One of our missionaries just emailed me, asking if any of my readers knew anything about Watchman Nee. He is, it seems, pretty big in their part of the world. Anyone got any comments?

Spiritually, I “grew up” on Watchman Nee....but I haven’t heard of him since I was 17 - too many years ago to mention!.  I think of him in the “holiness” brigade, along with Keswick conventions, as they were back then.  But as with anything, his devotees years and years down the track may be more ardent and “out there” than he actually was.  I would think more Armenian than Calvanist.

Good to hear others responses who have some specific information, and to see from your missionary friend what it is exactly “being pretty big out there” means.

Gill.

Craig, I don’t really know much about him, though I did read a good article (by Ranauld Macaulay and Dick Keyes on Being Human) a while ago which was balanced, yet critical of him in a few points.  Here’s a couple of excerpts:

“Nee’s stress on dependence on God, and on the humility we ought to have as sinners is of great value. But it seems to us that he goes beyond this valuable emphasis when he speaks of the breaking of the soul to release the spirit. He seems to be rejecting not merely the sinful nature but the self, for is not the self constituted by the emotions, the mind, the will — Nee’s “outer man”? Consequently he devalues the human.”

“Much of what Watchman Nee has written is very helpful, particularly his emphasis on faith and the need to be yielded in all things to God, but his teaching on the self is unbalanced, unhelpful and contrary to the New Testament’s teaching.”

here’s the article: http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/beinghuman.html

Basil, a member of our congregation lived through China during the cultural revolution.  His family came from around Shanghai and were quite wealthy, however lost everything when the communist regime took over.  Watchman Nee ran a church in Shanghai which Basil was a part of.

Basil wrote a self-published book a couple of years ago and is very positive about Nee, whom he grew a lot from before Nee went to prison in 1952 right through to when Nee was released and died in 1972.

I have heard something of the (relatively minor) criticisms of his theology, however seeing the fruit of his ministry, and the way he stuck it out in his own life, I’m prepared to see him as a real hero of the faith in China - and this is how he is seen in China.  However in China it’s hard to pin down who (theologically) are the “good guys” and the “bad guys”.

Hi all, have just come back from an “over 50’s” group made up of our Church members. I asked how many of them had heard of Watchman Nee, and all of them had.  They all were influenced by Watchman Nees books in their early Christian days - must be late 60s early 70s.

Gill.

This must be a really late reply. Yes, Nee still exert a great deal of influence in many parts of the world (especially among Chinese Christians). He stood up against the Three-Self movement of Communist China and was gaoled for many years for it. That’s partly why he’s so popular - sacrifice, heroism etc he embodies many of the Chinese ideals.
On the theological front, he wrote to devlop what he thought would be a genuine indigenous Chinese theology (free from Western philosophical and cultural influences, thus he was the originator of the Three-Self movement). When you read his stuff, it’s clear that he himself cannot break free from his own cultural influences. So his theology is steeped in Arminianism, mystisicm, pietism, Toaist anthropology etc etc.
He was succeeded by his great disciple Witness Nee.
There are a couple of churches in Sydney that can be traced directly to Nee. They call themselves ‘The little Flock’ or ‘the local church’.
I’m sure a lot has been writen on him.

One of Watchman Nee’s famous sayings (on the importance of morning devotions):  “No Bible, no breakfast!”
Perhaps one of our other correspondents can give us the Chinese version!
Bob

Some of Watchman Nee’s teaching was helpful in books such as The Normal Christian Life, Sit Walk Stand [his helpful summary of Ephesians] and Changed into his likeness.

However his book called The Spiritual Man, based on a tripartite understanding of our makeup [body soul spirit] had all the worst elements of that erroneous, but popular misunderstanding of the biblical data.

Also, his local church ecclesiology was like an extreme Church of Christ or Brethren teaching and was not helpful.

Many years ago I enjoyed Angus Kinnear’s biography, Against the Tide.

The trajectory of Watch Nee is the Living Stream Ministry, which has all but abaondoned Christian orthodoxy.

Mr Tung
I dont know much about Watchman Nee but what is wrong with being Arminianism, mystisicm, pietism, I think Charles and John Wesley would say yes to all those.

Dear Peter,
And some would argue that Calvin was a mystic. And others would argue that Taoist anthropology is more biblical than the Greek athropology imbued in Western theology. And still others would argue that the theology of LMS is sound.
Notwithstanding, I haven’t yet said that there’s anything wrong with these. I didn’t think that this is the thread to argue the merits of arminianism and Calvinism etc. I’m simply drawing attention to the intellectual and spiritual heritage of Nee.

LMS = London Midland and Scottish Railway?
or London Missionary Society?
or?

Sorry.
LMC = Living Stream Ministries (http://www.lsm.org/).
It has taken to the practice of suing those who would suggest that it’s a cult. See the open letter here http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1821&Itemid=8.

Just realised that I have inadvertantly associated arminianism with LMS (which I did suggest is heretical). This is not intended.

Hi Peter and Brian and all
I think John and Charles Wesley would run a mile from what became of Watchman Nee’s ministry.

So would Watch Nee himself.