A teaching exists in some Christian groups concerning the “Minister of the Age” and the “Ministry of the Age.” We will consider this teaching based on some of the Brethren movement and of Witness Lee and their followers. Basically, the concept of the "minister/ministry of the age" means that God used one particular man at a particular time in history for His particular move on the earth. According to this theology, there has always been a man (or woman) considered the minister of the age who had the ministry of the age. For instance, when Abraham lived, he was the unique vessel through whom God unveiled and operated in His economy. If any person desired to follow God in His economy during Abraham's time, he or she must be connected to and follow Abraham, the minister of that age. Similarly, Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha, Samuel, David, Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Ezra and Nehemiah, etc. represented God's ordained way on the earth at the time they were living. All of God's people needed to follow their lead as these ministers were commissioned by God.

According to truth one might have a strong case that God did use special vessels to be ministers of the age with the ministry for that age in the Old Testament age. For example, God told Abraham, “I will bless those that bless you, and curse those that curse you. And in you will all the families of the earth be blessed (Genesis 12:3).” In God's Old Testament economy, He clearly chose specific vessels, specific men and women, to carry His economy. Therefore, if any person desired to follow God in His economy during Abraham's time, he or she must be connected to and follow Abraham, the minister of that age. (It would be interesting to note that many scholars attribute Job as a contemporary of Abraham. Could it be possible that was God working through Job while also working through Abraham?)

The difficulty arises when proponents of this teaching of the minister/ministry of the age extrapolate the Old Testament economy of God into the New Testament economy. These groups believe that the Triune God continued this trend of a minister of every age throughout the New Testament. According to this view, the apostle Peter was the first “minister of the age” at Pentecost. Within a few years, the apostle Paul took his place as the “minister of the age” with the ministry of the New Testament. Possibly the fact that Paul wrote 13 books (14 if you attribute the book of Hebrews to Paul) of the canonized New Testament is used to validate the teaching of a “minister of the age?” If saints living at that time desired to follow God's New Testament economy, they needed to take heed to and follow Paul. Advocates of the teaching of the minister/ministry of the age say that Paul himself instructed saints to become imitators of him (Philippians 3:17; 1 Corinthians 4:16; 11:1) and that Paul had authority from God to instruct through his letters in great detail. Eventually, the apostle Peter wrote to believers in his second epistle that they should take heed to Paul's writings (2 Peter 3:15-16).

Followers of Witness Lee superimpose their theology of the “minister of the age” to include saints from Pentecost (~AD 30) up to the present day, claiming that there has always been a “minister of the age” in God's economy. Ironically, their theology excludes most of church history after the apostle John in AD 90 and prior to the late 1500's AD. Then, from the late 1500's until the present day, they only include five major figures over a 450 year time frame. The Brethren proponents of the "minister of the age" do not even begin their "succession of ministers" until the 1800's.

Martin Luther was considered in Witness Lee's theology as the minister of his age (1500's) mainly because he was used by God in the reformation to recover the truth of justification by faith. Other ministers of their age included Count Nicolas Zinzendorf (1700's) who was used by God to recover the aspect of corporate oneness among believers in their daily church life, and John Nelson Darby (1800's) was the minister of the age in recovering many major and minor truths in the scriptures, both Old and New Testaments. In the twentieth century, Watchman Nee and Witness Lee are the "ministers of the age."

The teaching upholding the “minister of the age” implies that all other believers need to align themselves with the minister of the age who is dispensing God's ministry of the age. Believers who either choose not to follow this ministry or are ignorant of this ministry will not mature in the divine life as God intended. Paralleling this teaching is another teaching concerning God's ordained authority on the earth. The minister of the age is endowed with God's ordained authority and to go against that ministry is to oppose God's ordained authority. The implication is that to follow Jesus Christ in His New Testament ministry, one must participate and submit to the minister of the age as he/she carries out the ministry of the age ordained by God.

There are two major problems with this theology concerning a minister of the age. First and foremost, there is no Biblical basis for it in the New Testament. No doubt the Lord has sanctified many of His children to serve Him through dynamic and marvelous ministries. However, the New Testament never exalts or uplifts any minister of the New Testament to the level of Jesus Christ or the Triune God in type, figure or shadow as in the Old Testament. One might be able to make a solid argument for a minister of the age during certain periods of Old Testament history based on types, figures and shadows pointing to Christ, the Head of the Body. However, there is not one verse in the New Testament supporting the claim that a minister of the age is God's ordained servant for all else to follow or suffer the consequences.

