User talk:Watch-Wiki

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

August 2008[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Watchman Nee are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. - Bob K | Talk 23:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for welcoming me. Actually, I was only reacting to text already put there by others who were discussing the subject matter. Did you confront them too? Watch-Wiki Talk 23:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Incidentally, I share some doubts about the orthodoxy of Witness Lee's teachings but I am also pretty certain that Wikipedia isn't the place to discuss this, especially in such depth that requires multiple edits. Just a heads up, nothing personal :) - Bob K | Talk 09:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes I understand. It's just, I know a few people who actually have known Chinese brethren that kenw Watchman Nee personally, and my experience with Lee's movement is not very good I'm sorry to say. I know there is often heated debate about many subjects, especially on pages such as evolution and creation, which is understandable. Everyone has certain convictions, and that is I guess the negative point of wikipedia, that it isn't a paper encyclopedia which cannot be edited. Neutrality is often only possible in abstract subjects, such as mathematics. Ideological, philiosophical and religious articles/biographies are always prone to change because of personal views. Watch-Wiki Talk 16:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Watchman Nee[edit]


I think it would be good to include a section on Nee's theology. He has been considered by many Christians to be heterodox in his teachings (for example in his views of church authority and having only one church per area instead of many). I have read some about him and am convinced that much of people's objections to his teachings are misunderstandings or ideas that got "lost in translation" - having been translated into English from Chinese, and also coming from an Eastern worldview into the West. I also think that much of his teaching was distorted by Witness Lee into what the "local church" has become today. Anyways, I think it would be helpful to sort through some of the material about Nee's teachings and have a section about it. Kristamaranatha (talk) 17:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Sister, thanks for the noble idea. I also believe that it would be good to expand this article as the rating of it is start-class. Also a section on theology would be very nice.
Secondly, I would like to address few topics which might be useful in expanding this article on Mr. Nee. I believe, we see and hear, primarily what we want, and What we are, and with whom we associate with. If I live with only mango lovers, I will think all the people in this world love mangoes. Similarly, some think that Watchman Nee is misunderstood (or criticized) by many but then that could be an illustration of a frog in the well. This world is like a ocean and there are millions of faithful Christians (faithful to salvation and faithful to the Lord) around this globe (both in denominations and the local churches and in the other churches). I have seen a part of this world and I can assure you that Watchman Nee is understood and read by far more people than we can guess. Witness Lee did not mis-represented or ill-represented Mr. Nee or his teaching or writings. Mr. Lee only expanded the vision seen by Mr. Nee. And there are hundreds of others those who have a big contribution in the local churches and their practices today. (For exmp. J N Darby (Brethren and first Church restorinist (in a sense anti-denomination)), St. Iraneous (an Apostolic Father), Madam Gyone (a Catholic), Miss Barber (an Anglican), John Calvin (hated by so many Christians, for what??, I don't understand) (for pre-destination doctrine), Faith mission (Ireland), Holiness movement (Scotland, UK, Ireland), Early true church Christians (Montanist, Anabaptists, Moravians of past, etc) and others, and others ...
Thirdly, anyone true to the Bible (especially a lover of the complete Word of GOD) could see that a church, Christ, or biblical living has nothing to do with EAST or WEST. If that would happen then that will be marrying to the world. Remember there is no JEW, no GREEK, No Eastern Way (or philosophy: Confusious, Md. Rumi, Buddha, etc) or Western Way (or philosophy: Plato or Aristotle, K. Marks, and others). So what Watchman Nee preached or wrote was from the Universal God inspired Bible (God's breathe and own Word and revelation) and not from eastern influence or way of thoughts and living. There is absolute no doubt on that if one is true to God then she or he is a virgin and pure and universally Christ-like and under divine growth and work.
I hope this will clear some of the things I found saggy. Thanks. HopeChrist (talk) 00:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Witness Lee actually did distort some of Nee's teachings. He took some of Nee's teachings and stretched them a bit too far. I have all the works of Nee (translated by Stephen Kaung), and I have also many works (life-studies) by Witness Lee and other works by Lee. I have translated about 16 books by Nee into Dutch. As far as I know, Stephen Kaung (also a former co-worker of Nee) doesn't want to have anything to do with the movement of Lee. Representatives of Living Stream Ministries in my country have threatened my publisher, claiming that LSM had all the copyrights of the Basic Lesson Series published by CFP, which was an outright lie. A letter from a CFP board member confirmed that. The movement has caused a lot of trouble, and tries to link Nee with Lee, in order to gain more acceptance. I remember clearly how brother Nee once said to a woman who wanted to leave the Baptist Church upon hearing his teaching about church locality, that she should not leave on his account, but only if the life in that church was not present. Nee did not drive people out of the denominations. And Mr. Kaung works with denominations as well. Not that denominations are approved of mind you, but you cannot change the denominations, and since there are brothers and sisters in them, you cannot shun them. And it certainly isn't appropriate to walk around with printed t-shirts carrying texts like "God hates christianity." It doesn't help a lot when on the one hand we reject the denominations, and on the other hand practically start a new denomination ourselves and call it the "local church." This was not the way Nee worked. Watch-Wiki Talk 01:13, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

