Today, we continue the fellowship on item ten of the various manifestations of antichrists: They despise the truth, brazenly flout principles, and ignore the arrangements of God’s house. Last time, we conducted some specific fellowship directed at despising the truth, so let’s review this first. What was your explanation of “despising” last time? (We explained it as not attaching importance to the truth, as looking down upon, scorning, and slighting the truth, and as showing disdain for the truth.) Have you clearly explained the essence of this word using practical terms? (Our explanation only amounted to synonyms of despising; it was superficial and did not clarify the details of despising the truth, nor our attitude and manifestations in our treatment of the truth. We failed to explain the essence of it.) What is the nature of such an explanation? Which category does it fall under? (Words and doctrines.) Anything else? Does it belong to knowledge? (Yes.) How was this knowledge acquired? It was acquired from schools, from teachers, and also from dictionaries and books. So, what’s the difference between My explanation and yours? (God’s fellowship is about each person’s attitude toward the truth—that is, from the depths of their hearts, people resist the truth, feel repulsed and disgusted by it, do not accept it, and even go so far as to condemn it and maliciously judge and slander it. God’s explanation comes from the essence of people’s attitude toward the truth.) I explain the essence of the word “despising” from the perspective of various essential behaviors, practices, attitudes, and viewpoints. Which explanation is actually the truth? (God’s explanation is the truth.) So where does your explanation fall short? (We don’t understand the truth. We only look at the surface of things and interpret them literally, relying on knowledge and doctrines to view issues.) You interpret this word based on the knowledge you have grasped and according to your understanding of the literal meaning, but you do not know at all how this word is connected to a person’s nature essence and corrupt disposition. This is the difference between knowledge and doctrines, and the truth. Do you usually also use this method and perspective when reading God’s words and fellowshipping the truth? (Yes.) No wonder most people, no matter how they read God’s words, can’t understand what the truth in them actually is. So, many people have believed in God for many years without understanding or entering into the truth reality. This is why it is always said, “People do not understand the truth and do not possess the ability to comprehend it.”

We’ll continue to fellowship on item ten of the manifestations of antichrists: They despise the truth, brazenly flout principles, and ignore the arrangements of God’s house. At the last gathering, we divided despising the truth into three items. What were those three? (First, despising God’s identity and essence; second, despising the flesh in which God is incarnate; third, despising the words of God.) Let’s dissect the topic of “antichrists despising the truth, brazenly flouting principles, and ignoring the arrangements of God’s house” based on these three items. Last time, we basically more or less covered the first item, but didn’t fellowship in too much detail about the holiness and uniqueness of God’s essence, which was meant to leave you some room for contemplation and to have you fellowship more specifically based on the aspects of God’s righteousness and almightiness that I fellowshipped. Today, we will fellowship on the second item, which covers how antichrists treat the flesh in which God is incarnate, to dissect the theme of how antichrists despise the truth, brazenly flout principles, and ignore the arrangements of God’s house.

II. Despising the Flesh in Which God Is Incarnate

The antichrists’ perspectives and viewpoints on, and their relationship with, the God incarnate—that is, with Christ—also have some specific manifestations and essential revelations. If we were to simply lay out in a flat manner some of people’s specific manifestations or the specific practices of certain people, you might find the presentation a bit indistinct. Let’s instead divide it into several items, to understand from these what exactly is the attitude of antichrists toward the flesh in which God is incarnate, and to verify and dissect how antichrists despise the truth. The first item is fawning, flattery, and fair-sounding words; the second is scrutiny and analysis, along with curiosity; the third is how they treat Christ depends on their mood; the fourth is merely listening to that which Christ says, but neither obeying nor submitting. Judging from each of these items’ expressions, as well as the views and manifestations that you can understand from their literal meanings, is each of them positive? Is there any item that seems more affirmative or positive? What do “affirmative” and “positive” refer to? At the very least, they refer to having humanity and reason. This does not need to be elevated to the level of having submission or the attitude and stance which a created being should have. Just using the measure of human reason, which of these is up to par?

First, let’s look at the first item: fawning, flattery, and fair-sounding words. Are these three terms considered commendatory, positive, or affirmative in human language? (No.) Typically, which type of people’s speech and behavior do these words describe? (Deceitful people, traitors, vile people, sycophants.) Traitors, vile people, and renegades; the type of people linked with deceitfulness, baseness, and wickedness. The actions of such people are seen in the eyes of others as mostly despicable and base, insincere toward people, and not kind-hearted. They often fawn, flatter, and speak fair-sounding words, fawning and flattering those who wield influence or are of high status. This type of person is despised by others and usually seen as a negative figure.