Martin Luther was a great servant of the Lord and had the grace to oppose the Catholic Church and reveal the matter of justification by faith. According to the “minister of the age” teaching, saints living in that era had to follow Martin Luther in order to participate in God's economy at that time. Yet, Martin Luther was one brother among many contemporaries who also rose up to oppose Catholicism and unveil truths in the scriptures. Luther was known to have violent mood swings from depression to elation. He could be very temperamental and rejected fellowship with certain brothers based on doctrinal and practical issues. One brother, Ulrich Zwingli, believed that a clear break from Catholicism was necessary to accomplish what God needed even to the point of physical warfare. Luther was mainly attempting to reform Catholicism and not destroy it so he opposed warfare. He and Zwingli were at odds with each other despite being brothers for whom Christ died and despite both recognizing the major flaws in Catholicism and the need to stand against that system of error. Yet, later Luther advocated physically suppressing the peasant uprising in Germany after they responded to his new theology!

Martin Luther held to some teachings that still had their roots in Catholicism, such as infant baptism and con-substantiation. The church services he initiated still possessed much Catholic flavor. Menno Simmons, a contemporary of Martin Luther, saw that there was no biblical proof for infant baptism. He advocated baptism after one became a believer showing that the divine truth of baptism, the death to our flesh and the resurrection into Christ, could only be experienced by a believer, not a young child. He and his followers were greatly persecuted by many of Luther's followers. If saints at that time had to follow Luther as the minister of the age, were they required to baptize their infants and carry the same rituals Luther held to even though the Lord raised up contemporary saints who recovered other divine revelations simultaneously?

Count Nicholas Zinzendorf began a kind of commune in the 1700's in which saints throughout parts of Europe and from all kinds of denominations would come and live. Initially, the saints refused to receive one another because of their differing opinions on Biblical doctrines and practices. Zinzendorf would visit all the saints in their homes. He did not require “oneness” outwardly, but depended on prayer and the move of the Spirit to produce inward oneness which eventually would translate into outward oneness. Zinzendorf visited house to house, day after day, for months in order to pray with family after family. Eventually the Lord broke through and gave a revival. Saints dropped their own doctrines, dropped their own practices, and dropped their own opinions about how to live individually in order to gather together as the one Body of Christ. How wonderful! The first missionaries living absolutely by faith came out of this church life in Western Europe.

John Wesley, known for his "open air" preaching and as founder of the Methodist denomination, not only admired what the Lord did through Zinzendorf, but was attracted to this kind of church life. He actually participated with the saints at Zinzendorf's commune for several years … until he felt he had to disassociate from Zinzendorf after some strange practices developed. Wesley did not feel peaceful before the Lord to practice speaking about being “blood worms in the wounds of Christ” that Zinzendorf promoted. If saints had to follow Zinzendorf as the minister of the age, were they required to sing and pray about being a blood worm in Jesus' side? Would the Lord tell all those who followed John Wesley that they were wrong for not following Zinzendorf, who was the unique minister of the age, and that they had attached themselves to the wrong person? Were all those Methodists who sang Charles Wesley's songs doing something wrong because they should have joined communal living instead? Could it be possible that God's plan was broad enough to include all of these saints?

Finally, John Nelson Darby was one of many brethren whom God used in the 1800's to recover the matter of leaving denomination, meeting only in the name of Jesus Christ taking no other name, and relying solely on the authoritative, inspired Word of God. They rejected the need for Pastors, Priests, Reverends and official leaders in the church. They dropped many of the outward, ritualistic practices handed down from Catholicism and earlier Protestant Churches. Breaking bread and drinking wine became a regular occurrence among the saints without any "official" to preside over the gathering. Darby was known by many as a tender shepherd, teaching the saints as God would reveal His truth to him. Many of today's fundamental teachings among Christians come from the Brethren, and some sects of the Brethren hold Darby in high regard.

