"Against the Tide" by Angus Kinnear

[UntoHim]

--------------------------------------------
Imported from ProBoards Forum
--------------------------------------------

Posted by UntoHim
I used to have a paperback copy of this book. I remember (while still in the LC) sneaking into a Christian bookstore and thumbing through a copy...I thought my hair was going to catch on fire for looking at something without the name "Lee" or "LSM" on the cover.
Does anybody know if this is the only third party book that covers the subject of Watchman Nee or the Little Flock movement in China?

----------------------------------------------------

Posted by Testing123
Hello, Unto. For a more critical perspective on Watchman Nee, you might try the two books written by Dana Roberts - "Understanding Watchman Nee" and "Secrets of Watchman Nee." Roberts was never associated with the Local Church. Personally, I don't like his books, especially the latter, which tries to be controversial in painting Watchman Nee as a philandering embezzler.
Norman Cliff wrote a very good book called "The Life and Theology of Watchman Nee: Including a Study of the Little Flock Movement," but it's rather hard to find. The few other biographies of Nee that I am aware of come from members of LC offshoots.Also, just as an aside - before his death, Angus Kinnear had been working on an extensive rewrite and expansion of "Against the Tide." One or two years ago, this was finished by his widow, Jean, and published in the UK. You can find it on amazon.co.uk or other British booksellers. The American edition is the same from the '70s. The new one benefits from years of further research and added source material. Interestingly, Witness Lee is thanked in the acknowledgments as one of the books' contributors.

--------------------------------------------------

Posted by Norm
There is a biography in the Heroes of the Faith Series entitled Watchman Nee Man of Suffering by Bob Laurent; 1998; Barbour Pub.
Another book is Three of China's Mighty Men by Leslie Lyall; 2000; Christian Focus Pub.
Lastly, Watchman Nee's Testimony compiled by KH Weigh; 1974; Hong Kong Church Book Room LTD.
Norm

---------------------------------------------------

Posted by UntoHim
Thanks Testing and Norm. I was aware of some sort of updated version of Against the Tide. "Philandering embezzler"? Wow, never heard that tag put on Nee before. I am aware of Nee being basically excommunicated from the Little Flock for going into business (and supossedly having a woman living with him - turned out to be his mother?!). I would sure like to see Stephen Kaung write some sort of biography - I think he may be one of only a few people alive who was actually there working closely with Nee in the Mainland during the Little Flock days. (I assume that there are some brothers and sisters still alive in China and Tiawan as well, but we are not likely to hear from them)
I have read all three of the references Norm provided, but did not find them very comprehensive at all.
Considering how Watchman Nee was unquestionably the "founder" of the Local Church movement (Lord's Recovery), I still find it amazing how little Witness Lee referred to Nee and the Little Flock churches of the 30s & 40s, at least for the last 25 or so years of his ministry. Maybe you brothers (testing and Norm) had a different view/understanding/experience in the earlier days. It is my understanding from some older brothers and sisters that Lee did indeed refer more to Nee and the Mainland experiences back in the Elden/Los Angeles days. I personally was quite dissapointed in Witness Lee's book "Seerer of the devine revelation"....thought it was a bit more a self serving work more then anything else. It was certainly not the comprehensive biography of Nee and the early Mainland years that it was cracked up to be.
Ok, don't mean to take this off track.
Just out of curiousity does Kinnear (who I understand was TA Sparks' son-in-law?) have any other blood relatives/associates that wrote regarding the early days in China?

----------------------------------

Posted by Norm
UntoHim,
The last three chapters of A Seer of the Divine... are actually a WL autobiography of his relatioship to WN.
Norm

--------------------------------

Posted by UntoHim
Thanks Norm. I am aware of that. The problem is that I no longer trust Witness Lee's account of hardly anything, unless there are multiple 3rd party witnesses (no pun intended). I used to blindly believe everything that came out of the man's mouth, (a mistake on my part) so now I have probably unfairly swung the pendulum the other way. Nevertheless, I think many ex (and current) Local Churchers are hungry for the truth...the plain, unadulterated truth regarding so much of the early history of the Local Church movement. I say this knowing full well that the "truth" of history is usually shaded to some degree by our individual perceptions and experiences - "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" as they say. The problem is that there has only been ONE version of the history that has been told in the Local Church. It is my clear and distinct recollection that other "versions" of historical events (other then Lee's version) were to be considered as "poison" and "handling death". As I now see it, the "truth" in and of itself can NEVER be poisonous or deadly - it is just the truth.

