[Ohio]

W. Lee frequently told us that W. Nee read exhaustively from all available Christian literature. We also learned that Nee was in personal contact with the British leadership (James Taylor Sr.) of the Exclusive Brethren. Yet, we were also told that Nee's "vision" of the ground of the church, the so-called "one-church-one-city" paradigm, a grand milestone in the "Recovery" history of long-lost truths of scripture, was altogether new to Nee in China.

Actually it was not.

It was already actively practiced for many decades by the Exclusive Brethren. Nee was able to read extensively of all the doctrinal nuances of this doctrine, and more importantly, learn of the endless failures and divisions it caused. Nee himself was even excommunicated by the Brethren for breaking one of their trivial rules, yet he knew he would be, because for sure he had read the tragic stories of George Muller and Dr. Edward Cronin.

So I agree with Freedom's assertion that both Nee and Lee mischaracterized their original intentions by claiming to originate strictly "local" churches, the so-called Antioch model, without centralized controls, completely autonomous, without headquarters, ruled by local elders, etc. Later they would introduce stringent controls to takeover these churches, according to the Jerusalem model, with local elders reporting to workers from headquarters, and with centralized ministry and structure. Those who resisted would be expelled. These were their many "storms."

The Brethren began this way. Mainland China began this way. Taiwan began this way. The USA began this way. All started out local, and all soon became highly structured, and btw, not much different from Rome's model.