Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
when you slow down in your reading, you discover many things that undermine the apparent spirituality of the teaching. The church must absolutely obey. They are unable to make any accusation against the authority. And in one place, Nee actually says that the authority is not subject to correction because of sin, but only because of rebellion (or something like that). It is derived from an example of the sons of the priest who were judged by God for doing what was not allowed. Can’t remember if it centered around Eli’s sons, or Nadab and Abihu. But these were similar issues. Nee asserts that it was not because they sinned, but because they dared to do something not under the headship of the high priest. I never figured out where he got that. It was true that it was not under the HP’s headship. But there is nothing that I could see that made that the reason for their deaths. Rather, it was for their wanton sin being brought into the holy place.
|
The thing I never could understand about Nee's logic here is that the rule didn't apply to him, when he was leaving the "headship" of established Christianity, and encouraging others to do so. His and others' leaving the degraded Protestant denomination wasn't rebellion, or division, so he said. But once established as "authority" in his new, restored movement, he set up a rule in which doing anything apart from the organizational head was not allowed.
To me this smacks of "Do as I say, not as I do."
Supposedly his outstanding character was the counterweight (I am guessing here). His meekness and humility and mature spirituality would prevent any leading of the flock astray. He as the deputy God (Living Stream terminology) would have a clear line to the interceding High Priest in heaven. Just do what Nee/Lee says, and you are covered, by the "deputy authority".
Yet none of this occurred to Nee when he was considering leaving the Protestants. It only made sense after, when he was ensconced as leader of his own "little flock".