However, if you follow the life of Darby you will find that while he could be tender toward those who agreed with him, he strongly opposed anyone who did not agree with him. Within the first few years of his ministry, a schism formed due to some doctrinal disagreements with Darby. Within 15 years, divisions came, resulting in multiple independent Brethren assemblies. One particular schism came because of eschatology, the study of the end times. Darby disagreed with a brother, Newton, and eventually Darby excommunicated Newton from his fellowship and any of the assemblies associated with himself (Darby). Newton later confessed that he had behaved inappropriately, but Darby never restored their fellowship. Years later, much of Newton's teaching on eschatology was not only accepted by Darby, but passed on as if it was his own without any credit given to Newton. This kind of schism occurred throughout Darby's long ministry. Although unintentional, Darby produced and contributed too many parties, sects, factions, and divisions ... in the name of oneness. If saints had to follow Darby as the minister of the age, were they required to participate in excluding other saints, denying fellowship with ones for whom Christ had died, and advancing division based on teachings and practices dictated by one who tended to be an authoritarian? [See Also A Letter To Darby From Anthony Norris Groves]

One should ask about the other large gaps in church history not accounted for in the "minister/ministry of the age" teaching especially since so many brothers and sisters were raised up by the Lord to recover major truths in the scriptures. [see "Biographical Sketches."] Why are only five singled out? Witness Lee did mention many other saints throughout church history that contributed to what he called, "The Lord's Recovery." However, only five brothers, Luther, Zinzendorf, Darby, Nee and Lee were consistently mentioned as ministers of the age with the ministry of the age.

How and why did such teaching concerning the “minister of the age” originate? It is possible that JN Darby considered himself as a kind of "minister of the age" in order to justify his separation from all other believers who would not take his way or follow all of his teachings. Darby was also at least partially responsible for what is now known as “secondary separation.” Darby taught that those who did not agree with the New Testament teaching (defined by him) were to be excluded from fellowship. This eventually formed the exclusive Brethren sect. Not only so, but if you were to fellowship with one of the excluded people, then you were also excluded from fellowship. What a divisive practice and teaching! If one follows the past 150 years of Brethren history, one would find hundreds of isolated, exclusive groups who will not receive each other nor any other believers into their bread-breaking fellowship. However, Darby probably did not formerly teach that he was the minister of the age with the ministry of the age.

By the 1960's, one sect of the Brethren did, in fact, promote this “minister of the age” teaching based on some of the servants of the Lord during the late 1800's and early 1900's. The succession according to this sect began with Darby and included Stoney, Raven, C.A. Coates, J. Taylor, Sr and finally J. Taylor, Jr.. This "succession" of ministers was established by J. Taylor, Jr. and his followers after his father, J Taylor, Sr., had served faithfully in the ministry of the Word for over 50 years, had been greatly used in the opening up of the truth, and was universally respected and honored by the brethren and his fellow servants. There is no doubt that J Taylor, Sr.'s ministry was distinctive. Because of this many brethren came to regard him as in a special place of leadership - much as JN Darby was regarded in his day. After J Taylor, Sr.'s death in 1953, there was a widespread expectation that someone would be raised up to succeed him. There was also open partisanship in vocal support of various servants. The "New York Readings" were published monthly during the later years of J Taylor, Sr. After his death in 1953 for some unknown reason - questioned by some at the time - they continued to be published with J Taylor, Jr (his son) leading in the readings. Thus the groundwork was laid for his claim to be the successor. J Taylor, Jr. never openly claimed the position but did nothing to discourage the place accorded him by his partisans. He spoke of "the three great ministries" - JND, FER and JT (referring to his father) - and of others as "supportive ministries." In London, 1960, he gave an address on 2 Samuel 5: 1-2, later published as "The King and His Men." In J Taylor, Jr. said, "There is no detour from JN Darby around others. It is JND, FER, JT, down, right here - no detour." The "right here" was understood by many as a reference to himself.

