In church life, there’s another kind of manifestation of vying for status that involves disrupting and disturbing church life and the work of the church. For instance, sometimes when the brothers and sisters are fellowshipping a problem together, everyone’s fellowship has some light; the more they fellowship, the clearer and more lucid the truth principles become, and the path to practice becomes quickly understood. However, someone might suddenly introduce a “brilliant idea,” a suggestion of theirs, breaking the flow of the fellowship and shifting the topic elsewhere, leaving the fellowship of the main subject unfinished. On the surface, it doesn’t seem like they are causing a disturbance, much less that they are restricting others from fellowshipping the truth, but they did not choose the appropriate time to introduce this topic. By inserting a new issue for fellowship and discussion at a critical moment when the truth is being fellowshipped to solve a problem, the previous issue gets cut off before being fully resolved. Isn’t this abandoning the task at the halfway mark? Does this not delay solving the problem? Not only has the problem not been fixed, but people’s understanding of the truth has been delayed. Are people with reason liable to do this? Is it going too far to say that such things disrupt and disturb church life? I don’t think it is, at all. To disturb a gathering like this when it is fellowshipping the truth to solve a problem—is this not deliberately disrupting and disturbing church life? If someone always sticks their oar in at critical moments when the truth is being fellowshipped to solve a problem, if they always try to cut things short, then this is not a problem of not having reason; it is deliberately disturbing the gathering while the truth is being fellowshipped to solve a problem, it is the evil deed of disrupting and disturbing church life, pure and simple—only antichrists and evil people do this, only people who hate the truth do this. No matter what the context or circumstances, people like this always have to come out with their “brilliant ideas,” they always want eyes on them, to be the focus of attention. No matter how crucial and important the topic that people are fellowshipping is, they always have to stick their oar in to divert people’s attention and spout high-sounding ideas, wanting to appear unique. Just what kind of stunt are they trying to pull? Are they not vying for status? They want to control the situation. They don’t want people to have a greater understanding and greater clarity into the truth; what they care about most is making everyone pay attention to, listen to, and obey them, and everyone doing as they say. This is clearly vying for status. For some people, no matter what work they do, when you ask them to fellowship about specific ideas and plans for implementing something, and the specific steps for carrying them out in detail, they can’t come up with anything. Yet, they are fond of spouting high-sounding ideas, appearing unconventional, and doing something novel and dazzling. No matter what the situation at hand is, as soon as a novel idea strikes them, they present it as if inspired, rashly proposing it for others to accept and agree with, without thoughtful consideration. But when they are eventually asked to discuss specific paths for practice, they become speechless. They lack the competence, but still wish to show off, always aiming to be seen. They are unwilling to play second fiddle; they do not want to be just another ordinary follower. They always fear that others will look down on them, and they always want to assert their presence. So they always spout high-sounding ideas to be seen. What’s the deal with always doing this? When an idea pops into their mind, they blindly deem it good and worthy of practicing without consideration or before the idea has matured. When they rashly present this idea, other people don’t understand it and naturally raise some questions. Unable to answer, they still insist their opinion is correct and that everyone should accept it. What kind of disposition is this? What consequences will their baseless persistence in their own views bring about? Is it beneficial or disturbing to the church’s work? Is it beneficial or harmful to God’s chosen people? They are able to say this without any sense of responsibility—what is their purpose? It’s just to assert their presence. They are afraid that others won’t know they have such “brilliant ideas,” won’t know that they have caliber, intelligence, and abilities; they strive for this recognition, to make the majority of people hold them in high regard. What happens in the end? They rashly make suggestions, and others initially think they really have some abilities, something genuine. But as time goes by, it becomes apparent that they are just blockheads, lacking real knowledge or skill yet always wanting to have the final say. This is vying for status. Without real ability, they still want to call the shots; they always spout high-sounding ideas without presenting any concrete plans, lacking a specific path of practice. What would the consequences be if such people were really entrusted with tasks? It would surely lead to delays. Why do they always seek to vie for status, to hold power, when they can’t accomplish anything? They are just blockheads who are a few bricks short of a full load; to put it in more elegant terms, they are entirely lacking in reason. Among nonbelievers, there are too many of such people, all talk and no action. Most people can discern a bit about this kind of person. If someone is always spouting high-sounding ideas and wanting to appear innovative, one should be cautious so as not to be taken in by them. If there truly is someone with insightful ideas who can also present a concrete plan, it’s only acceptable if it’s feasible; if they only spout high-sounding ideas without presenting concrete plans, then one should treat them with caution. Fellowship should be carried out to determine whether there’s a viable path for their ideas or not. If the majority feel their idea is feasible and has a path of practice, then it should be tried for a period to see what the results are like before making a decision.

