Spiritual Authority by Watchman Nee

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Great post bro Z.

But what do I know?

The LRC claims to be a Bible based church.

So I looked there to find "who was right."

I searched the Bible for "delegated authority" and "minister of the age." Result : no hits. So I narrowed the search to "delegated." Again no hits.

But "authority" pulled up :

Mat 20:25 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
Mat 20:26 But it shall not be so among you:

So does Jesus qualify as someone who knows who is right?

Other than that, right now, I got nothing. But maybe I'll know everything some time soon. I'll get back to you then.

Wow! Who would have thought? The Bible doesn't mention Fathers or mothers! It doesn't command you to "honor your father and mother". It doesn't talk about obeying authority! It doesn't talk about headship. It doesn't mention laws, or elders, or excommunication, or any vestige of authority! Were you doing a search of the King James Bible or the Anarchists Bible?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Were you doing a search of the King James Bible or the Anarchists Bible?

So you think Jesus was an Anarchist? The Romans thought so too. That's why they hung him. As they did all Anarchists. Jesus was just one among thousands (mostly Pharisees) they hung on a cross for insurrection against Rome.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

So you think Jesus was an Anarchist? The Romans thought so too. That's why they hung him. As they did all Anarchists. Jesus was just one among thousands (mostly Pharisees) they hung on a cross for insurrection against Rome.

This may explain the confusion of your other posts. I don't think Jesus, Lord of all, is an anarchist. I think you are.

[UntoHim]

Hi Harold, good to see you....kind of...

Please stay on topic. The last few post are wondering a bit. I think this topic is controversial enough without having to resort to agitating other members. Let's keep the Topiq Nazi on the sidelines where he belongs.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Hi Harold, good to see you....kind of...

Please stay on topic. The last few post are wondering a bit. I think this topic is controversial enough without having to resort to agitating other members. Let's keep the Topiq Nazi on the sidelines where he belongs.

I respect your authoritah .... sorry ... It went off topic at post #38 ...

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Wow! Who would have thought? The Bible doesn't mention Fathers or mothers!

So now we're not talking about spiritual authority, but natural authority. Of course parents are an authority. They change the diapers. Still, who can have authority over a baby? Just command it to do something and see what happens.

You are confusing authorities. Normal authorities are not the same as God authorities.

Were you doing a search of the King James Bible or the Anarchists Bible?

I already stated it was the KJV.

The point is that "delegated authority" as taught by Nee & Lee, and "Minister of the Age, are not in the Bible. They are extra-Biblical teachings and practices, that require a "Sleight of Mind spell casting trick of verbage" to gain all-in allegiance.

And don't try to bait me into the subject of Christian anarchy. However, if we're talking about sticking to scripture, at least there's more support for Christian anarchy than delegated authority or the MOTA.

But we're good boys and won't talk about that.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

So now we're not talking about spiritual authority, but natural authority. Of course parents are an authority. They change the diapers.

You are confusing authorities. Normal authorities are not the same as God authorities.


I already stated it was the KJV.

The point is that "delegated authority" as taught by Nee & Lee, and "Minister of the Age, are not in the Bible. They are extra-Biblical teachings and practices, that require a "Sleight of Mind spell casting trick of verbage" to gain all-in allegiance.

And don't try to bait me into the subject of Christian anarchy. However, if we're talking about sticking to scripture, at least there's more support for Christian anarchy than delegated authority or the MOTA.

But we're good boys and won't talk about that.

In Nee and Lee's teaching they refer to "delegated" authority using Police and the uniform as one example. Hence, anarchy is relevant to their teaching. They also use Fathers, Mothers, head covering and other scriptural references. The issue with the teaching is not that the NT does not teach this concept, it does. The issue isn't that some of what Nee and Lee taught was scriptural, it was. The issue is that they went too far and also misappropriated the teaching. MOTA is a clear example of their error.