Besides the Brethren, the teaching of the “minister of the age” was propagated toward the end of Watchman Nee's ministry by another servant of the Lord, Witness Lee. When Watchman Nee was alive, Witness Lee considered Watchman Nee the minister of the age from 1922 to 1952. Witness Lee, or at least his followers, taught that the “mantle” was passed on to him because Nee was imprisoned in China and 20 years later died in prison. This parallels Elijah passing on his mantle to Elisha as Elijah was taken up in a chariot of fire in 2 Kings 2. Witness Lee many times indicated that he was the unique faithful follower and coworker of Watchman Nee, chosen by Watchman Nee himself to be the successor. On one hand, Lee often told his followers that Watchman Nee had sent him to this place or that place in order to carry out his ministry. On the other hand, the obvious motive for putting forward such teaching by Witness Lee was to assert his own position as the "one man," the “minister of the age” that saints must follow. This necessitated giving that same position to others who had preceded him - Watchman Nee, JN Darby, Count Zinzendorf, Martin Luther, the apostles, Peter, John, and Paul - and then claiming 'the mantle' as part of the New Testament succession.

In fairness to Witness Lee's followers, they would claim that he normally referred to the "ministry" of the age rather than the "minister." His major focus was on the content of the ministry rendered rather than on the specific person as the minister. Witness Lee considered himself part of the same ministry as Watchman Nee and any others speaking the same thing are also part of that same ministry. Witness Lee, however, often spoke of the "oracle" of the age, clearly implicating himself. His followers repeated many thousands of times in meetings that he was the oracle of God in this age and that he was the minister of the age.

Believers often do not have the discernment to separate the ministry of truth from outward practices. For instance, Witness Lee spoke many truths of the divine revelation that all believers would benefit from in pursuing Christ. Just as believers must accept justification by faith for their regeneration, so they should accept other truths God has reserved for His Body. Witness Lee was used by God to speak many of these truths. However, he also instructed saints to practice certain things that were not necessarily helpful and which even caused division among his followers. One example came in the 1970's when he approved a plan to sell recreational vehicles for profit in order to fund the work of publishing materials. Although saints may not have been ordered to do this, a kind of pressure existed to join such an endeavor, whether or not Christ was leading. Some saints felt not to follow and even disagreed with such a practice to the point of leaving the group. There were other major practices established by Witness Lee with same kind of result: strife, jealousy, ... division based on the premise held by followers of Witness Lee that he was the "minister of the age" and all others needed to follow him even if he advocated practices contradicting one's conscience.

Most Christians take an all or nothing approach to viewing God's servants. If they are "for" Witness Lee, they justify his actions or easily forgive his mistakes. If they are not "for" Witness Lee, they tend to throw out all the precious riches that God did reveal through this brother. We must all realize that God's servants are still fallen men who make mistakes which have consequences. We need to receive God's word and God's truth from the servants God has raised up ... even if we do not accept all that they represent. We should not just follow practices or minor truths just because we consider a saint the "minister of the age." When advocates of the "minister of the age" push such an issue they inadvertently cause strife among other believers because there are minor truths and outward practices that should not be accepted (as just mentioned) if one is not peaceful before the Lord.

The Old Testament figures such as Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David, Isaiah, Ezra and Nehemiah were all types of Christ. Once Christ came He was the unique Head of the Body. Christ is the unique Minister of the age with the unique Ministry of the age. Certainly God did set apart particular individuals and used them specially in regard to His operations. However, the Old Testament figures were types of Christ. He is the "one Man." That is not to say that the Lord did not use Paul - "an elect vessel to me," [Acts 9:15] - as well as Peter, John and others, such as Martin Luther, Count Zinzendorf and JND, in an outstanding way, but there is no Scriptural basis for any kind of successional leadership throughout the New Testament age.

Matthew 17:1-5 addresses this very issue when the Lord Jesus took Peter, James and John to a mountain privately. The Lord was then transfigured before them, and His face shined like the sun, and His garments became as white as the light. Then, Moses and Elijah appeared, having a conversation with Jesus. Peter quickly decided that he would suggest to the Lord to make three tabernacles in honor of Jesus, Moses and Elijah. Before Peter could finish speaking, God the Father spoke from the heavens out of a cloud saying, “This in My Son, the Beloved, in whom I have found My delight. Hear Him.” The Father purposely told Peter to hear Christ alone and not to set up three tabernacles for the former leaders in the Old Testament age, Moses and Elijah. The Father was showing Peter they are not on the same exalted level as the Christ.