No matter what aspect of truth the church fellowships about or what problem it resolves, all kinds of people will show themselves. After interacting for a long time, one can see who truly loves and can accept the truth, and who are those that disrupt and disturb, not attending to proper tasks. Do you think that those who like to spout high-sounding ideas and present novel ideas can accept the truth and embark on the right track of believing in God? I think it’s not easy for them to do this. What role do these people play in church life? What are the consequences of them often spouting high-sounding ideas and not attending to proper tasks? It disrupts and disturbs church life, as most people can see, and if this continues, it will delay God’s chosen people from pursuing the truth and entering into reality. Although those who like to spout high-sounding ideas are not necessarily evil people, the consequences of their actions are very detrimental to the life entry of God’s chosen people, and, at the same time, their actions also delay and affect the work of the church. So, how should this problem be resolved? How should people who like to spout high-sounding ideas and present novel ideas be handled appropriately? The first method is this: If they like to spout high-sounding ideas and always have opinions, let them speak first, and then exercise discernment. No matter who, everyone is free to speak and express opinions; no one should restrict this. Anyone who truly has ideas and wise insights should be allowed to speak up and make them clear, to let everyone see, and then fellowship and discuss to see if it is correct, if it conforms to the truth principles, and if there is any part that can be adopted. If it’s worth learning from and some benefit can be drawn from it, that’s good; if, after fellowship and discussion, it’s determined that what they say has no value and is not advisable, then it should be abandoned. By practicing like this, everyone will grow in discernment; whenever something comes up, they will all know how to ponder on this matter, and they will understand various people better. Such practice is beneficial for God’s chosen people and will not bring disturbance to the work of the church; this way of practicing is correct. The second method is this: When what is said is of no value, and no benefit will be gained from it even if it is fellowshipped on and discussed, such suggestions should be directly rejected, and there is no need for any fellowship or discussion. If a person keeps raising such worthless issues and “brilliant ideas,” making God’s chosen people fed up and unwilling to listen to them, shouldn’t such a person be restricted? It would be best to advise them to show greater reason, to refrain from saying things that shouldn’t be said to avoid affecting others. If this person lacks reason and insists on continuing in this manner, causing disturbance to church life and making everyone particularly annoyed, even to the point of anger, then they are an evil person who disturbs church life. They must be handled according to the principles of God’s house for cleansing the church—clear them out of the church; this is appropriate. Tell Me, what kind of people are most of those who like to spout high-sounding ideas? Are they the type who pursue the truth? Are they sincerely expending themselves for God? Certainly not. Then, what purpose and intention do they have in causing such disturbances to church life? This requires discernment. If everyone already has enough understanding of such people, knowing they lack intellect, caliber, and reason—that they are simply blockheads—the most appropriate way to handle them when they express their “brilliant ideas” is to stop and restrict them, making them keep quiet. If they insist on speaking, on causing disturbances to church life, then they should be cleared out of the church to prevent further trouble. Some say, “Isn’t this ruining their chances of being saved?” This is wrong to say. Could God save such people? Can people with such dispositions accept the truth? Can they achieve salvation without accepting the truth at all? Isn’t it extremely foolish and ignorant to not even be able to see through such matters? Regardless, those who often cause disturbances to church life are evil people, and God does not save them. Keeping someone whom God does not save in the church, isn’t that deliberately harming God’s chosen people? Is someone who pities such evil people truly loving? I think not; theirs is a false love. The truth is that they intend to harm God’s chosen people. Therefore, God’s chosen ones must be vigilant against any who defend evil people, not to be misled by their devilish talk. Some who like to spout high-sounding ideas, although they do not seem like evil people and don’t commit obviously evil acts, can cause disturbances to church life by always spouting their high-sounding ideas; at the very least, these people are muddled. What do you think, can muddled people be saved? Certainly not. If muddled people constantly disturb church life, they should also be cleared out of the church. Muddled people do not accept the truth, are incorrigibly unrepentant, and their end is the same as that of evil people. Whether evil or muddled, if they often disrupt and disturb church life, do not heed advice, and speak uncontrollably like a broken car unable to stop, isn’t this a sign of abnormal reason? What would be the consequences if such muddled people continue to disturb the church in this manner over the long term? Furthermore, can they