are many of us. And if this is the scenario – the Boggart becomes confused. Maybe this process is becoming apparent concerning the Portland movement. “Perhaps most confusing is the persecution towards us within our own fellowship, the International Churches of Christ”, related Kip in Partners in the Gospel – Part 1.
Finally, I have assumed a shape. A restaurant menu! It makes me laugh. This time I’ll practise the charm without my wand first.
The leadership representing the houses of Renovation (The Portland movement) and Innovation (United Cooperation Group) despite their differences and confusion have something in common as this restaurant menu advertises.
“All the chicken you can eat!!! This is the same delicious chicken we have been serving for the past twenty years!”
After me, please… Ridiculous!!!
Crack!
(Thank you R.K. Rowling for the little inspiration)
It’s quite overwhelming!
At least it’s official, Douglas Arthur, will not act as Kip’s “right hand cranker”! McKean may have the “glue of the World Sector Leaders” – Steve Johnson – by his side, but on the whole, it’s a sticky issue concerning unifying the former brotherhood.
I am certain, since McKean probably no longer has to be tied to “lifelong friends who used to support” his leadership, the opportunity will come for him to re-introduce former leadership structures of the ICOC in the Portland family of Churches. McKean to the determent of his life long friends, still reasons “there are no Scriptures against World Sector Leaders, Lead Evangelists, Women’s Ministry Leaders, Bible Talks and Discipleship Partners.” Perhaps now Pope Benedict XVI feels more comfortable with his leadership role in the Catholic Church! And Archbishop Tutu can safely hold his title!
In my article, entitled, A Renovator, not an Innovator, “Kip’s current ministry is about renovation, renovation and more renovation from here to eternity!” I was amazed to compare my notes with McKean’s ideals as stipulated in Partners in the Gospel – Part 1-3. Here I strongly recommend all concerned parties to view Roy Davison’s treatise (Check the sidebar) concerning Kip McKean’s “own version” that “we are free to implement any methodology that is not explicitly forbidden in the Bible” based on Kip’s own reformed slogan “Speak where the Bible is silent!”
Interestingly, many ICOC’ers like the “mainliners” now start to see Kip McKean as a type of “boogieman”! But we must not lose sight of leaders who have signed up their churches with the ratification plan of the United Cooperation Group that now “embraces discipleship”. The majority of these churches are not as visible as the Portland movement. They are in my opinion still locked up in an old wardrobe. The lowered standards comparatively to the Portland family of churches zeal will steadily rise over time. Anyone practising the principles held by the disciple approach (generally representing the findings of Robert E. Coleman’s Master Plan of Evangelism) will quickly realise there is no time for a slacker in the Kingdom. The disciple approach knows no half measures! Many supporters of the United Cooperation Group or “our international family of churches” will have to “agree” on certain biblical principles uphold by McKean, like the Jethro’s principle, which ties in with the disciple approach. Here, the “persecution” Portland faces not only from outsiders in other church communities but from “flesh and blood” relations within the ICOC will befall the United Cooperation Group in the near future.
Alas, more fears, despite Arthur’s optimism: “Clearly our best and brightest days are ahead as we reengage in winning our cities and this world for Christ.” I say, it’s about time for those in the wardrobe to come out!
Personally I can deal with the “boogieman”. In fact, for ten years I had given my brain to that former “movement”. Today, it is relatively easy to anticipate where the Portland movement is heading officially. On the other hand, it’s the Boggart in the old wardrobe that scares me the most. Ever heard of it?
In one of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books, Professor Lupin poses a question to his third-years studying Defence Against the Dark Arts. Standing next to him is an old wardrobe “in which the teachers kept their spare robes.” Only this time something more sinister has “moved in”. A Boggart. “So, the first question we must ask ourselves is, what is a Boggart?” Hermione put up her hand. “It’s a shape-shifter”, she said. “It can take the shape of whatever it thinks will frighten us most.”
“Nobody” as the story continues with Professor Lupin, “knows what a Boggart looks like when he is alone, but when I let him out, he will immediately become whatever each of us most fears.” “This means”, said Professor Lupin lecturing the class, “that we have a huge advantage over the Boggart before we begin. Have you spotted it, Harry?”
Harry replied, “there are so many of us, it won’t know what shape it should be?” “Precisely,” said Professor Lupin. “He becomes confused.”
Lupin explains, “The charm that repels a Boggart is simple, yet it requires force of mind. You see, the thing that really finishes a Boggart is laughter. What you need to do is force it to assume a shape that you find amusing. We will practise the charm without wands first. After me, please … riddikulus! Riddikulus!” said the class together.”
A shape-shifter. “It can take the shape of whatever it thinks will frighten us most.”
If I was in Lupin’s class standing next to Harry Potter. My fear would be to see young people, become entrapped by the methodologies that “embrace discipleship”. So, “laughter” can make it go away, Professor Lupin?