Let’s look at the second item: scrutiny and analysis, along with curiosity. Are these words considered commendatory or derogatory? (Derogatory.) Derogatory? Explain to Me, why would you categorize them as derogatory? Without context, these words are neutral and cannot be called commendatory or derogatory. For instance, adopting scrutiny toward a scientific project, analyzing the essence of a problem, being curious about certain things—these manifestations basically cannot be called positive or negative and are fairly neutral. However, there is a context here: The object of people’s scrutiny, analysis, and curiosity is not some topic appropriate for human research, but is rather the flesh in which God is incarnate. So, clearly, with this added context, based on these things done by this type of people, as well as their manifestations and behaviors, these words become derogatory here. Which type of people usually scrutinize and analyze the flesh in which God is incarnate? Is it those who pursue the truth, or those who don’t? Is it those who truly believe in Christ from their hearts, or those who hold a skeptical attitude toward Christ? Obviously, it’s those who hold a skeptical attitude. They don’t have genuine faith in Christ, and apart from scrutinizing and analyzing, they are also particularly curious. What exactly are they curious about? We will specifically fellowship on the details of these manifestations and essences shortly.

Next, let’s look at the third item: How they treat Christ depends on their mood. This item doesn’t have specific words to analyze for their commendatory or derogatory meaning. What fact is revealed by this kind of manifestation and specific practice of such people? What kind of disposition does a person who does such things and exhibits such manifestations have? Firstly, are they impartial in their treatment of others? (No.) From which phrase can this be inferred? (“Depends on their mood.”) This phrase means that these kinds of people act and treat other people or matters without principles, without a bottom line, and especially without any conscience or reason—they are entirely guided by their mood. If someone treats an ordinary person based on their mood, it might not be a major issue; it won’t violate administrative decrees or offend God’s disposition, and merely illustrates that this person is willful, doesn’t pursue truth, acts without principles, and does whatever they please based on their mood and preferences, only considering their own fleshly desires and feelings and not the feelings of others, and showing no respect to others. This is an explanation based on their treatment of an ordinary person—but who is the recipient of their mood-based treatment here? It’s not an ordinary person, but the flesh in which God is incarnate—Christ. If you treat Christ based on your mood, this is a serious problem, the extent of which we will not discuss now.

Now, let’s look at the fourth item: merely listening to that which Christ says, but neither obeying nor submitting. There are no specific terms here to define exactly what this is; it’s a kind of manifestation, a habitual state and specific attitude in how people treat things, but it involves a person’s disposition. What is the disposition of such people? They listen, but neither obey nor submit. On the surface, they can still listen, but is what they show outwardly the same as what they think or their true attitude inside? (No.) Outwardly, they may appear well-behaved and seem to be listening, but on the inside, it’s not like this. Internally, there is a mood and attitude of disobedience, along with a mood and attitude of resistance. They think: “I do not obey you in my heart; how can I make it apparent to you that I do not obey? I merely listen to the words you say with my ears, but I don’t take them to heart at all or implement them. I will set myself against you and oppose you!” This is what it means to neither obey nor submit. If such people come into contact and interact with ordinary individuals, treating what ordinary people say with this kind of state, viewpoint, and attitude, regardless of whether it is a manifestation that is obvious or detectable, what is the disposition of such people? Are they considered what others call good people with humanity and rationality? Are they seen as positive figures? Clearly not. Just judging from the phrase “merely listening, and neither obeying nor submitting,” these people are arrogant. How arrogant are they? Extremely so, to the point of losing rationality, being utterly crazed, obeying no one and not giving anyone the time of day. Their attitude when interacting with others is: “I can talk to you, I can associate with you, but no one’s words can enter my heart, nor can anyone’s words become the principles and guidance for my actions.” They only have their own thoughts in mind, only heeding the voice within themselves. They neither listen to nor accept any correct, affirmative, or positive statements and principles, instead resisting them in their hearts. Are there such people among the masses? In a group, are such people considered rational or irrational? Are they seen as positive or negative figures? (Negative figures.) So, how do most people in a group usually view and treat them? What kind of methods do they use in their treatment of them? Are most people willing to come into contact and interact with such individuals? (No.) In the church, most people can’t get along with such individuals—what is the reason? Why does everyone dislike and feel repulsed by such people? Two sentences can explain this issue. First, these people don’t cooperate with anyone, they want to have the final say, and they listen to no one; getting them to heed someone else’s words is extremely difficult, and it’s impossible for them to seek others’ opinions and ideas, or to listen to what others say. Second, they are unable to cooperate with anyone. Aren’t these two sentences the most specific manifestations of this type of person? Aren’t they such a person’s essence? (Yes.) Firstly, considering their disposition, they listen to no one and submit to no one. They want to have the final say, don’t want to listen to others, and are uncooperative with them. In their hearts, there is no place for others, nor for the truth or the church’s principles—such is the antichrist disposition of these kinds of people. Moreover, they are unable to cooperate or get along with anyone, and even if they feel reluctantly willing in their hearts, they still aren’t able to cooperate with others when the time comes. What is going on here? Isn’t there a certain state involved? They look down on others, don’t listen to them, and no matter how aligned with the principles the words of others are, they don’t accept them. When it comes to cooperating with others, it can only be done their way. Is this harmonious cooperation? This is not cooperation; it’s taking arbitrary action, where one person calls the shots. This is the kind of disposition such people have in their interactions with others, and they treat Christ in the same way. Is this worth dissecting? The issue here is serious and deserves dissection! Next, let’s talk about the specific manifestations and practices of antichrists in each item, and through these specific manifestations and practices come to understand the antichrists’ essence—despising the truth, brazenly flouting principles, and ignoring the arrangements of God’s house. Let’s start dissecting from the first item.

