[aron]

Originally Posted by David Rogers

Introduced by Barber to the writings of John Nelson Darby and other Brethren leaders, Nee read widely and began to digest the ideas to which he was exposed and synthesize them with his own understanding of Scripture, as informed by his diligent personal study. The spiritual and theological influences in his life are many, including John Bunyan, Hudson Taylor, George Mller, George Cutting, J. G. Bellett, William Kelly, Charles G. Trumbull, A. B. Simpson, Madame Guyon, Brother Lawrence, T. Austin-Sparks, Jessie Penn-Lewis, Mary C. McDonough, D. M. Panton, Andrew Murray, and F. B. Meyer. He also studied the lives of significant Christian leaders, such as Martin Luther, John Knox, Jonathan Edwards, John Wesley, George Whitefield, David Brainerd, John Henry Newman, Dwight L. Moody, Charles Finney, and Charles H. Spurgeon. His ecclesiology, though, was especially influenced by the Brethren, most notably Darby and C. A. Coates.

If you look at Nee's influences, they are all post-Reformation Protestant teachers (or Protestant spin-offs like the Brethren). The only exception I see is Guyon the French (Catholic) mystic. So what of the first 1,500 years of church history? Nothing noteworthy? Was the new move of God on earth founded upon so little?

You know, God can speak through anyone. God used unlettered Galilean fishermen. So I don't begrudge Nee, at all. He did well. But the LSM prattle of "Nee read all the Christian classics" rings pretty hollow, for me. The idea that he read everything worth reading, took the good from each and discarded the dross is simple myth-making. If you want to believe a story like that, you deserve what you get. Sorry to be so blunt. (and yes, I was there too. Mea culpa).