Soul-Life, Kundalini, and Watchman Nee

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Ohio

At the risk of appearing to be "hovering" over this thread, I question this opening premise. Nee was hardly the first to use this English phrase. I would suggest some good Word Studies and commentaries for clarification.

Secondly, the use of this phrase "soul-life" has nothing to do with Nee's wild speculations about "latent powers of the soul" ascribed to Adam at creation.

You're right Ohio, I wasn't sure if it was Nee or one of his influences that coined the term. It appears it was first used by Penn-Lewis. But in the context of Watchman Nee and his writings, I believe you'll find that phrase first appear in Latent Power of the Soul. Either way, now skimming through Penn-Lewis' book, I see how much of her ideas he borrowed from.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Nee's source here was Penn-Lewis, who had a checkered influence over the Evangelist Evan Roberts and the revival in Wales. She brought much paranoia into that gospel work which sadly brought it to an abrupt end.

That's assuming gospel work was being done in the first place.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Jo S

You're right Ohio, I wasn't sure if it was Nee or one of his influences that coined the term. It appears it was first used by Penn-Lewis. But in the context of Watchman Nee and his writings, I believe you'll find that phrase first appear in this book. Either way, now skimming through Penn-Lewis' book, I see how much of her ideas he borrowed from.

That's assuming gospel work was being done in the first place.

Nee's book "Spiritual Man" plagiarized JPL's writings.

Yes, the gospel work in Wales bore much fruit. It was called the "Welch Revival." Much has been written about it. JPL's paranoid counseling about demons drove Evan Roberts into depression, and ended the gospel work.

This is one case where a sister should have been silent.

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Nee's book "Spiritual Man" plagiarized JPL's writings.

Yes, the gospel work in Wales bore much fruit. It was called the "Welch Revival." Much has been written about it. JPL's paranoid counseling about demons drove Evan Roberts into depression, and ended the gospel work.

This is one case where a sister should have been silent.

I don't know too much about the Welsh Revival and obviously wasn't there so I can't discern the fruit for myself. Like you, I'm cautious about books outside of scripture, but I also approach mass revivals with skepticism (Azusa street comes to mind). It's interesting this Evan Roberts, even after the revival died out, maintained a yoke with Penn-Lewis.

I just read a charisma magizine article claiming it was Jezebel in Penn-Lewis that killed the Welsh revival but seeing as she was Roberts's main influence, how can you conclude that it was ever a move of God to begin with? After the failure of the revival, Penn-Lewis blamed Roberts and Satan and then other Charismatics blamed Penn-Lewis and Jezebel. I just see a lot of passing the buck here. This could very well have just been two deceived souls. That's also a possibility.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Jo S

I don't know too much about the Welsh Revival and obviously wasn't there so I can't discern the fruit for myself. Like you, I'm cautious about books outside of scripture, but I also approach mass revivals with skepticism (Azusa street comes to mind). It's interesting this Evan Roberts, even after the revival died out, maintained a yoke with Penn-Lewis.

I just read a charisma magizine article claiming it was Jezebel in Penn-Lewis that killed the Welsh revival but seeing as she was Roberts's main influence from the start, how can you conclude that it was ever a move of God to begin with? After the failure of the revival, Penn-Lewis blamed Roberts and Satan and then other Charismatics blamed Penn-Lewis and Jezebel. I just see a lot of passing the buck here. This could very well have been not only be a Jezebel issue but an Ahab issue as well, two deceived souls. That's also a possibility.

Many lives were changed via regeneration by the work of God's Spirit as a result of Roberts' gospel preaching. Sure there was blaming and buck-passing. That exists everywhere.

What we have to be freed from is this thought of perfection. Lee and Nee and Darby and others would like us to believe that their movement was free from all fleshly influence. Even Apostle Paul's co-workers turned on him when things went South. Look at the Galatians. Did not they begin in the Spirit, and then finish in the flesh?

Even Azusa Street was a real move of the Spirit. That's undeniable. But that doesn't mean that everything else since then is real. I've seen numerous frauds on TV. I know many folks who many pilgrimages to Azusa Street. Is that not superstitious?

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Many lives were changed via regeneration by the work of God's Spirit as a result of Roberts' gospel preaching. Sure there was blaming and buck-passing. That exists everywhere.

What we have to be freed from is this thought of perfection. Lee and Nee and Darby and others would like us to believe that their movement was free from all fleshly influence. Even Apostle Paul's co-workers turned on him when things went South. Look at the Galatians. Did not they begin in the Spirit, and then finish in the flesh?

Even Azusa Street was a real move of the Spirit. That's undeniable. But that doesn't mean that everything else since then is real. I've seen numerous frauds on TV. I know many folks who many pilgrimages to Azusa Street. Is that not superstitious?

Ohio, I have to say the way you phrased that statement makes it sound very LCesque and a bit too ambiguous. Sort of like saying "get out of your mind" or "lay down your soul-life". I don't think we should be freed from the thought of perfection as a reality to strive toward but we need to have a realistic view of what it means in our walk with Christ.

"Therefore be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect."

The issue I see is that in the LC's people trusted in another man's idea of perfection. When that eventually snowballs into an oppression it taints these biblical ideals.

But if you mean that just because someone is flawed doesn't mean God can't work through them, you'd be right. But at the same time just because there's a massive move in the spiritual with all kinds of signs and wonders, especially with one man at the center of it all, doesn't mean any of it is from God either.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Ohio, I have to say the way you phrased that statement makes it sound very LCesque and a bit too ambiguous. Sort of like saying "get out of your mind" or "lay down your soul-life". I don't think we should be freed from the thought of perfection as a reality to strive toward but we need to have a realistic view of what it means in our walk with Christ.

"Therefore be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect."

The issue I see is that in the LC's people trusted in another man's idea of perfection. When that eventually snowballs into an oppression it taints these biblical ideals.

But if you mean that just because someone is flawed doesn't mean God can't work through them, you'd be right. But at the same time, just because there's a massive move in the spiritual with all kinds of signs and wonders, especially with one man at the center of it all, doesn't mean any of it is from God either.

OK. Agreed. Perhaps I can clarify.

There has always been two definitions of "perfection." At least for me. One is Biblical, meaning matured, full-grown, becoming fit, reaching completion. The second is sinless, flawless, error free, without mistakes, completely free from the flesh, from the old man, etc.

The second definition can only be applied to Jesus Christ. Never to us. Yet it becomes the standard of comparison by which we Christians are unfairly judged.

In the Recovery during my 30 years, Witness Lee transitioned from definition #1 to #2 at least in the eyes of the Blendeds. Titus Chu famously said that the Blendeds viewed WL as god, while he viewed WL as man. There was no doubt some truth to that. Every healthy New Testament minister needs peers, needs balance, needs feedback. God designed it this way. He would only allow his Son to be perfect. Sounds obvious, yet Nee and Lee operated alone on top, as if they were. Officially they declined such an honor, but the facts are the facts, and proof that power does indeed corrupt.

[Jo S]

I also wanted to add this point to my original post.

The bible verse that Watchman Nee/Penn-Lewis misinterpret and use to justify the need to separate and compartmentalize the soul from the spirit is found in Hebrews 4:12;

"for the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."

If you continue on to Hebrews 4:13 and add a bit more context, it goes on to state;

"...and there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account."


The Hebrews author isn't teaching an esoteric dividing of soul from spirit, he simply teaches through metaphor that the Word of God penetrates past things that are seen and discerns the things of both the soul and the spirit.

How they conclude "soul is bad, spirit is good" from that verse is baffling but nevertheless it's twisted to justify losing one's soul-life, that is, losing the sense of individuality.