A. Fawning, Flattery, and Fair-Sounding Words

Fawning, flattery, and fair-sounding words—on the surface, everyone should know what these terms mean, and individuals who embody them are commonplace. Engaging in fawning, flattery, and speaking fair-sounding words are most often ways of speaking adopted to gain favor, praise, or some kind of benefit from others. This is the most common mode of speech for those who engage in flattery and sycophancy. It can be said that all corrupt humans, to some degree, exhibit this manifestation, which is a manner of speaking that belongs to satanic philosophy. So, do people exhibit the same manifestations and practices in front of the incarnate God, perhaps also to gain some benefits? Of course, it’s not that simple. When people engage in fawning and flattery toward the flesh in which God is incarnate, what kind of viewpoint or thought about Christ within their hearts causes such behavior? Such behavior is usually what people exhibit toward other people. If people also behave this way toward the incarnate God, it implicitly reveals a problem: They regard the incarnate God, Christ, as just an ordinary person among corrupt humankind. From an external perspective, Christ has bones and flesh and bears the appearance of a human. This gives people an illusion, leading them to believe that Christ is merely human, allowing them to brazenly treat Christ based on the logic and thinking of treating humans. According to the logic and thinking of treating humans, usually in treating someone of status and renown, the best strategy for leaving a good impression, in order to smoothly gain benefits or future promotion, is to make one’s words sound pleasing and tactful, ensuring that the listener feels comfortable and happy. One must maintain a gentle facial expression, and not show a fierce or grim face, and in language, there should be no intense, malicious, or harsh words, or words that can wound one’s pride. Only with such manifestations and words can one leave a good impression in such a person’s presence and not repulse them. It seems that speaking pleasingly, engaging in flattery and sycophancy, is considered the truest form of respect toward others. Similarly, people believe that to show respect to Christ, and to maintain harmony, they must go to great lengths to exhibit such behavior, ensuring their words contain no hurtful language or content, and certainly nothing offensive. People think this is the best way to interact and converse with Christ. They treat the flesh in which God is incarnate as a most ordinary human with a normal, corrupt disposition, thinking there is no better way to behave or treat Him otherwise. Therefore, when an antichrist comes before Christ, what they harbor in their heart is not fear, respect, or genuine sincerity, but rather a desire to use pleasing and tactful language, even resorting to illusions to openly engage in fawning and flattery toward the flesh in which God is incarnate. They believe that all humans are susceptible to this approach, and since the flesh in which God is incarnate is also human, He too would respond to this approach and favor it. Hence, in treating Christ, the flesh in which God is incarnate, in their hearts, antichrists do not accept the fact that Christ possesses the essence of God. Instead, they employ some human tactics, human philosophies for worldly dealings, and the common human tricks of treating and manipulating others to treat the flesh in which God is incarnate. Does the essence of these behaviors demonstrate the fact that antichrists despise the flesh in which God is incarnate? (Yes.)

