Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Watchman Nee
When delegated authority (men who represent God’s authority) and direct authority (God Himself) are in conflict, one can render submission but not obedience to the delegated authority.
1. Obedience is related to conduct: it is relative. Submission is related to heart attitude: it is absolute.
2. God alone receives unqualified obedience without measure; any person lower than God can only receive qualified obedience.
3. Should the delegated authority issue an order clearly contradicting God’s command, he will be given submission but not obedience.
We should submit to the person who has received delegated authority from God, but we should disobey the order which offends God.
|
Can anyone give an example from the Bible that grounds anything Nee is blowing smoke about here?
What I have in mind specifically is - are there examples of someone in the Bible who represents God's authority while simultaneously being in conflict with God.....thus forcing someone to choose between obeying God's delegated authority versus God Himself? In this context, I am presuming Nee is not speaking of parental authority, or of secular authority (which I don't view as "representing God's authority" but being "an authority God has ordained"), but of some kind of spiritual authority in the NT church or in the Old Testament over God's people.
One instance comes to mind - Moses striking the rock. He was arguably God's representative and yet represented God wrongly to His people. But God punished Moses for it. And the people weren't put in a position of following Moses or God in that case.
I don't think God allows anyone to continue on in disobedience to God while also continuing to bear the honor of being "His delegated representative"........right? That's an upside down kingdom.
My other comment is, if I follow Nee's logic here, if obedience is related to conduct and submission is related to heart attitude, this seems to be an outward/inward distinction. I honestly don't understand what "relative" versus "absolute" have to do with anything.
Nee then further divides obedience into "unqualified" and "qualified"......without giving any further information or distinction or examples......good job Nee.
And then Nee says that if a delegated authority is in conflict with God, we should submit (i.e THE DEEPER OF THE TWO...the inward) to them, but not obey (outward) them? How on earth do you do that? How do you submit in heart but disobey in action? How do you submit inwardly but disobey outwardly?
Sorry, but Nee and Lee were masters of splitting human beings up into parts and pitting those parts against each other. I can't think of very many other things I've read besides "the ministry" that so frequently makes so little sense once you start untangling the apparently "high" and "deep" sweeping statements they make.
edit to add: because I'm only human, honestly seeing Nee's smug visage in that picture associated with the quote makes me want to smack him. To know that this teaching here is an abuse of the Bible, and this and other teachings of his were used to manipulate people to let him off the hook from his own sexual sins....and to know the cascading effects that has had on so many people since then....I just can't think about it.