truly repent? Does God save such muddled people with abnormal reason? Once these questions are thoroughly apprehended, it will be clear how to properly handle such individuals. Muddled people certainly do not love the truth, and the truth is beyond their reach. Muddled people cannot understand human language; it can be said that muddled people lack normal humanity and are half-insane—in actuality, they’re simply useless. Can muddled people render service well? It can be definitely said they are not even able to render service in a way that is up to standard because their reason is unsound; they are people who understand neither heads nor tails. If someone wishes to show love to muddled people, let them support the muddled people. The attitude of God’s house toward muddled people is that they must be cleared out. Anyone who does not accept the truth at all, anyone who is not sincerely doing their duty, always doing it in a perfunctory manner, should be restricted if they often cause disturbances to church life. If some of them feel remorseful and are willing to repent, they should be given the chance. Those whose essence cannot be seen through should be temporarily kept in the church, allowing God’s chosen people to supervise them, observe them, and grow in discernment. If there are those who consistently disrupt and disturb and, despite being pruned, remain incorrigibly unrepentant, continuing to vie for fame and gain, to attack and exclude positive characters—especially attacking those who pursue the truth and can share experiential testimonies, and those who sincerely expend themselves for God and do their duties—then these individuals are evil people and antichrists, they are disbelievers. For such people, it’s not just about stopping and restricting them; they should be promptly cleared out of the church to prevent future troubles. This way of practice is entirely in accord with God’s intentions.

These are more or less the various manifestations of vying for status, from minor ones to serious ones. The minor manifestations mainly refer to mocking leaders and workers with harsh words, nitpicking, and attacking the proactiveness of leaders and workers, with the goal of destroying them and discrediting them. The most serious manifestations are directly opposing leaders and workers in an open manner, finding things to use against them and judging, condemning, attacking, and excluding them, and then isolating them, and forcing them to admit fault and resign in order to seize their status. These are the most serious issues of disrupting and disturbing that occur in church life. Those who openly clamor against leaders or workers and vie with them for status are those who disturb the work of the church and resist God, they are evil people and antichrists, and they must not only be stopped and restricted—if the situation is serious and it is necessary to clear out or expel them, then they should be dealt with according to the principles. There is also another manifestation of vying for status: excluding and attacking people who pursue the truth more in the church. Because people who pursue the truth have a pure comprehension, and they have experience and true knowledge of God’s words, and they often fellowship the truth to solve problems among the brothers and sisters, and thus edify God’s chosen people, and gradually gain prestige in the church, these evil people and antichrists are envious and defiant toward them, and they exclude and attack them. Any behavior that consists of attacking or excluding people who pursue the truth directly constitutes disruption and disturbance to church life. Some people may not take aim at church leaders directly, but they have a particular antipathy and disdain for people in the church who understand the truth and have practical experiences. They also exclude and oppress such people, often mocking and deriding them, even laying traps for them and scheming against them, and so on. Although problems such as these are less serious than vying with church leaders for status in terms of their nature and circumstances, they also constitute disruptions and disturbances to church life, and should be stopped and restricted. If the majority of brothers and sisters in the church are affected, and frequently plunged into negativity and weakness—if the problems lead to these sorts of consequences, then they amount to disruptions and disturbances. The kind of evil person who creates disruptions and disturbances should not merely be restricted, they should be sent to Group B for isolation and reflection, or else cleared out. Those who engage in actions which have a nature of causing disruptions and disturbances to them are people who habitually commit evil. A distinction should be made between evil people who frequently commit evil and those who occasionally commit evil in terms of how they are treated. Those who commit multifarious evils are antichrists; those who occasionally commit evil are of poor humanity. If two people occasionally argue or engage in disputes because of their incompatible personalities, or because they have different views when doing things, or because they have different ways of speaking, but church life is not affected, then there is not a nature of causing disruptions and disturbances to this; it is different from evil people disrupting and disturbing church life. All the things that have a nature of causing disruptions and disturbances to church life to them, which we’ve been talking about, are manifestations of evildoing by evil people. When evil people commit