Antichrists treat Christ in the same way they treat corrupt humans, only speaking words of fawning and flattery upon seeing Christ, and then observing Christ’s reactions and trying to cater to His preferences. Some people, upon seeing Christ, say: “I spotted you from afar. You stand out in the crowd. Unlike others, who don’t have halos, you have one over your head. I knew right away that you’re no ordinary person. Who else in god’s house isn’t ordinary but christ? The moment I saw you, I could tell, it’s unmistakably true. The flesh in which god is incarnate is indeed different from others.” Isn’t this blatant nonsense? My appearance is ordinary, common. If I don’t do anything or say anything in any crowd, it might take a year or two for anyone to recognize who I am. In any group, I am just an ordinary member; nobody can see anything special about Me. Now, I am working in the church, and because of God’s testimony, you listen when I speak among you. But without God’s testimony, how many would listen to Me or pay attention? That remains a question, an unknown. Some people say: “He looks just like god to me. I’ve always felt he is out of the ordinary, different from others.” How am I different? Do I have three heads and six arms? How can you tell the difference? God once said: I deliberately do not let people perceive even a hint of divinity in Me. If God doesn’t let people perceive His divinity, how can you see it? Isn’t what these people say problematic? It is clearly nothing but the nonsensical talk of despicable sycophants, whose words lack all substance. The external appearance of the incarnate God is that of an ordinary person. How can human eyes discern Christ’s divinity? If Christ did not work and speak, no one could recognize Him or know His identity and essence. This is a fact. Then what about those who say, “I could tell at first glance that you are the flesh in which god is incarnate, distinct from others,” or “As soon as I saw you, I knew you could do great things”? What are these statements? They are utter nonsense! When God had not given His testimony, how could you not discern it no matter how many times you looked? After God’s testimony, when I began My work, how could you suddenly see it at first glance? These are clearly deceptive words, sheer madness.