There are no verses in the New Testament that support the claim that God sets aside special servants whom all of His people must follow during a particular age. On the contrary, all of the New Testament books teach that we must follow the One Man: Christ and Christ alone. The apostle Peter never exalted himself as the minister of the age. Rather he exalted Christ as the Chief Shepherd over the flock of God (1 Peter 5:4). He did not instruct saints to grow in his (Peter's) grace and knowledge, but in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Peter made it clear that it was to Christ "be the glory both now and unto the day of eternity" (2 Peter 3:18).

The apostle Paul never exalted himself to match Christ. Rather he instructed saints to abound in the work of the Lord, not in his work (1 Corinthians 15:58). He clearly denounced the idea that he was a particular "minister of the age" that all should follow when he rebuked the Corinthians for forming parties based on saying, “I am of Peter, I am of Apollos, I am of Paul, and I am of Christ.” He asked those same Corinthians if they had been baptized into his name or Christ's name (1 Corinthians 1:10-13). Paul announced Christ, the Son, Who was revealed to him (Galatians 1:16). His life goal was that Christ would be magnified in his body and that for him to live was Christ (Philippians 1:20-21). Paul admonished saints to let the peace of Christ arbitrate in their hearts and the Word of Christ to dwell in them richly (Colossians 3:15-16) … not his own peace or words. Paul stated that the Old Testament economy was a shadow of the things to come, but the body is of Christ (Colossians 2:11-17). Paul did admit that he was a minister of Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 4:6) sent to unveil God's economy in faith which is altogether related to and consummating in Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 1:4-17).

The apostle John wrote the final five books of the New Testament: The gospel of John, his three epistles and the book of Revelation. In his gospel, John often wrote about “the one whom Jesus loved,” referring to himself but remaining anonymous. John wrote two basic tenets in his epistles: (1) be one with God and (2) love the brothers. He never addressed his ministry in relation to the readers. Finally, in Revelation 1:9, “I, John, your brother (not “minister of the age”) and fellow partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and endurance in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos because of the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus.”

The apostle Paul did vindicate his ministry in 2 Corinthians to those who were his genuine children in the Lord through his gospel preaching. Advocates of the "minister/ministry of the age" theology point to this as a major endorsement of their view. This is not the case, however. Paul wrote, "All this time you have been thinking that we are defending ourselves to you. Before God in Christ we speak, but all things, beloved, are for your building up" (2 Corinthians 12:19). Paul made it clear that his intention was not to defend himself as a minister of the age or a super apostle, but to build up the Corinthian believers in love. Paul did speak persuasively about his own credentials as an apostle but he was appealing to their inward spirit that they might seek and pursue Christ based on the divine life he knew was imparted to them at regeneration. This is bourne out in 2 Corinthians 13:5, "Test yourselves whether you are in the faith; prove yourselves. Or do you not realize about yourselves that Jesus Christ is in you unless you are disapproved?"

2 Corinthians 12:20 says, "I fear that I may find you with.... strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambitions, slanders, whisperings, demonstrations of being puffed up, tumults ..." All of the items Paul listed here are a direct issue from the lack of building up between the saints. These negative actions destroy the oneness of the Body of Christ rather than allow for the building up between believers in the one Body of Christ. Paul went on to write, "When I come again to you my God may humble me before you and I may mourn over many who have sinned before and who have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and licentiousness which they have practiced" (2 Corinthians 12:21). Paul was not arguing a case that he was some kind of minister of the age" as some would say. He was clearly and unequivocally revealing what the "superapostles" were doing to the saints. They were producing all kinds of negative feelings between believers because of their teachings, practices and lording over the saints. Paul came into speak "life and peace" to the saints by vindicating his ministry: a ministry of regeneration, a ministry of growth in life and a ministry resulting in the building up of the Body of Christ. Paul showed that his life matched his preaching. He also pointed out that these other "superapostles" were producing uncleanness, fornication and licentiousness among the saints and they were unrepentant! His point is simple: Who is the real minister of Christ here?

To assume that saints should simply follow Paul as the minister of the age based on Paul's writings is speculation at best, especially when he said, “So then let no one boast in men, for all things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Peter or the world or life or death or things present or things to come; all are yours, but you are Christ's and Christ is God's" (1 Corinthians 3:21-23). Paul expressed the motive of his ministry when he said, “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up” (1 Corinthians 8:1). His ministry was not primarily to disseminate knowledge, but to advance divine love among the saints so that the Body of Christ could be built up. And finally, Paul wrote, “Christ has made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant, ministers not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Corinthians 3:6).