-----------------------------------------

Posted by Testing123
Unto, some scattered thoughts:
In the second Roberts book, the author implies that Nee was involved with prostitutes, as well as having improper relationships with young sisters in Shanghai. He also suggests that Nee used his ministry to funnel money into his own pocket for the lavish, decadent lifestyle he enjoyed in private. It is really a stunning departure away from anything serious ever previously written on Nee, and I sincerely believe that these accusations are well beyond silliness. As far as I know, Roberts is the only "scholar" to have adopted this line of rhetoric - what was, in fact, the Communist Party's attack against Nee used to shut down his ministry behind a semblance of legality.
Stephen Kaung, as a matter of principle (so as not to improperly elevate a man), has chosen not to write or publish a biography of Nee. However, he did write a very extensive biographical introduction at the beginning of the first volume of The Finest of the Wheat published by CFP. In and of itself, it is long enough to constitute a slim book if published on its own.
Regarding Witness Lee, I agree with you that he did refer to Watchman Nee to a greater extent in the earlier days of the Local Church movement in the USA. There might be several possible explanations for this, but I won't conjecture further on that point just yet. I'm also not particularly fond of his work on Nee's life, having always found it confusing the way in which he organized it into chapters illustrating broad principles about Nee's behavior or experience, rather than in a standard chronological format.
You are correct that Jean Kinnear, the widow of Angus Kinnear, is the daughter of T. Austin-Sparks. The last I heard, she is still living in London. As far as I know, Kinnear (now referring to Angus) was never himself in Mainland China, having met Nee in the 1930s when he spent significant time at Honor Oak in England. Kinnear would later go on to serve many years of medical missionary work in India where he was involved with the Bakht Singh movement. It was there, in Bombay, that he first started publishing his own editions of Watchman Nee, which he edited together from notes compiled of Nee's speaking in England and Denmark. Angus Kinnear was very much spiritually related to T. Austin-Sparks and the other workers coming out of that center in England. However, none of those brothers ever worked with Nee directly.
James Chen, who was an elder in the church in Hong Kong, and an associate of both Nee and Lee, wrote a little book in the 1970s called Meet Brother Nee in which he, for whatever reason, seeks to drive home the idea that Nee considered Austin-Sparks his spiritual authority and had checked with him for advice at the collapse of the Chinese Republic. Gene Edwards would later publish a series of messages spoken by Chen in California under the title The Passing of the Torch in order to bolster his own delusions of grandeur that the "torch" had at some point been passed from the Little Flock on to his own personal "house church" following.

----------------------------------------------------

Posted by UntoHim
Amazing stuff to be sure. I think this all plays into Nee's intense desire to see the Chinese church (body of churches) be raised up apart from traditional Christianity and return to a more biblically based organization (cf: locality law). Being the smart and practical man that he was, Nee realized that he needed money to raise up, train and supply a team of co-workers, and the only way that he could figure to do this was start/assist in a western style, profitable business. (he took the apostle Paul's "tentmaker" example and expanded upon it) So I really don't know if it was a matter of simple jealousy or that those co-workers really and truely believe that Nee abdicated from the faith. These kinds of things would be virtually impossible for an outsider to know so I think Dana Roberts is quite off base in what he wrote in this regard.

[Ohio]

Posted by Testing123

For a more critical perspective on Watchman Nee, you might try the two books written by Dana Roberts - "Understanding Watchman Nee" and "Secrets of Watchman Nee." Roberts was never associated with the Local Church. Personally, I don't like his books, especially the latter, which tries to be controversial in painting Watchman Nee as a philandering embezzler.

Posted by Testing123

In the second Roberts book, the author implies that Nee was involved with prostitutes, as well as having improper relationships with young sisters in Shanghai. He also suggests that Nee used his ministry to funnel money into his own pocket for the lavish, decadent lifestyle he enjoyed in private. It is really a stunning departure away from anything serious ever previously written on Nee, and I sincerely believe that these accusations are well beyond silliness. As far as I know, Roberts is the only "scholar" to have adopted this line of rhetoric - what was, in fact, the Communist Party's attack against Nee used to shut down his ministry behind a semblance of legality.