Some people, when they meet or interact with Me, want to showcase themselves. They think: “It’s not often one gets to meet the incarnate god; this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. I must perform well, conveying the results of my years of believing in god, and the good achievements I have made since accepting god’s current stage of work, to let god know.” What do they mean by letting Me know? They hope for a chance to be promoted. If it were in the church, they might never have the chance to stand out or be promoted in their lifetime; no one would elect them. They think the opportunity has now come, so they ponder how to speak in a way that doesn’t reveal any issues and doesn’t show how they are trying to showcase themselves. They have to be more tactful and skillful, employing some schemes and tricks, resorting to petty ruses. They say: “God, we have certainly benefited a lot from believing in you over these years! Our entire family believes, all having forsaken everything to expend ourselves for god. But that’s not the most important thing. The most important is that your words are so great, and you have done so much work. We are all willing to do our duties and expend ourselves for god.” To which I say: “But there’s not really any benefit in this.” “There is—the grace god has given is plentiful. In god’s words, we have gained a lot of new light, insights, and understandings. The brothers and sisters are all so energized, all willing to expend themselves for god.” “Are there any who are weak and negative? Any who cause disruptions and disturbances?” “No, our church life is very good. The brothers and sisters all pursue loving god, forsaking everything to spread the gospel. Everything god says is good. We are all motivated, and can no longer believe as before, seeking grace and seeking bread to satisfy hunger. We must forsake everything for god, offer ourselves to god, and expend ourselves for god.” “Then, over these past few years, have you gained any understanding of God’s words?” “Yes, we have. Your words, god, are so great, each sentence hitting right at our key issues, exposing our nature essence! We have received great light in understanding ourselves and in your words. God, you are the lifesaver for our entire family, our whole church. Without you, we would have perished in who-knows-where long ago. Without you, we wouldn’t know how to continue. Everyone in our church longs to see you, praying every day to meet you in their dreams, hoping to be with you every day!” In their speech, are there any essentially heartfelt or genuine words spoken? (No.) What are these words then? They are hypocritical, empty, and useless. When I ask them to talk about self-knowledge, they say, “Since accepting god’s work, I feel that I am a devil and Satan, lacking humanity.” “How do you lack humanity?” “I act without principles.” “In what actions do you lack principles?” “I can’t cooperate harmoniously with others, my interactions with others lack principles, my dealings with people lack principles. I am a devil and Satan, I originate from Satan, I am deeply corrupted by Satan. I resist god at every turn, constantly opposing and confronting god.” These words sound good on the surface. When I ask them, “How is so-and-so in your church now?” they say, “Now, he’s doing well. He was replaced from church leadership before, but then repented, and the brothers and sisters elected him again.” “Is that person someone who pursues the truth?” “If god says he pursues the truth, then he does; if god says he doesn’t, then he doesn’t.” “This person appears enthusiastic, but his caliber is quite poor, isn’t it?” “Poor? Yes, a bit. Otherwise, why would the brothers and sisters have replaced him last time?” “If his caliber is poor, can he do concrete work? Can he fulfill the obligation of church leadership?” Hearing My words, they interpret them as suggesting that someone of poor caliber can’t fulfill the obligation, and say, “Then he can’t fulfill it. The brothers and sisters chose him as the best of the worst; there wasn’t anyone better, so they picked him. The brothers and sisters all say his caliber is average, but he can still lead us. If his caliber is poor, I think the brothers and sisters might not choose him next time. God, should I work on influencing the brothers and sisters?” “This matter depends on the stature of your church’s brothers and sisters. They choose someone who they think is good based on principles—this process is correct, but some people are foolish and cannot see through people or matters, and sometimes they choose the wrong person.” What did I mean by saying this? I was simply stating a fact, not intentionally aiming to replace this person. But how did the antichrist comprehend this after hearing it? They didn’t say it out loud, but thought to themselves, “Is this a hint from god to replace this person? Well then, I should probe further into what god really means. If this person is replaced, who else can lead the church, who can do this work?” The antichrists are blind to God, He has no place in their hearts. When they encounter Christ, they treat Him no different from an ordinary person, constantly taking their cues from His expression and tone, changing their tune as befits the situation, never saying what’s really going on, never saying anything sincere, only speaking empty words and doctrine, trying to deceive and hoodwink the practical God standing before their eyes. They don’t have a God-fearing heart at all. They aren’t even capable of speaking to God from the heart, of saying anything real. They talk as a snake slithers, the course sinuous and indirect. The manner and direction of their words are like a melon vine climbing its way up a pole. For example, when you say someone is of good caliber and could be promoted, they immediately talk about how good they are, and what is manifested and revealed in them; and if you say someone is bad, they are quick to talk about how bad and evil they are, about how they cause disturbances and disruptions in the church. When you inquire about some actual situations, they have nothing to say; they prevaricate, waiting for you to make a conclusion, listening out for the meaning in your words, so as to align their words with your thoughts. Everything they say is pleasant-sounding words, flattery, and obsequiousness; not a sincere word comes out of their mouths. This is how they interact with people and how they treat God—they are just that deceitful. This is the disposition of an antichrist.