I thought it over. I have become a Blogger. In the old wardrobe is a Boggart – a shape-shifter. I blogg about my experiences in the ICOC … and my fears for her future! But I am not alone! There are many of us. And if this is the scenario – the Boggart becomes confused. Maybe this process is becoming apparent concerning the Portland movement. “Perhaps most confusing is the persecution towards us within our own fellowship, the International Churches of Christ”, related Kip in Partners in the Gospel – Part 1.
Finally, I have assumed a shape. A restaurant menu! It makes me laugh. This time I’ll practise the charm without my wand first.
The leadership representing the houses of Renovation (The Portland movement) and Innovation (United Cooperation Group) despite their differences and confusion have something in common as this restaurant menu advertises.
“All the chicken you can eat!!! This is the same delicious chicken we have been serving for the past twenty years!”
After me, please… Ridiculous!!!
Crack!
(Thank you R.K. Rowling for the little inspiration)
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Church Politics: The McKean’s and Us
Point 2: Are we fighting God?
The growing number of Portland family of churches, hereby describe as the Portland movement follows a predictable pattern of self-imposed isolation, fence-building and burned bridges as recorded throughout the history of the Boston movement. Not far behind them is the slowly awakening giant of the Unity Proposal Group, hereby describe as the United Cooperation Group, consisting of an estimate 70% of the former International Churches of Christ (ICOC).
Many ICOC members downplay the logical conclusions and reasons offered by various leaders in both factions as church politics thus cleverly avoid sticky issues that need urgent biblical attention of which “church unity” is paramount. How can Christians in both groups teach a Church study with a clear conscience while amongst them there may be quarrelling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, factions, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder? Here, we need to ask, are we fighting God, like the Corinthians, when we quarrel amongst ourselves, lining up behind various church leaders?
Here the predictable pattern of self-imposed isolation, fence-building and burned bridges becomes unmistakeable as leadership of both factions revert to old habits with a slight twist. Both groups believe they can see the road ahead much clearer than those comrades on the other side. Nevertheless, both groups, more so with the Portland movement busy themselves with introducing former ICOC concepts by slowly giving old words new meaning to a new crowd.
Would you belief the ICOC cult of personalities – a thing of the past has been replaced by “a new group of like-minded friends creating a new synergy, a new movement.” However, here too we face a problem. Whose side is God on?
Mike Taliaferro now a supporter of the United Cooperation Group have answered a question concerning McKean’s role during the April 1st 2004 Faithful Conversations: “Yes, we are going to have a man lead the movement, and that is going to be Jesus Christ.” Today, Kip McKean who acted in a role as “leader of the movement” before 2001 also agrees with Taliaferro: “I will be with disciples agreeing to build a movement centered on one personality. And His name is Jesus.”
Now the Apostle Paul lectures the McKean's and us in our Church Studies: “Is Christ divided?” (1 Corinthians 1:13 NIV)
The growing number of Portland family of churches, hereby describe as the Portland movement follows a predictable pattern of self-imposed isolation, fence-building and burned bridges as recorded throughout the history of the Boston movement. Not far behind them is the slowly awakening giant of the Unity Proposal Group, hereby describe as the United Cooperation Group, consisting of an estimate 70% of the former International Churches of Christ (ICOC).
Many ICOC members downplay the logical conclusions and reasons offered by various leaders in both factions as church politics thus cleverly avoid sticky issues that need urgent biblical attention of which “church unity” is paramount. How can Christians in both groups teach a Church study with a clear conscience while amongst them there may be quarrelling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, factions, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder? Here, we need to ask, are we fighting God, like the Corinthians, when we quarrel amongst ourselves, lining up behind various church leaders?
Here the predictable pattern of self-imposed isolation, fence-building and burned bridges becomes unmistakeable as leadership of both factions revert to old habits with a slight twist. Both groups believe they can see the road ahead much clearer than those comrades on the other side. Nevertheless, both groups, more so with the Portland movement busy themselves with introducing former ICOC concepts by slowly giving old words new meaning to a new crowd.
Would you belief the ICOC cult of personalities – a thing of the past has been replaced by “a new group of like-minded friends creating a new synergy, a new movement.” However, here too we face a problem. Whose side is God on?
Mike Taliaferro now a supporter of the United Cooperation Group have answered a question concerning McKean’s role during the April 1st 2004 Faithful Conversations: “Yes, we are going to have a man lead the movement, and that is going to be Jesus Christ.” Today, Kip McKean who acted in a role as “leader of the movement” before 2001 also agrees with Taliaferro: “I will be with disciples agreeing to build a movement centered on one personality. And His name is Jesus.”
Now the Apostle Paul lectures the McKean's and us in our Church Studies: “Is Christ divided?” (1 Corinthians 1:13 NIV)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)