Except for Dana Roberts, and now Dr. Lily Hsu, every author has portrayed Nee as almost angelic. Other authors who heard less than perfect reports about Nee, always attributed it to the cruel tactics of the Communist Party, and, of course, nothing they have presented should be taken at face value, unless it can be independently corroborated. With the endless glowing reports on Nee, it is almost impossible to reconcile the disparities we are confronted with in his life. None can deny the gifts, the talents, and the wisdom Nee was endowed with, along with a fervent desire to serve God. I suppose the same accolades could be said of King David.

With two authors now presenting confirming accounts of Nee, his pristine image must be reconsidered. Like his "successor" Lee, the source of the danger seems to lie in his willingness to be highly exalted among God's people. Nee in China was uplifted as was Lee in America. The early Apostles, however, were not this way. They may have struggled for power and glory before His death, but not afterwards. Paul repeatedly demeaned his own stature in the church, and lest he forget, the saints could remind him of their murdered comrades, and God would ratchet up the pain from that thorn. Thus, Paul would remain as nothing in the church, and Christ, the Beloved of the Father, would remain all and in all in the church.

[OBW]

I know that I am just a broken record now, but I'm continuing to have problems with "the gifts, the talents, and the wisdom Nee was endowed with." I'm really not sure that even Nee's writings and "wisdom," though not as "out there" as Lee's, are really as sound and beyond "denying."

We have picked through a couple of his books — or at least the beginnings of them — and I became convinced that Nee was no less cavalier with the scripture than Lee. Just not quite as arrogant about it. (Of course, he did "humbly" submit that no one else could see what he saw and wrote in The Spiritual Man.)

I fear that the comparative softness of Nee and the Christian public's acceptance in the few books that reached general circulation has caused us to allow teachings not much less erroneous than Lee's to slip in like weeds in a flower garden. And having been in the LRC, we have seen the more egregious errors.

But too often I think that speaking against the "good" of Nee is like speaking against "turning to our spirit" the way the LRC teaches it. It just seems like talking against God. But it is not. It is only speaking against error cloaked in spiritual language.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by OBW

But too often I think that speaking against the "good" of Nee is like speaking against "turning to our spirit" the way the LRC teaches it. It just seems like talking against God. But it is not. It is only speaking against error cloaked in spiritual language.

I hear ya, bro, I hear ya.

For us ex Local Churchers, probably the last thing to go is our abject admiration and respect for Watchman Nee. Once we admit he was just a mere mortal, what is left of the movement that once captured our entire heart, soul and mind? Yes, at one point in our lives talking against Nee or Lee was like talking against God. It pains me to admit this, but it is true. Now we come to find out that the once revered founder of the Local Church/Recovery movement may have fallen prey to the most gross of sins. 10....heck, 5 years ago, I would have strongly resisted that there was any truth to what this sister, Dr. Hsu has written in her book. Now I am strongly leaning towards believing that much of what she has written is true and accurate.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

10....heck, 5 years ago, I would have strongly resisted that there was any truth to what this sister, Dr. Hsu has written in her book. Now I am strongly leaning towards believing that much of what she has written is true and accurate.

Bro Untohim and all. I've been thru Dr. Hsu's book from top to bottom a couple of times.

All I can say is that it's a must read concerning Watchman Nee.

Lily was there, and she's been in touch with many others that were there. And she footnote's and cite's her references. She's put in her research. She's got nothing to gain in making up fabrications.

Anyone reading her whole book will find it very hard to doubt it.

Get the book. Read it. You never see Nee the same again.

[OBW]

First, and aside. I think that maybe "Against the Tide" was an appropriate title since it now appears that Nee's goal was not something so truly spiritual, but rather something that was different from the foreign mission boards and denominational HQs. Something unique. Never seen before.

Should all be red flags.

------

For me, I had already begun to see the theological flaws in Nee's writings. I did not need to have his personal life reexamined in such a severe way to start that process.

But as that is now happening, I think that (once again) some of the warnings of Paul come to mind. If you see evidence of self-serving in living, don't even listen to them teach. If they are coming with flowery words designed to tug at your heart, question it even harder. If they are caught in sin, reject them.

I don't think that Paul was simply trying to get rid of people whose living made a lie of the gospel. He was rejecting the very idea that what they said could be of value. And that is one of the things that so bothers me about those of us who continue to talk about how much Nee was gifted and had wisdom. I think that Paul would have disagreed. He would have said to reject them outright. He would have considered their error to undermine and negate anything that might have been true.