Some people come into contact with Me, not knowing what kind of words or matters I like to hear; yet, even without knowing, they find a way. They pick certain topics to discuss with Me, thinking, “These topics might interest you, might be what you want to know or hear but are too polite to ask about, so I will take the initiative to tell you.” When we meet, they say, “Recently, there have been torrential rains in our area, flooding the entire city. Public order is also deteriorating; there are so many thieves now. When one goes out, there’s the risk of being stolen from or robbed. I heard that in some places, many children have been abducted, and people are in a state of panic. The nonbelievers say that society has become too chaotic, completely abnormal. People in religion are still clutching the Bible and preaching the gospel, saying that the last days have come, that god is about to descend, and great disasters and calamities are upon us.” And there are some people who, upon meeting Me, immediately say, “A few days ago, three moons appeared in the sky in one place, and many people took photos. Some folk diviners say that great visions are about to appear in the sky, that the true lord has appeared.” They say such things as these—they are particularly interested in and collect information about the occurrence of such societal chaos, disasters, and various unusual events and astronomical phenomena. When they meet Me, they use this as a topic of conversation to build a closer relationship with Me. Some believe, “God incarnate is an ordinary person. The difference between him and others lies in the fact that he does god’s work and represents god. Thus, while most people hope for world peace, for humans to live in harmony and contentment, the christ in the flesh is unlike normal people. He hopes for great chaos in the world, for visions and great disasters to come, for god’s great work to be swiftly accomplished, and for god’s management work to be quickly concluded, to fulfill his spoken words. These are the topics he cares about and is interested in. So, when meeting him, I shall talk about these things, and he will be particularly pleased. With this pleasure, perhaps I might be promoted, and there might be a chance to spend more days by his side.” Are there such people? I once met a young girl who had a sweet mouth; she was eloquent, quick-witted, and knew exactly what to say to whom, adept at playing to the gallery and shining in all directions, especially skilled at interacting with those in power and with status. When she interacted with Me, upon meeting, she would immediately say: “In such and such a place, the underworld is rampant; even the local police have gang members. There was a gang leader who did many bad things locally. One day, he encountered a high-ranking official, a big demon, on the road. His car overtook the big demon’s car, and the big demon said to his bodyguard, ‘Whose car is that? I don’t want to see him again!’ The next day, he was taken out.” Are there such things in society? (Yes.) Such things do exist, but is it useful to make them the main topic of conversation upon meeting Me? These are not the topics I care about or wish to hear, but she didn’t know that. She thought I liked to hear these thrilling stories. Tell Me, are disasters, visions, natural and man-made calamities the topics I care about, the ones I wish to hear? (No.) It’s fine to listen to these things to pass the time, but if you think I really like to hear them, then you are mistaken. I’m not interested in these things, I don’t care to hear about them. Some people ask, “Do you listen when people talk about these things?” I don’t oppose listening, but that doesn’t mean I like to listen, nor does it mean I wish to collect this information, these stories. What does this mean? It means that deep in My heart, I have no curiosity about these matters, no interest whatsoever. Even some people think, “In your heart, don’t you particularly hate the great red dragon? If you hate the great red dragon, I’ll tell you about a punishment that befell the great red dragon: There was infighting among high officials within the great red dragon, several factions fighting each other, almost killing a certain head demon. These head demons have survived several assassination attempts, it’s really dangerous! Would you be happy to hear this?” Would you all be happy to hear about such things? If you would be happy, then be happy; if you don’t like to hear it, then don’t listen—it’s unrelated to Me. In short, regarding these matters, whether it’s an epidemic in some country, how the epidemic came about, how many people died, which country encountered a major disaster, the state of some country’s government, how brutal the internal struggles are in the upper echelons of some country, or social upheavals, I might listen if I happen to hear about them, but I won’t make an effort to look up specific details about these events, listen to news, read newspapers, or search online for content related to these events just because I don’t know about them. I absolutely will not, and I never do such things. I’m not interested in these matters. Some people say: “All of this is under Your control, it’s all Your doing; that’s why You’re not interested.” Is this statement correct? It’s right in terms of doctrine, but in essence, that’s not the case. God holds sovereignty over human destiny, every race, every group of people, every age. It’s quite normal for some disasters and unusual events to occur in each age—all of this is in God’s hands. Regardless of the age, whether significant or minor events occur, when the time comes for an age to change, even if there is no alteration in a single blade of grass or tree, that age must pass. This is a matter of God’s sovereignty. If an age is not meant to end, then even if there are major changes in celestial phenomena or in all things on earth, it should not end. All of these are God’s affairs, beyond human intervention or assistance. What people should do most is not to concern themselves with these matters, not to collect evidence and information about these events to satisfy their curiosity. Regarding the things God does, you should understand as much as you can, and not force understanding where it’s not possible. Among corrupt humankind, these matters are all too normal, all too commonplace. All these matters—the changing of ages, the transformation of the world order, the fate of a race, the governance and status of a regime, and so on—are all in God’s hands, all under His sovereignty. People need only to believe, accept, and submit; that is sufficient. Do not harbor the thought of understanding more mysteries, thinking that the more mysteries you understand, the more fashionable it seems, as if by believing in God you have great stature and spirituality. Holding such a mindset means your view of believing in God is incorrect. These matters are not significant. The real significant matter, what people should most concern themselves with, is the core of God’s management plan—the salvation of humanity, enabling humankind to be saved within the work of God’s management plan. This is the greatest and most central matter. If you understand the truths and visions related to this matter, then accept what God does in you and the truth He provides to you, and accept every instance of being pruned, judged, and chastised, if you accept all of these, then this is more valuable than researching celestial phenomena, mysteries, disasters, or politics.