Spiritual Authority by Watchman Nee

[aron]

Originally Posted by alwayslearning

in regards to so called "spiritual authority" the question [] is: where does spiritual authority reside? If it resides in a certain person or select group of leaders than we are in trouble. Because this idea and practice allows this person or select handful of people to freely say and do whatever they want and everyone else is expected to submit to them regardless of what their own conscience says or what the Word of God says...

here is a section from page 80 "Elder's training, book 9"

"The New Testament leadership in the Gospels was a person. That person was the Lord Jesus Himself. But from Acts to Revelation, the unique New Testament leadership became the teaching of the apostles. Thus, neither Peter nor Paul controlled any church, but their teaching controlled. We can see this in 1 Timothy where Paul exhorted Timothy to remain in Ephesus in order that he might charge certain ones not to teach different things other than the economy of God (1:3-4). Different teachings are teachings which are different from the apostles' teaching concerning God's economy. This teaching is the unique leadership."

In this section Jesus, the subject, gets 2 quick sentences and the bulk of the attention goes to "teaching". Notice how easily Witness Lee turned the focus away from the leadership example of Jesus Christ. Jesus had led people back to their Father in heaven by doing: by serving (see John 13:12-17), by healing, feeding, comforting, and freeing people from oppression. Yes Jesus taught, but the focus, authority, and basis of his ministry was arguably "good works" --- see e.g. the declaration by one who was there with him: "how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him." ~Acts 10:38

Lee transformed this "doing good" into being a talking head, and selling one's messages, or teachings, for lucre. This is an infection from the spirit which was operating in Simon Magus, and which clearly penetrated the souls of both Lee and his fellow merchandizer Dong Yu Lan. Good works were ignored in the rush to convert "grace" into "cash".

[alwayslearning]

Originally Posted by aron

here is a section from page 80 "Elder's training, book 9"

"The New Testament leadership in the Gospels was a person. That person was the Lord Jesus Himself. But from Acts to Revelation, the unique New Testament leadership became the teaching of the apostles. Thus, neither Peter nor Paul controlled any church, but their teaching controlled. We can see this in 1 Timothy where Paul exhorted Timothy to remain in Ephesus in order that he might charge certain ones not to teach different things other than the economy of God (1:3-4). Different teachings are teachings which are different from the apostles' teaching concerning God's economy. This teaching is the unique leadership."

In this section Jesus, the subject, gets 2 quick sentences and the bulk of the attention goes to "teaching". Notice how easily Witness Lee turned the focus away from the leadership example of Jesus Christ.

I think what Witness Lee said in above quote is partly true but the apostles' teachings only play a part in the NT leadership.

There isn't a NT leadership in the Gospels and then a different one after that. The Gospels were all written at different times. John was one of the last books written. Jesus Christ is the Head of the Body the church and it's Leader. And one of the main ways he leads us is through our conscience.

During the time of the early church there were also the apostles and their teachings. And these apostles had apostolic authority and provided in-person leadership to the church and their teachings were also authoritative. Today what we have left are some of their teachings in writing which is part of the NT. And we also have some of the teachings of Jesus Christ in writing and his example.

So today 2000 years later we have the Lord Jesus Christ who is alive and well and able to lead His church and we have the NT which includes His teachings and the apostles' teachings. This is where spiritual authority resides.

What the LC systems has done is equate Witness Lee's teachings with the apostles' teachings. If you listen carefully to them and watch their practice that is what it amounts to. And when Witness Lee was alive they thought he was the apostle with apostolic authority. So him in-person and his teachings were authoritative. And now that he is dead his teachings are equal to the NT or higher in status for all intent and purposes. That is why they could have a big division over which is the correct and official exegesis of Witness Lee's teachings i.e. BB/LSM or Titus Chu? Nothing to do with the NT. Let's have a fight over the interpretation of Witness Lee's teachings!

[zeek]

Watchman Nee writes the following in Spiritual Authority, "God alone is authority in all things; all the authorities of the earth are instituted by God."

"We should not be occupied with right or wrong, good or evil; rather should we know who is the authority above us."

