Quote:
Originally Posted by Indiana
Although Watchman Nee did not have his own children he was in many homes tending to broken and ruinness family relationships by 1948. Paul, the apostle, also did not have children and was never even married yet he wrote to Timothy twice, his last 2 epistles, with instruction on how ones ought to behave as parents, as slaves, as slave-owners, and as elders - he was never any of these.
Paul, by this time at his age and maturity in life, both humanly and spiritually, spoke according to his view. Watchman at his age spoke according to his view and his level of maturity. Both cared for the future of the church and saw the need for discipline early, and in a spirit of love only.
|
You do have a point here, the fact that WN didn’t have kids is not an immediate disqualification from talking about raising them. I’m sure a lot of the advice he gave was based upon what he observed around him. Where I have a lot of hesitation, however, is in regards to the fruit of the advice on families that both WN and WL gave. Many LC families have really suffered. Families have been hurt, there are some at odds with each other. Clearly, there was a lack in this area of each of their ministries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indiana
Righteousness and peace was a goal to gain within the family as a foundation for the church life, to the glory of God for both present and future purpose, sought by Paul, and also by brother Nee.
The latter's well-intentioned recommendation might work very well, or it might not; but compared to Moses' instruction for dealing with a rebellious child (Deuteronomy), it was a very mild suggestion.
I happen to be listening to tapes on Deuteronomy at the same time I have been in Paul's writing to Timothy; and now have read Nee's word - and have my reactions to them all.
(Note: Moses also was in his maturity, at 120 years old)
|
Concerning the case in Deuteronomy, I believe that the context of the punishment of death was that maybe certain rebelliousness had the ability to affect the small-knit communities of that time. The punishment itself involved bringing the son before the elders of the city: “
then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city.”
Maybe what WN suggested was applicable in early 20th century China, but it’s certainly not applicable, nor legal today. Rebelliousness is a phase that most kids go through. It’s generally not a problem that stays around forever. I remember when I was a kid, I was threatened with the belt a few times, but it never happened. It kept me in line, but honestly, I still harbor resentment that such a punishment was ever viewed as an option. It’s kind of hard to imagine any kind of corporal punishment being done out of love.