"Reject them. Refuse them. Don't keep reading their books. They were lying to you all along. You'll never figure out where truth ends and error begins. So don't bother."

And I think that pointing to the flawed leaders of Israel in the past — David being among the most notable — there is nothing in the NT record that suggests that such a dichotomy would be allowed in leadership.

David is an excellent example of how it is that we may have such a heart of God and still be so unrighteous in our living. But David always repented — often with bitter tears and terrible consequences. And he did it in the public's eye, not just in private. (I sometimes think that Jimmy Swaggert was trying to play David when he did that tearful confession of his sin on TV. But David took his lumps. Swaggert was trying to play to the public's sympathies as he thumbed his nose at the hierarchy of his denomination (Assemblies of God, at the time) and refused to step down — even for a time.)

But in the NT scheme, Paul advised that teachers who do these things are to be rejected (as teachers, not necessarily as believers — not necessarily some kind of excommunication). Elders were to be made examples of, not swept under the rug like Lee's version of Noah's sons backing into the tent with a blanket to cover their father.

But without any suspicion of wrongdoing, Nee's words were already failing in terms of rightly handling the Word or truth. Add to it the almost overwhelming evidence of some serious sins and we shouldn't even be discussing his words. Paul's more weighty words should have turned us from them. We should have reburied them in the pit of pseudo-Christianity from which Nee dug them.

Maybe it's time for an old-fashioned burning. At least a theoretical burning. Discard the respect. Don't read another page unless it is to help someone see the errors of his teachings. I'm sure that Paul would have discouraged the keeping of any scrolls of teaching from the "refused" ones.

If there is anything that is truly worthwhile in any of Nee's or Lee's writings, let a group of respected Biblical scholars do the dirty work of finding it. Let them publish it void of the chaff of culture and national pride that set the whole Little Flock and Local Church movement in motion. Without the arrogance of self-proclaimed oracles and unique ministers of the age.

------

Stepped on a few more toes. Probably a few more enemies. Alas, that seems to be my plight.

[Cal]

The essential seed of the Nee/Lee movement was an extreme bias against established Christianity. This bias became the movement's undoing because they became unable to accept needed criticism.

It boils down to pride, the lack of humility to accept correction no matter what the source. Anyone who has been around the block knows that the Lord often teaches us through those we would consider unworthy of doing so. This is one way he keeps us humble and honest--grounded so to speak.

There is little evidence of this spirit in the Recovery and none in Lee. The rejection of all feedback from Christians outside the movement was the equivalent of the movement signing its death warrant. God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble. No one is exempt.

[Ohio]

Posted by Testing123

As far as I know, Kinnear (now referring to Angus) was never himself in Mainland China, having met Nee in the 1930s when he spent significant time at Honor Oak in England. Kinnear would later go on to serve many years of medical missionary work in India where he was involved with the Bakht Singh movement. It was there, in Bombay, that he first started publishing his own editions of Watchman Nee, which he edited together from notes compiled of Nee's speaking in England and Denmark. Angus Kinnear was very much spiritually related to T. Austin-Sparks and the other workers coming out of that center in England. However, none of those brothers ever worked with Nee directly.

Kinnear (p.312) writes the following about Lee restoring Nee to the ministry ...

In the hearts of those bearing responsibility in the Assembly Hall churches, the concern occasioned by Watchman Nee's prolonged absence from their ministry was very great. Already in 1946 Witness Lee had challenged the Shanghai elders: "Were you in the Spirit when you made the decision to reject him? And what was the effect? Can you say it brought life?" "No," they had replied sorrowfully to each question. The remorse felt among the fellow workers, and their patient search for a way back, is well expressed by one of them in April 1947: "Brother Nee's case was a mortal wound to us, and words cannot tell how far the consequences go. The charge that he collaborated with the enemy is entirely groundless, and much else that has been said was not based upon pure facts. This was the work of the devil, and shows our own spiritual deficiency at that time, but we hope we may have learned our lesson.

Kinnear's account begs the question, what were his sources? Did Kinnear, who never set foot in Shanghai, receive his account of events from Lee, or others who were not actually members of the church in Shanghai? Kinnear's book came out in 1973, and China had been a closed country for decades.