The ICC seems averse to public debating & dialogue

The Book of Acts is full of examples of religious dialogue between Christians and non-Christians, including religious leaders. Why don’t we see more of this today from the evangelists of the International Christian Churches?

This is a good question to be asking our friends from the ICC since the entire movement is based on the principle of being a “Bible Church“. Being a Bible Church means they would emulate the first century church as closely as possible, while also drawing on principles found throughout whole of Scripture (not only the NT).

If this is so, it should make you wonder why the leaders of the ICC do not engage more in public debates & dialogue when it is scattered throughout the Book of Acts.

Examples of religious debates and dialogues in Acts

• Acts 4 – Peter and John were arrested and brought before the Jewish Sanhedrin to defend their case.
  • Indeed the room was full of religious experts. “The rulers, the elders, and the teachers of the law met in Jerusalem. Annas the high priest was there, and so were Caiaphas, John, Alexander and others of the high priest’s family.” (Acts 4:5-6)
  • Although this wasn’t a formal “debate” per se, but Peter and John’s willingness to publicly engage the leaders of Israel with Scripture is quite notable, esp. in verse 11.
• Acts 5:17-41 – Similar to the above. The apostles were brought before the religious authorities and were ready to engage in religious dialogue and defence.
• Acts 7 – Stephen makes a public defence of his faith before the Sanhedrin.
• Acts 9:19-22 – Paul (Saul) publicly preaches at the synagogues in Damascus shortly after his conversion.
• Acts 9:28-29 – Paul publicly talked and debated with the Hellenistic Jews in Jerusalem.
• Acts 13:4-12 – Paul and Barnabas preaches at Jewish synagogues in Salamis and then publicly rebukes a false prophet in Paphos.
• Acts 13:13-51 – Paul and his companions went to Pisidion Antioch and preaches to everyone in the synagogue, including the religious leaders. The following week, the whole city came to listen to them speak!
  • This wasn’t a monologue since the Jewish religious leaders themselves had an opportunity to speak to counter their ideas, and yet they couldn’t (verse 44).
• Acts 14:1-6 – Paul and Barnabas preaches at a Jewish synagogue in Iconium, and later fled Lystra and Derbe to, presumably, do the same.
• Acts 17:1-4 – Paul and his companions went to Thessalonica to a Jewish synagogue and “on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise fro the dead” (verse 2).
  • This appears to be religious dialogue, not just a monologue.

These are just some examples of public religious dialogues and debates that can be found scattered throughout Acts. It is interesting to note that the usual method employed by Paul was to engage people with Scripture at the Jewish synagogues. These include religious leaders who know their OT Scriptures.

The ICC’s (almost) non-existent public religious debate & dialogue

If the ICC is really a Bible Church, you would expect them to follow the patterns found in the Bible with the way they engage people with the gospel, esp. with religious experts.

Unfortunately, you don’t get any Internet results when you type in “Kip McKean debate” or “International Christian Church debate”.

The one and only theological dialogue that can be found on YouTube is on the topic of baptism between Evangelist Tim Kernan (City of Angels International Christian Church) and Christian apologist Matt Slick (CARM ministries).

Sadly, this type of theological dialogue is extremely rare for the ICC.

People who push back on the ICC’s teachings would get placed in the “too hard” basket, and the conversation would stop there.

This is vastly different to, say, the Protestant Reformation, where public debates with the Catholic Church was desired by the Reformers. In fact, Martin Luther had 95 theses to debate with the Catholic Church!

Conclusion

The ICC claims to be God’s movement to bring everyone, including members of mainstream churches, back into alignment with the Scriptures. But if this is true, then why has there been very little effort by the ICC’s leadership in engaging on a theological level with people who are trained in the Scriptures?

Is it fear that the ICC’s doctrines might be exposed as deficient under theological scrutiny?

These are the questions that the ICC must answer.