evil, it is habitual. What evil people hate most is people who pursue the truth. When they see that someone who pursues the truth is able to share their own experiential testimony, and thus gains the particular admiration of others, they become envious, hateful, and their eyes burn with rage. Whoever reflects on and knows themselves, whoever shares their practical experiences, and whoever bears testimony to God, meets with the mocking, denigration, oppression, exclusion, judgment, and even persecution of these evil people. They habitually act in this way. They allow no one to be better than them, they can’t bear to see people who are better than them. When they see someone who is better than them, they get jealous, angry, incensed, and think about harming and tormenting them. Such people have already caused severe disruption and disturbance to the church life and the order of the church, and leaders and workers should join hands with the brothers and sisters in exposing, stopping, and restricting such individuals. If it isn’t possible to restrict them, and they do not repent or change course after the truth has been fellowshipped to them, then they are someone evil, and evil people should be measured and treated according to the principles of God’s house for cleansing the church. If, through fellowship, the leaders and workers reach a consensus, and determine that this amounts to someone evil disturbing the church, then the matter should be handled according to the truth principles: The person should be cleared out from the church. There should be no further tolerance of such evil people disturbing church life. If it is clear to the leaders and workers that this amounts to someone evil causing a disturbance, and yet they still feign ignorance and tolerate the evil person doing evil and causing the disturbance, then they are failing in their responsibilities toward the brothers and sisters, and are being disloyal to God and to God’s commission.

Some people may seem fine when observed by their appearance, but in fact, their IQ is like that of a blockhead. They speak and act without understanding what is proper, lacking the rationality of normal humanity. Such people also like to vie for status and reputation, fight to have the final say, and compete for others’ high regard. In church life they often propose seemingly valid but actually fallacious views and arguments in order to garner attention and high regard from the majority of other people, disturbing people’s thoughts, disturbing their correct comprehension and knowledge of God’s words, and disturbing their positive understanding of everything. When others are fellowshipping on God’s words and on their pure understandings, these people often pop up like jesters to assert their own presence, and to hog everyone’s attention, always wanting to show the brothers and sisters that they know a trick or two, and that they are erudite, and highly knowledgeable and learned, and so forth. Although they don’t yet have clear goals in terms of which leader to target, or which leader’s position to vie for, their desires and ambitions are so great that their words and actions have caused disturbances to church life, so they should also be restricted according to the severity of the situation and of its nature. It would be best to first fellowship the truth with them to correctly guide them, and provide a direction for their comportment, enabling them to turn themselves around, and to understand how to live church life normally, how to interact with others, how to stay in their proper place, and how to be rational. If it is down to their young age, lack of insight, and youthful hubris, and if they have repented after repeated fellowshipping, realizing that their previous actions were wrong, shameful, disgusted everyone, and brought trouble on everyone, and they have expressed their apologies and remorse for this, then there is no need to hold it against them—they can just be helped with love. However, if their wrong actions that disturbed everyone were not due to youthful hubris or a lack of understanding of the truth, but rather were driven by ulterior motives, and they continue with their behavior despite repeated discouragement; and if, furthermore, they have been pruned, and the brothers and sisters have fellowshipped with them on the seriousness of this issue—they have been offered fellowship and help from both negative and positive aspects—yet they still cannot recognize their own nature essence, cannot see the disturbance these actions cause to others and their severe consequences, and continue to create disturbances and disruptions by carrying out these same actions whenever they get the chance, then in this case, sterner measures are warranted. If, given ample opportunities to repent, they do not reflect on or try to know themselves at all, and no matter how the truth is fellowshipped with them, they do not understand, nor do they know how to act rationally and in accordance with principles, but instead, they stubbornly cling to their own way of doing things, then there is a problem with these people. At the very least, from a rational standpoint, they lack the reason of a normal person. This is looking at it on the surface. If, looking at it in terms of essence, no matter how they are fellowshipped with, they cannot recognize the seriousness of the issue, nor can they find their proper place, nor can they accept fellowshipping and help, or try to practice according to the path fellowshipped by the brothers and sisters—if they cannot even achieve