"...he who walks after reason and sight goes the way of reason; only he who obeys authority enters Canaan by faith. None who follow reason can walk the spiritual pathway, because it is beyond and above human reasoning."

"People will perhaps argue, `What if the authority is wrong?' The answer is, If God dares to entrust His authority to men, then we can dare to obey. Whether the one in authority is right or wrong does not concern us, since he has to be responsible directly to God. The obedient needs only to obey; the Lord will not hold us responsible for any mistaken obedience, rather will He hold the delegated authority responsible for his erroneous act. Insubordination, however, is rebellion, and for this the one under authority must answer to God."

Nee argues for strict authoritarianism over the normal exercise of human conscience and reason. History has show the disastrous consequences of such teaching. No wonder tyranny has been so prevalent in the Local Churches.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

The Bible teaches the wife to submit to the husband and the husband to exercise authority. Children should obey their parents. But as deputy authorities, parents also have their responsibilities and requirements.

Originally Posted by aron

In this section Jesus, the subject, gets 2 quick sentences and the bulk of the attention goes to "teaching". Notice how easily Witness Lee turned the focus away from the leadership example of Jesus Christ. ... Lee transformed this "doing good" into being a talking head, and selling one's messages, or teachings, for lucre.

Originally Posted by alwayslearning

What the LC systems has done is equate Witness Lee's teachings with the apostles' teachings.

Originally Posted by zeek

Nee argues for strict authoritarianism over the normal exercise of human conscience and reason. History has show the disastrous consequences of such teaching. No wonder tyranny has been so prevalent in the Local Churches.

Great points by all posters.

The message of the Bible clearly tells us that the true God of the universe created the heavens and the earth, and He alone is the true absolute authority. Sure He places some authority in man, but that is never absolute, and always with numerous caveats. Whenever the importance of human authorities becomes exaggerated, and the necessary warnings and exemptions are removed, conditions are rife with abuse. Both the church and secular history are filled with these tragedies.

There was a time when Lucifer, the Daystar (take note of that title!) on high, was given great authority from God Himself to administer the universe. That authority was parlayed into the first coup d'etat in recorded history. One third of the angels "obeyed" their authority to their own peril. Obviously God has not provided them with an exemption for "obeying the authority" which God had put in place.

With Nee's exaggerated sense of deputy authority, based more on Chinese culture and dynastic history than the Bible, it's easy to see how Zeek has rightly concluded, "No wonder tyranny has been so prevalent in the Local Churches."

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Lucifer... was given great authority from God Himself to administer the universe. That authority was parlayed into the first coup d'etat in recorded history. One third of the angels "obeyed" their authority to their own peril.

In zeek's quote, Nee wrote that insubordination to authority was akin to rebellion. It seems as though Nee himself found a way around this dilemma, and was able to establish his own authority, via his "ground of the church" interpretation. Based on the exposited "ground of the church" he could form and lead a spin-off from a spin-off from a spin-off from a spin-off (Nee was ex-Brethren, itself broken from Protestantism, which had left Catholicism, which had split from the Orthodox) and there teach absolute obedience to (his own) authority within this new group.

It is little wonder that his spiritual heirs are bullies, sycophants, and merchandizers. Had Nee's "ground of the church" teaching and organization been true to the word coming from God's throne (i.e. obedient to God's disseminated authority), his new organization and its subsequent spin-off progeny would have been immune to usurpation by such rebellious forces. Instead, these groups had their doors wide open with positions ready for the new bosses. For a behind-the-scenes view of this process, see Paul's word on "...the kingdom of the air... the spirits now at work in those who are disobedient" in chapter 2 of his letter to the Ephesians. The repeated turmoils, rebellions, schisms, and quarantines have naturally followed suit behind such an organized, collective disobedience to the authority of God's holy word.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by aron

It is little wonder that his spiritual heirs are bullies, sycophants, and merchandizers. Had Nee's "ground of the church" teaching and organization been true to the word coming from God's throne (i.e. obedient to God's disseminated authority), his new organization and its subsequent spin-off progeny would have been immune to usurpation by such rebellious forces.

