[OBW]

Having never read Nee's Spiritual Authority, it was quite an eye opener to see the gross errors in his reasoning on the matter of what is now called deputy authority. In this one work of fiction, he has denied everything that Paul wrote concerning church discipline and turned it on its head. There is no way to bring a charge against an elder in the LC because they are taught to not even respond. Further, they are taught that they have the authority to silence the ones bringing the charge.

I keep bringing up Nee's logical errors in arriving at his ground of the church doctrine. I must admit that I have always had a sort of nagging consideration that even the things he taught correctly are more because his natural inclination was proper on those points while other points, like the ground, and now the whole spiritual authority thing, were not. He based too much of his teaching on observations of others, stories, and not enough on what the scripture actually said. He added overlays, as did Lee, that did not spring from the scripture, but we forced upon it and made to fit.

For example, in the little book Sit Walk Stand he provides a viable overlay for the whole Christian life through the view from these three positions. But the way he goes about it is not entirely true to the scripture, but instead relies on examples, added metaphors and such. The last time I read it, I was impressed that he was only one additional thought from turning Sit into the "wait on the dispensing" teaching that Lee concocted. And if he had taken it that far, there would be no need to read about Walk and Stand because it would naturally flow from us once enough dispensing had been received. We did not need to study about it.

Yes, many have received spiritual help from some of his books. But even the best of them must be read with care.