Beware the writings of the Watchman

Watchman Nee had a flawed view of man, practiced an allegorical approach to interpreting Scripture, believed denominations were sinful, and frequently called others to join him in his perpetual quest for the deeper spiritual life—a quest that smacks of perfectionism.

Lack of clarity
Perhaps the best way to describe Nee is to label him a confused Christian mystic. Here’s one lengthy but insightful example. I chose this example because it is indicative of his writing style, as well as an excellent example of his lack of clarity:

'Some years ago I was ill. For six nights I had high fever and could find no sleep. Then at length God gave me from the Scripture a personal word of healing, and because of this I expected all symptoms of sickness to vanish at once. Instead of that, not a wink of sleep could I get, and I was not only sleepless but more restless than ever. My temperature rose higher, my pulse beat faster and my head ached more severely than before. The enemy asked, ‘Where is God’s promise? Where is your faith? What about all your prayers?’ So I was tempted to thrash the whole matter out in prayer again, but was rebuked, and this Scripture came to mind: “Thy word is truth” (John 17:17Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)). If God’s Word is truth, I thought, then what are these symptoms? They must all be lies! So I declared to the enemy, ‘This sleeplessness is a lie, this headache is a lie, this fever is a lie, this high pulse is a lie. In view of what God has said to me, all these symptoms of sickness are just your lies, and God’s Word to me is truth.’ In five minutes I was asleep, and I awoke the following morning perfectly well” (The Normal Christian Life, 33-34).

While Nee places heavy stock in personal “spiritual” experiences of that kind, the more significant danger prevalent throughout his books is his consistent lack of clarity. Nee does not come right out and say that faith can cure physical illness, nor does he claim outright that he receives direct revelation from the Lord. He doesn’t hold his experience up as an example to follow, but simply relates it as it happened, and then passes it along to us. Consider another example from The Normal Christian Life:

“The fact of the matter is that, while Christians may enter into the deeper life by different ways, we need not regard the experiences or doctrines they stress as mutually exclusive, but rather complementary. One thing is certain, that any true experience of value in the sight of God must have been reached by way of a new discovery of the meaning of the Person and work of the Lord Jesus. That is a crucial test and a safe one” (25).

That’s the kind of ambiguity you’ll find in much of Nee’s writing. What does he mean by “the deeper life?” What is a “true experience of value?” How does one reach “a new discovery of the meaning of the Person and work of the Lord Jesus?” He never really defines those terms. And yet because he uses phrases like “the higher life,” he appeals to the growing number of American Christians who believe that the key to sanctification is to arrive at a place where one stops striving for it. Is that what Nee taught? Even after reading many of his books multiple times, I can’t really tell.


http://thecripplegate.com/beware-the-writings-of-the-watchman/

'Nee’s writings show that he adopted this two-tiered system of believers: there are those that are being sanctified by letting Christ live in them, and those that are still carnal (he uses the term “ripened” vs. “unripened” ). He also developed one of the first “partial-rapture” views, where only the sanctified believers would be raptured. This then leads to his strange view of the New Jerusalem as a place where unripened believers receive chastisement through the millennial kingdom, so that they will be ripened for eternity. Those secondary eschatological issues are just that: secondary. But they bear mentioning because the higher life approach to Christianity is often his main point, and is very misleading.'


http://thecripplegate.com/beware-the-writings-of-the-watchman/

This thread was started under the naive assumption that runs something like this:

"When you get a bad article written by someone on the Internet, immediately believe everything you have read.

If it were not so it would not have someone write up their complaints on the Internet. Beware! "

Ghost's working assumption must be:

The only things safe in the world that need not be warned against are people and things which have absolutely NO BAD statements written to criticize them on the Internet.

That is things like ........

And people like ........

My exposure to these writings is only through what sonship has written here. I see these writings as just 'another voice' out there. I tend to give them more credence than, say, similar writings by televangelists or others who have made lots of money from speaking fees, and yet they read to me like what others have written before them. Reasonable, yet sometimes putting too fine a point on it.

What I honestly see too much of out there is 'writing to their base'. Even Paul was guilty of this. This seems to me an effort to escape criticism, but interestingly enough, writings like these end up generating criticism because people misunderstand the target audience. As Paul showed, too often the ones who need 'encouragement' (read: chastisement) the most are already Christians in name, if not exactly in action. Apparently, most need to be reminded continually that being a Christian is NOT about self, but about others. True, this is needed because there seems to be too many who actually read the New Testament and come away thinking "Well, okay, this is all about ME". Well, some of it IS, but only BECAUSE of this common attitude that it is "all about me". Some of it IS about the re-alignment of our compasses, but only because we didn't get the message in the Gospels right the first time. Non-Christians view this material and say "How is this supposed to make me want to be a Christian?" Well, it's not. That is not its aim. I do agree that there is not nearly enough written with the audience of non-Christians in mind. Everyone seems only interested in pandering to their 'base'. I would have welcomed more in the New Testament speaking to those not yet "reached".

@sonship said
When you get a bad article written by someone on the Internet, immediately believe everything you have read.

@suzianne said
there seems to be too many who actually read the New Testament and come away thinking "Well, okay, this is all about ME". Well, some of it IS, but only BECAUSE of this common attitude that it is "all about me".

@sonship said
This thread was started under the naive assumption that runs something like this:

"When you get a bad article written by someone on the Internet, immediately believe everything you have read.

If it were not so it would not have someone write up their complaints on the Internet. Beware! "

@sonship said
When you get a bad article written by someone on the Internet, immediately believe everything you have read.

@sonship said
This thread was started under the naive assumption that runs something like this:

"When you get a bad article written by someone on the Internet, immediately believe everything you have read.

If it were not so it would not have someone write up their complaints on the Internet. Beware! "

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

'Nee’s writings show that he adopted this two-tiered system of believers: there are those that are being sanctified by letting Christ live in them, and those that are still carnal (he uses the term “ripened” vs. “unripened” ).

The work of each shall become manifest; for the day shall make it known, because it is revealed by fire, and the fire itself will test each ones work, of what sort it is. (v.13)

If anyone's work which he has built upon it shall remain, he shall receive a reward. (v.14)

If anyone's work shall be consumed, he shall suffer loss, but he shall be saved, yet so as through fire (v.15)

@sonship said
Ghost's working assumption must be:

The only things safe in the world that need not be warned against are people and things which have absolutely NO BAD statements written to criticize them on the Internet.

That is things like ........

And people like ........

@ghost-of-a-duke said
These threads, therefore, are intended to readdress the balance and examine their teachings from a different perspective. This really shouldn't concern you if you stand by what they have said.

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

He also developed one of the first “partial-rapture” views, where only the sanctified believers would be raptured.

Because you have kept the word of My endurance, I also will keep you out of the hour of trial which is about to come on the whole inhabited earth, to try them. (Rev. 3:10)

This then leads to his strange view of the New Jerusalem as a place where unripened believers receive chastisement through the millennial kingdom, so that they will be ripened for eternity.

"Because whom He foreknew, He also predestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He should be the firstborn among many brothers.

And whom He predestinated, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified." (Rom. 8:29,30)