I have placed in italics the portion of aron's post I wish to emphasize. I can very well understand aron's point if your are referring to the late Witness Lee and his handpicked "blended brothers". However if you are referring to other brothers Nee had discipled, I say you're going too far. My perception of Stephen Kaung is a polar opposite of Witness Lee. A merchandizer? If any posters or lurkers have been to his Family conferences in Virginia or the West Coast Conferences held each summer, you would know his books are at little or no cost at all. A bully? Not hardly. Probably more one who hadto bear the cross from being bullied. Sychophants? That's a term I don't hear used apart from Obama's administration or LSM. Having been a junior to Witness Lee, Stephen by now must be in his mid-90's. As for other brothers Watchman Nee had discpled, I don't know much about them. My best estimate is when it came to teachings on deputy authority and the local ground, the late Witness Lee over-emphasized it as a doctrine.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Terry

I can very well understand aron's point if your are referring to the late Witness Lee and his handpicked "blended brothers". However if you are referring to other brothers Nee had discipled, I say you're going too far.

I was writing from a reference point of being part of the Living Stream group, and then observing its progeny:

Arvore da Vida

http://www.arvoredavida.org.br/

and the group run by Chu.

http://ministrymessages.org/

I am aware that Nee influenced others, but don't know many details of their teachings, activities and organizations, and did not mean to disparage them. Actually I don't disparage any person, but rather the teachings which allowed so many in the flock of God to become controlled by rebellious forces, who set themselves up as 'authorities' on earth. Nee was perhaps a better man than I. But his ideas have splintered and stumbled the flock of God now how many times? Too many to count. And his heirs that I am familiar with (Witness Lee, Benson Phillips, Titus Chu, Dong Yu Lan) have certainly followed Nee's 'authority' teaching to its natural end: centralized control, with an 'acting God', followed by the inevitable turmoil and further splintering, and with bewildered sheep wondering what happened to the vaunted "oneness" of their flock. If Nee's teaching on authority was any good, why have its fruits been so persistently bad?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

In zeek's quote, Nee wrote that insubordination to authority was akin to rebellion.

It is little wonder that his spiritual heirs are bullies, sycophants, and merchandizers.

This obvious connection has to be examined. For Nee and Lee to teach absolute submission to human deputy authorities, beyond the prescribed words of the Bible, is to establish a system where one man will rise to the top of the heap conquering all others in the process. Though Nee spoke numerous teachings to the contrary, attempting to neutralize the inherent tendencies of man's fallen nature, still we must examine the fruit of this teaching in order to validate it.

Both the Roman Church, the Brethren exclusive system, and the Recovery all stressed singular human authorities endued with tremendous human authority over their members. Each stressed that insubordination to deputy authority was akin to rebellion against the throne of God. Whether the pope, the Oracle of God, or the Minister of the Age, each was elevated to a position as vicar or God-man status, placing his own teachings equal with or above those of scripture. Each system had leaders who robbed the Head of His rightful place over the flock, and each had leaders who felt a certain sense of entitlement to abuse the flock of God when their authority was threatened.

When Christ is replaced with a man on the top, God-pleasing gets replaced with man-pleasing. Instead of pleasing only the Head, the Knower of hearts, men begin to seek the glory of man at the expense of genuine faith. Men of faith are replaced with sycophants jockeying for position in earthly kingdoms. Blessings from God slowly dry up, and leadership is forced to seek the gains of filthy lucre. Merchandizing the teachings of man result in an effort to prop up whatever heavenly blessing once existed.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

This obvious connection has to be examined. For Nee and Lee to teach absolute submission to human deputy authorities, beyond the prescribed words of the Bible, is to establish a system where one man will rise to the top of the heap conquering all others in the process.

Again, Watchman Nee:

"Whether the one in authority is right or wrong does not concern us, since he has to be responsible directly to God. The obedient needs only to obey...Insubordination, however, is rebellion, and for this the one under authority must answer to God."

Notice how easy it is to slide from this to "Witness Lee: even when he's wrong he's right." Turns out that God is a respecter of persons, after all.