these things, then their problem is not just a lack of reason, but a problem with their humanity. Though they appear to be unintentionally causing disruptions and disturbances, these deeds are definitely not without intent, but rather, they are done with purpose and motives. Putting aside what these individuals’ motives or purpose might be, if what they say and do severely disrupts and disturbs the life entry of the brothers and sisters, and church life, leading many people to not gain anything from living church life, to the point where others are unwilling to gather just because they are present, or whenever they speak, people are turned off and want to leave, then the nature of this problem becomes serious. How should such people be handled? If they still persist in doing these things despite being offered fellowship and help on numerous occasions, and being given opportunities to repent, then it is their nature essence that is problematic. They are not people who genuinely believe in God and can accept the truth, but instead have some other agenda. Looking at their nature essence, the disruptions and disturbances they cause to church life are definitely not unintentional, but rather, these people have a purpose and motives. If such people are given further opportunities, is that fair to God’s chosen people who are living church life normally? (No.) The problem with such individuals has already been revealed to this extent; if they are still given chances awaiting their repentance, with the result that they end up committing even more evil, leading more people into negativity, weakness, and having no way out, then who will compensate for this loss? Therefore, if these individuals have been offered fellowship and loving help, or action has been taken to stop and restrict them, yet they still do not change their old ways, and persist in their original behavior, then they should be handled according to the principles: In mild cases, they should be isolated; in severe cases, they should be cleared out of the church. How does this principle sound? Is it about mercilessly beating someone down, without giving them a chance to repent? Or arbitrarily making a decision without exercising any discernment and without clearly understanding what their nature essence truly is? (No.) If, despite being offered fellowship and help, and being given opportunities to repent, these people’s ways and disposition have not changed at all, and neither do they repent, remaining as they were before—with the only difference being that what they previously did openly and visibly they now do in secret and furtively, but the disturbance and disruption remain the same—then the church can no longer keep them. Such people are not members of God’s house; they are not God’s sheep. Their presence in God’s house is solely to cause disturbances and disruptions, and they are Satan’s lackey, not a brother or sister. If you always treat them as a brother or sister, continually supporting and helping them, and fellowshipping the truth with them, and it ends up wasting much effort without bearing any fruit, isn’t that foolish? It’s more than foolish; it’s stupid, utterly stupid!

Looking at the nature of the problems, the various manifestations and the types of people, events, and things involved in vying for status can basically be categorized into these three types. Vying for status is a common issue in church life, appearing across different groups of people and in various aspects of church life. As for those who vie for status, in mild cases they should be offered ample fellowshipping of the truth to support and help them so that they can understand the truth, and given the chance to repent. If the case is serious, they should be closely monitored, and as soon as it is discovered that they speak or act with the aim of achieving a certain motive or goal, they should be immediately stopped and restricted. If the case is even more serious, they should be dealt with and handled according to the church’s principles for clearing out and expelling people. This is the responsibility that leaders and workers should fulfill when these people, events, and things involved in vying for status appear in church life. Of course, it also requires all the brothers and sisters to step up and cooperate with the leaders and workers in this work, jointly restricting the various behaviors and actions of evil people that cause disruption and disturbance, ensuring that there is no more disruption or disturbance by evil people in church life, striving to ensure that every occasion of church life is enlightened by the Holy Spirit, filled with peace and joy and the presence of God, and has God’s blessing and guidance, and to ensure that each gathering is a time of enjoyment and gain. This is the best kind of church life, the one that God wishes to see. Undertaking this work is relatively complex for leaders and workers, as it involves interpersonal relationships, and it involves people’s face and interests, and it also involves people’s level of understanding of the truth, making it somewhat more challenging. However, when problems arise, do not avoid them, and do not downplay major issues as smaller ones and ultimately let them go unresolved; nor should they be dealt with using philosophies for worldly dealings, by turning a blind eye to them. Even more so, do not be a people pleaser, but rather, treat the various types of people who vie for status according to the truth principles. Is this fellowship clear? (Yes.) Then this concludes our fellowship on issue five.