To promote the theology of the "minister/ministry of the age" makes it easier for Christians to defer their accountability before the Lord. They may feel that if the "minister of the age" teaches or instructs in a certain way, they have no choice but to follow. This thought is against the scriptures and against God's economy. 2 Corinthians 5:10 says, "For we must all be manifested before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done through the body according to what he has practiced, whether good or bad." As believers mature, God holds them directly and personally responsible for their walk before Him. He will not accept any excuse like, "I was just following the minister/ministry of the age, Lord." Romans 14:10-12 speaks much the same way, "For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God, for it is written, 'As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall openly confess to God.' So then each of us will give an account concerning himself to God." God is not going to ask us which "minister" we followed in order to selectively judge us. He is only going to ask us about our relationship to the ONE Minister of the age: His Son, Jesus Christ.

The point of not having a "minister/ministry of the age" could be expounded further by showing how each New Testament author uplifted only Christ and not their own ministry. There is just no logical, divine, Biblical evidence for the teaching of a "minister/ministry of the age." Witness Lee taught that Peter was the first "minister of the age" in the New Testament as we discussed earlier. Then, he teaches that Peter's ministry of the age basically ceased once Paul's ministry was established. Peter is recorded to play a major role in the New Testament church through the first 12 chapters of Acts, then again in Acts 15 when the leaders of the church gathered for a corporate conference. This was concurrent with Paul's ministry. It should also be noted that Luke, one of Paul's close companions, wrote the book of Acts. It makes sense that Paul's ministry would be highlighted in Luke's writings since Luke spent much of his life with Paul. Although Peter does not have significant mention again in the book of Acts, he wrote two epistles around 67 AD. Paul's writings were completed by this time as well. If Paul was the unique minister of the age, why were Peter's epistles, representing Peter's ministry, included on an equal plain as Paul's in the Bible since they were written at the same time Paul's ministry was ending?

John does not seem to be a major player in the book of Acts, but he was an elder in Jerusalem and a significant leader in the churches throughout his ministry after the Lord's death and resurrection. Why should it be assumed that John was mostly passive until Paul passed from the scene, after which John could become operative? Surely John had an ongoing divine operation among the saints and the churches; not just after Paul left the scene. In his writings, John did not exonerate his ministry nor any other brother, including Paul. His main themes were Christ, fellowship with God and loving the brothers. Biblically, it follows that Peter, Paul and James were all ministers of the New Testament ... and they were contemporaries. They all had their unique flavor from the Lord, but one should not be considered above another. All are servants of Jesus Christ for our salvation, for our growth in the divine life, and for the building up of the Body of Christ.

Hebrews 1:1-2 lays out the parameters of ministry in the New Testament: "God, having spoken of old in many portions and in many ways to the fathers in the prophets, has at the last of these days spoken to us in the Son, whom He appointed Heir of all things, through whom also He made the universe." These verses above all others show decisively that Christ is the unique Minister of the New Testament age. He is the appointed Heir of ALL things as "the effulgence of God's glory and the impress of His substance and upholding and bearing all things by the word of His power, having made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high ... " (Hebrews 1:3). How can anyone else be considered as a minister of the age? How can we contradict such a marvelous revelation of the Christ of God? God's New Testament is entirely wrapped up in the Son and no one else.

But what things were gains to me, these I have counted as loss on account of Christ. But moreover I also count all things to be loss on account of the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord on account of whom I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as refuse that I may gain Christ. And be found in Him, not having my own righteousness which is out of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is out of God and based on faith, to know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death.

I would like to end by saying that Witness Lee was a servant of the Lord for many years. I highly regard him and appreciate many of the divine revelations that God dispensed through him. I also highly regard and respect the ministries of so many other saints throughout church history. As seekers and pursuers of Christ, we must pray for enlightenment of the divine revelation and the Lord often answers by granting us gifted members of the Body who can discern and expound the truth. May we always find Christ as our past, present, and future Minister of the age.