For an online encyclopedia, how do we define and neutralize what is "distortion" and what is "further expansion"? I mean, in the light of facts and general user centered, user-contributed wikipedia, how do we represent the truth!?!
I'm afraid that people are (and will) fight like inhuman beings on the name of God and on the nature of theology, translations, and doctrines. Well, I believe, atleast on Wiki, let us put only those things which are well sourced and verifiable (for the sake of human civility).
To some, Lee distorted the teaching and visions of Nee, and Paul for example did that to Peter and James!! Well, just in similar ways, Nee too have gone far away from the orthodox Biblical truths according to many theologians. Well, who is then right about the things of the invisible, unheard, incomprehensible, and unimaginable God!?! Let's not be overtly religious, self protecting, and too knowledgeable (beyond normal common sense), but we should try to "love and respect one another" and write the facts. As far as Wiki is concerned, it is all about "informations, facts, and sources". Another thing is "weight of the argument" and "the general consensus among the editors". Thanks. HopeChrist (talk) 06:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I am speaking only from personal experience. I started out to translate the works of brother Nee published by CFP. However, representatives of LSM in the Netherlands confronted my Dutch publisher at a christian book fair, and claimed that LSM had the sole rights to Mr. Nee's Basic Lesson Series, and they told the publisher that they could't sell these books. This clearly was a threat. Isn't this claiming the Lords work for oneself? Aren't we supposed to be glad when Nee's books are translated and published? No matter who does it? Why all this backbiting? Why try to cause trouble everywhere? Up to then I never had anything to do with LSM, but my first contact with them was negative. I was simply in love with Nee's work and what did I get in return from LSM? They displayed a selfish spirit and only caused frustration. This is not the way to behave. They also threaten christians who criticize them and take their own brothers and sisters to court. Is that what Paul wanted? I know Lee's works. I know the dangers of some of his teachings, especially in the pratice of pray-reading. Lee did not expand the teaching of the local church, he took it to extremes and caused division. I know this from testimonies of christians who have been in Lee's church for several decades. Again, I never sought trouble with LSM, it was the other way around, and it saddened me, because we have to spend eternity together and make amends while we are still "in the way." Furthermore, criticizing and judging and rebuking are perfectly biblical, if done in the right spirit. Tolerating unspiritual and fleshly behavior can come accross as loveing, but in reality it is not. One should not confuse spiritual love with soulical love. As to the Watchman Nee article, it is striking that most quotes and referrences are from LSM material. Therefore I gather that this article was first created by a member of LSM. Nothing wrong with that, but Watchman Nee's teachings have sometimes been changed by LSM, such in as for example Nee's book on Revelation (which I also have translated). I compared both CFP and LSM material for that. My feeling is that the name of Nee is misused to find acceptance of some of Lee's teachings. I grant that much of LSM is good, but there are unmistakenly some teachings and practices that are not biblical, with the result that LSM often is divisive. My personal and sincere feeling is that they are somewhat exlusive, and also use unhealthy prayer methods. Neutrality in this article means that Nee has to stand on his own, and that one needs to varify whether certain teachings are entirely from him, and not from LSM or whatever other organization. Now there is one website that deals with this matter, but the website owner is a very obstinate person and is fleshly and even foulmouthed in the way he treats Leeists. This is the website of Troy Brooks. Although I agree with a few things he has to say, I also must say that he refused to remove one article I once wrote from his website, an article which doesn't represent the truth. May the Lord forgive him. I do realize that many Lee and Nee critics simply do not interpret what they teach the right way, but I also know that Nee is not Lee, and therefore neutrality means to rid the article of everything "Lee", if at all present. I'll have to peruse the article afresh one time in order to fully grasp what is actually ascribed to Nee and what not. I'm not saying the latter is the fact, I'll have to read it through first. Watch-Wiki Talk 17:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

