David Henke Makes Himself Another Master

Of the Watchman Fellowship Expositor or Fellowship, Inc.

David Henke writes "Another way submission is required is through the teaching of a 'chain of command' in one’s church and family relationships. It is also called 'delegated authority.' These terms have been associated with abusive, controlling authority in the Discipleship, Shepherding groups."

No doubt such is abused, but the fact of the matter, there are those with authority, in the household, those of the 4 fold Ministry of the Work for the Church, and there are those we look up to who are helpful in their teaching. For example, Watchman Nee was perhaps the most spiritual Christian writer that ever lived. Another writer I highly respect is Lee Strobel. To simplify, parents are the authority of their children. Watchman Nee used the example of a police officer as being of authority. We even ought to pay our taxes to the authority of the government. What is in view here is that of humility and knowing submission in where true authority is seen. Because of this fact, this is no reason to misread Watchman Nee's intention. Watchman Nee does not use the term "chain of command" for the Bible is not a military chain of command and control center. Rather all things in life have authority and submission. Yet another example, Nee uses the light bulb that needs a lamp, and that lamp needs wire that connects to an outlet for electricity that needs a power supply from the electric company, so on and so forth. This is common sense is it not?

David Henke, further writes, "This false teaching came into American churches through Watchman Nee and his book Spiritual Authority. Nee says on page 71, 'If God dares to entrust His authority to man, then we can dare to obey. Whether the one in authority is right or wrong does not concern us. The obedient one needs only to obey. The Lord will not hold us responsible for any mistaken obedience, rather He will hold the delegated authority responsible for his erroneous act.' In addition, he states, 'We should not be occupied with right or wrong, good or evil; rather should we know who is the authority above us' (page 23)."

Therefore, as noted about God's delegated authorities, such is not a false teaching, but the way the universe works and it is God's will in all things. All things have cause and effect. It did not happen as soon as when Watchman wrote Spiritual Authority. Spiritual Authority perfectly reflects God's will as it pertains to authority and submission since the beginning of creation. Another person who horribly misreads Nee in the same way, is Pat Knapp. As you read through the underlying motivation of why these individuals alter Watchman Nee's writings in their misreading bearing false witness, I have found it usually has to do with a couple of things: either they are calvinists (Nee was osas arminian), against Biblical locality, hold the fallen bipartite view of man, or they are historicalists or premillennial onlyists.

This quote on page 71 is answered with the next paragraph when Nee writes "It is therefore clear that no human element is involved in the matter of authority. If our subjection is merely directed to a man the whole meaning of authority is lost. When God instituted His delegated authority He is bound by His honor to maintain that authority. We are each one of us responsible before God in this matter. Let us be careful we make no mistake." In the previous paragraph, Nee writes, "But the Lord makes us representatives plenipotentiary. What confidence He has in us! Can we trust any less when our Lord displays such trust in His delegated authority?" Further Nee adds in the same paragraph mentioned by Henke, "Insubordination, however, is rebellion, and for this the one under authority must answer to God". Now, the point of this whole exercise to to state clearly, as David was obedient to Saul's attacks, and did not try to oust him, David accepted God's authority in Saul. In due time God would bring about a change, a change not by David's strength. To reject delegated authority is an affront to God. David Henke appears to be disobedient and hostile to God's desire to see the harmony of authority and submission in all things, therefore Henke will suffer the consequences of God's wrath through his bearing false witness and misreading intention. Hence, through such bearing false witness, we may conclude Henke is making himself the center of the universe, for what other reason does one misread, but centering upon one's self or personal agenda whatever it may be? That is between Henke and God, whom God will deal with accordingly.