Yes the NT teaches delegated authority, especially when Paul says to "obey" those in authority.
Yes their is "delegated" authority in the church, particularly when Paul says to let everything be done in order, and where he says that we need to learn how to behave in the house of God.

However, Jesus made it very clear that we are to call no man "Rabbi", hence the teaching of MOTA is clearly prohibited by Jesus. That teaching is heretical. To justify that teaching with "delegated authority" is to misappropriate that teaching. Lee and Nee clearly mishandled the word of God and did not cut it straight.

PS. -- Honoring your father and mother is a commandment with the two promises that it will "be well with you" and that "you will live long". Hence, I don't accept your distinction between this being a "natural" delegated authority whereas Elders and Apostles are "spiritual" delegated authority.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

In Nee and Lee's teaching they refer to "delegated" authority using Police and the uniform as one example. Hence, anarchy is relevant to their teaching. They also use Fathers, Mothers, head covering and other scriptural references. The issue with the teaching is not that the NT does not teach this concept, it does. The issue isn't that some of what Nee and Lee taught was scriptural, it was. The issue is that they went too far and also misappropriated the teaching. MOTA is a clear example of their error.

Yes the NT teaches delegated authority, especially when Paul says to "obey" those in authority.
Yes their is "delegated" authority in the church, particularly when Paul says to let everything be done in order, and where he says that we need to learn how to behave in the house of God.

However, Jesus made it very clear that we are to call no man "Rabbi", hence the teaching of MOTA is clearly prohibited by Jesus. That teaching is heretical. To justify that teaching with "delegated authority" is to misappropriate that teaching. Lee and Nee clearly mishandled the word of God and did not cut it straight.

PS. -- Honoring your father and mother is a commandment with the two promises that it will "be well with you" and that "you will live long". Hence, I don't accept your distinction between this being a "natural" delegated authority whereas Elders and Apostles are "spiritual" delegated authority.

I would quibble but not cuz this was a great post. Thanks ZNP.

[Cal]

Misappropriation (great word by the way) of principles of authority is a calling card of abusive groups. Heck, it is a calling card of almost all abuse, spiritual or otherwise. It is taking advantage of another's good faith and intentions.

Nee's distorted view on authority is just one more example of why spiritual teaching needs to be vetted by the Body of Christ. I am under authority in the church I'm in. I honor God by being so. But if my church ever got on a tear, like the LC did, of making a big deal about spiritual authority, I would strongly consider leaving, because I know emphasizing it is a pretext to abuse.

Jesus specified tying a millstone around one's neck and throwing it in the sea being better than the consequences of such abuses. LC leaders, take note.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Misappropriation (great word by the way) of principles of authority is a calling card of abusive groups. Heck, it is a calling card of almost all abuse, spiritual or otherwise. It is taking advantage of another's good faith and intentions.

Nee's distorted view on authority is just one more example of why spiritual teaching needs to be vetted by the Body of Christ. I am under authority in the church I'm in. I honor God by being so. But if my church ever got on a tear, like the LC did, of making a big deal about spiritual authority, I would strongly consider leaving, because I know emphasizing it is a pretext to abuse.

Jesus specified tying a millstone around one's neck and throwing it in the sea being better than the consequences of such abuses. LC leaders, take note.

Refreshing Igzy.

Stopping this abuse of "spiritual" authority in the local churches will have to come from the bottom up. The small potatoes will have to wise up and proclaim : "Take your spiritual authority and shove it ... we follow Christ!" Many have stated that with their feet.

[zeek]

Mat 20:25 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
Mat 20:26 But it shall not be so among you:

So have we simply dismissed Jesus' teaching here? In Nee's book it would seem to read:

But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
Mat 20:26 And so shall it be so among you.

And authority doesn't work at all with babies. No matter what you do they just cry, eat, and mess their diapers. Authority does not exist to them yet.

Jesus sought to subvert people from the world system to the Kingdom of God. He was a non-violent revolutionary. That's why they killed him. It was the subversive element in Paul's teaching that got him killed as well. Who, if anyone, is practicing the Kingdom of God today?