And about his theology, it would be helpful to write a list of viewpoints on important things such as the place of the will in salvation (I know Nee was as we may call it that way a "once saved always saved Arminian"), and for example, while some people call Nee the Chinese Calvin, they should understand that he never adhered to Calvinist teaching regarding salvation. These details are very important for people to be able to classify Nee in the overall christian "arena." Watch-Wiki Talk 17:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Christ is the Answer[edit]

Dear Watch-Wiki,

I'm again afraid that, you might take up my comments on the Talk:Watchman Nee page as argumentative, and void of brotherly love. Dear brother, I've been working on all these articles for quite some time now, and you should understand the principle here. Even if you don't want speak and exercise your soul, you still have to argue but with factually true and weighted points. Almost all or Most of the editors on the Wiki are too much into their minds and worldly knowledge, and little they speak and write from their spirit. Now all these are relative terms and personal experiences. For example, what I consider to be in the Spirit may be a soulish thing for you. So it can be your spirituality in someone's else eye. These are relative spiritual measure but then all I knew was "Loving One Another" when I first believed in the Lord Jesus, in 2003, and not in the Lord's recovery.

I met with the local churches from 2006-2007, and I have seen and done so called "pray-reading," and truly speaking brother, all it takes is to exercise your spirit and it takes exercised spirit again to call upon the name of the Lord, O Lord Jesus. I have studied books from both CPF and LSM, and personally speaking I like the set from LSM as they have the biggest number of books by Brother Nee.

Now having said that, I am not a person to feel sorry about your negative experience with the LSM as I do not represent them but as a Christian and fellow slave of faith with you, i feel sorry, when we Christians fight in the name of God. I am not a born Christin and I grew up in mystical religions of India, which is too deep in sympathy, non-violence, "all are right kind of modest pagan attitude", and for me to believe in Christ was a big challenge after looking what Jews, Muslims and Christians are today and were in the ancients. I, too, just like any one here have much to say, bu then what is the point of that on Wikipedia. You tell me brother? Mu questions to you and Wiki editors are not an argument of defense but are an open questions to all believing Christians, an echo of agonized spirit. Please forgive me, if I made you feel negative or hurt.

I look forward to work with you in mutual respect, cooperation, in spirit and love. Thank you. HopeChrist (talk) 17:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear brother, I am not offended in the least and I see nothing in what you write that could hurt me in any way. What is very important to see dear brother, is that you need to take the official teaching of a person, for example pray-reading, and then also to realize that people in the local churches can interpret these theories differently, and act accordingly. The official method of pray-reading in one of Lee's books, is that you must repeat a Bible verse and take it in without mentally thinking it through, because since it is God's Word, it will do it's work anyway. This is passivity of the mind. This way a Bible verse is simply used as a mantra. And this is their teaching. It is dangerous, and therefore it is unloving not to warn about these things. As you probably have read The Spiritual Man and War on the Saints, you will realize that the mind can activate the spirit. First of all it strikes me - and I'm saying this lovingly - that you conclude beforehand that I (may) take up your comments on the Talk:Watchman Nee page as argumentative, and void of brotherly love. We should be carefull not to think subjectively and draw conclusions about persons whom we don't even know. I don't have a quarrel with anyone from LSM, it was the other way around. My reaction to them was simply one of ignoring the whole matter and leaving it to the Lord. This should be the reacion. If there is a quarrel in a church, however, the Bible clearly indicates how to deal wikth that. That is not up to you or me, but the Bible only. Of course debating these things do not have a place on wikipedia, unless an article is not neutral. Therefore, based upon my experiences with LSM, I feel somewhat extra motivated to prevent anything "LSM" in Nee's article. That is all. Thank you for your comments. Watch-Wiki Talk 17:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Ways to improve A. A. Griffith Medal and Prize[edit]

Hi, I'm Matty.007. Watch-Wiki, thanks for creating A. A. Griffith Medal and Prize!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Consider a table for the recipients

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Matty.007 (talk) 15:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rapture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Wilkinson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

no problem Watch-Wiki Talk 00:44, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Watch-Wiki. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)