On page 23, the following paragraph, Nee writes, "Since the fall of Adam disorder has prevailed in the universe. Everyone thinks he is able to distinguish good from evil and to judge what is right and wrong. He seems to know better than God. An example of this when you quote someone as Henke did, you do not flip from page 71 to 23 by saying "in addition, he states..." as somehow page 23 follows from page 71. It is out of context. Snippets out of context are man's flesh at work. In the same paragraph, Nee writes, "We are under men's authority as well as having men under our authority. This is our position. Even the Lord Jesus on earth was subject not only to God but also to other's authority. Authority is everywhere. There is authority in the school, authority in the home. The policeman on the street, though perhaps less learned than you, is set up by God as your authority. Whenever a few brothers in Christ come together, immediately a spiritual order falls into place. A Christian worker ought to know who is above him. Some do not know how to obey authorities above them, hence they do not obey. We should not be occupied with....."; as Henke continued the quote of Watchman Nee. When we know authority we know harmony. If we do not know authority, like David Henke does not know authority, what good is to anyone in his organization that he calls The Watchman Expositor or The Watchman Fellowship, Inc. Maybe that is his problem, that he is incorporated into a man's organization, not the Work of the Ministry for the Church not abiding in Biblical locality. Apostolic work does not involve corporations registered with the government. It is not necessary. Such is a man's organization usurping itself and not in the Work.

Henke concludes, "So, What’s Wrong With That? Watchman Nee learned this concept of delegated authority from the ethics of Confucianism. Confucius taught that parents should always be obeyed, that they were never wrong, but if they were they should still be obeyed. Among Confucianists loyalty is one of the greatest virtues and can lead to the blind loyalty described in Nee’s statement."

Watchman Nee did not learn the examples of delegated authority in the Bible from confucianism. Nor does Henke give an example of a proof where Nee brings anything fro Confucianism, so why make the connection by imagination alone? We must conclude then Henke's flesh is hard at work. That is merely the mistake of assumption of Henke, since Watchman Nee gives all the most pertinent examples of authority and submission in the Scriptures that is difficult for the non-humble to accept. You can see directly the authority here was the Word, and Nee was obedient in the Word, submitting to His teaching. Watchman Nee states elsewhere we do not always submit to authorities gone awry.

What Nee is doing is showing examples in the Word of how important it is to come into harmony in the body of Christ, and not misread bearing false witness in a spirit of dissension. Man's eyes looks to how he can retaliate or judge erroneously thinking he is doing good; that is the "good self'. A Christian looks to see how harmony can be maintained in submission, even in spite of some mistakes of those in authority. If people can be more lenient with each other, and resist retaliation and bearing false witness by being more humble by the grace of God, we can set an example for each other so that those in authority can change too. But when you play the false accuser as Satan does as David Henke did, when he said: "can lead to the blind loyalty described in Nee's statement". In Nee's statement, Nee did not say blind loyalty for those being obedient are fully cognizant of the error of the particular authority, just as David was not blindly obedient to Saul either, but at the same time David did not usurp himself over Saul and did wait for the right time to receive the throne, not of his own strength. Do you see how that works? So let us observe authority and from this other things fall into harmony and will reek less havoc and dissensions.

A further proof of David Henke's motivation is where he marries Watchman Nee to Witness Lee of the Local Church by misassociating the Local Church with Watchman Nee as he said "Local Church, The, Watchman Nee, Anaheim, CA" along with the various other false teachings of Witness Lee are somehow connected to Watchman Nee but he does not even try to prove it, but only self-declares that Watchman Nee believes these false teachings also. I have a real problem with todays so called watchman apologists. It appears they are so busying judging others, it is like a disease of judging, not even caring anymore that they bear false witness in so doing, listening to the pleasure of their own never ending rationalizations examining others. I don't like it one bit. Another example of someone like this is Nicholas Stivers of Cephas Ministries.

Make note this false marrying was given also by the staff of the Watchman Fellowship so their entire business is complicit. They are not very good watchmans. Watchman Nee has no association to this Witness Lee cult or the Watchman Fellowship Expositor cult, even though Witness Lee tried to attach himself through altering Watchman Nee's writings. Watchman Nee was osas arminian. Witness Lee was calvinist. Watchman Nee did not believe in a central hub of a Local Church, but believed in the local churches. Observe the various differences between Watchman Nee and Witness Lee. Anyway, you can see the underlying motivation of David Henke. It usually has to do with Biblical locality, historicalism (or premillennial onlyism), tripartite man or partial rapture; these spiritual facts, that the flesh can not accept in David Henke.

Bottom line: there is an underlying motivation. Ask the Watchman Fellowship (particularly David Henke) cult if they are calvinists, historicalists, premillennial onlyists, or of the fallen bipartite view, and there you will have your answer.

Troy Brooks