What else interests antichrists, apart from their desire and ambition to control people? Nothing, essentially. They’re not too interested in anything else. Whether each person is doing the appropriate duty, whether staffing is arranged appropriately, whether there’s anyone disrupting and disturbing the work of the church, whether each aspect of the church’s work is progressing smoothly, which segment of the work has a problem, which segment is still weak, which segment hasn’t been thought about yet, where the work isn’t being done properly—antichrists don’t involve themselves with any such things, nor do they ask about them. They never care about them; they never do this concrete work. For instance, translation work, video editing work, film production work, text-based work, the work of spreading the gospel, and so on—they don’t diligently follow up on any aspect of the work. So long as something doesn’t touch on their fame, gain, or status, it’s as if it has nothing to do with them. So, what’s the only thing they do? They just handle some general affairs—superficial work that people pay attention to and see. They finish with that, then trot it out as a qualification of theirs, and then they begin to enjoy the benefits of their status. Do antichrists care about the life entry of God’s chosen people? No; they care only about their reputation and status, about matters in which they can stand out, and get people to esteem and worship them. So, no matter what problems arise in the work of the church, they neither concern themselves with them nor ask about them; no matter how serious a problem, no matter how great a loss it incurs to the interests of God’s house, they don’t feel that it’s a problem. Tell Me, do they even have a heart? Are they people with loyalty? Are they people who love and accept the truth? Question marks must be drawn behind these things. Well, what must they be doing all day, for them to make a shambles of the work of the church? This suffices to show that they’re not the least bit considerate of God’s intentions. They don’t do the essential work that God has entrusted to them, but busy themselves exclusively with superficial, general affairs, so that they’ll appear to be working to other people; on the outside, they’re busy doing a duty, to show people that they have zeal and faith. This pulls the wool over some people’s eyes. But they don’t do a single aspect of the church’s essential work—they do none of the work of watering and providing the truth. They never use the truth to resolve problems; they just handle some general affairs, and do a bit of work that makes them look good. With the church’s essential work, they’re just perfunctory and irresponsible—they don’t have the least sense of responsibility. They never seek the truth to resolve problems, no matter how many should arise, and they go through the motions in their duties. And having handled some superficial, general affairs, they think they’ve done actual work. While antichrists do their duties, they run amok doing bad things and act in an arbitrary and dictatorial way. They make a shambles and a total mess of the church’s work. Not one aspect of the work is done to an adequate standard and without error; no aspect of the work is done well without the Above having to intervene, and ask after it, and supervise it. And even so, there are some who are full of grievances and defiance after being replaced; they make deceptive arguments on their own behalf, foisting responsibility off onto upper-level leaders and workers. Is that not completely unreasonable? A person’s true attitude toward the truth can’t be seen when nothing has happened, but when they’re pruned and replaced, their true attitude toward the truth is revealed. People who accept the truth are able to do so under any circumstances. If they’re wrong, they can admit their mistake; they can face the facts and accept the truth. People who don’t love the truth won’t admit that they’re wrong, even if their error has been exposed; less still will they accept God’s house handling them—and what would some of them even use as a justification? “I meant to do well—I just didn’t. I can’t be blamed now for having done badly. I meant well, and I suffered and paid a price, and I expended of myself—not doing something well isn’t the same as doing evil!” To use this justification, this excuse, to refuse to be handled by God’s house—is that proper? Whatever justifications and excuses a person gives, they can’t conceal their attitude toward the truth and toward God. This relates to their nature essence, and it is the most indicative thing. Whether something has happened or not, your attitude toward the truth represents your nature essence. It’s your attitude toward God. How you treat God can be seen just by looking at how you treat the truth.

What did we cover in our discussion just now about antichrists’ behavior of controlling people? (Antichrists are interested only in controlling people.) That’s right. People who are particularly arrogant and have a particular love for status have an ample “interest” in controlling people. This “interest” isn’t positive—it’s a desire and ambition, it’s negative, and it’s pejorative. Why would they be interested in controlling people? From an objective perspective, it’s their nature, but there’s another reason: People who would control others have a special passion and affection for status, fame, gain, vainglory, and power. Can I put it like that? (Yes.) And is that special passion and affection not similar to Satan’s? Is that not Satan’s essence? Satan contemplates all day long how to mislead and control people; every day, it inculcates in people fallacious ideas and views, whether through inculcation and education, or through traditional culture, or through science, lofty knowledge, and teachings—and the more it inculcates these things in people, the more they worship it. What is Satan’s aim in inculcating these things in people? Once it has done this, people possess its ideas; they possess its philosophies and mode of existence. This is tantamount to Satan taking root in people’s hearts. They live by Satan, and their living is Satan’s living—it’s the living of devils. Is that not so? Is this not also the nature of antichrists controlling people? They want to make everyone else into people like them; they want to make everyone live for them, be at their disposal, and do things for them. And everything must be under their control: People’s thoughts and speech, their style of speech, ideas, and views, the perspective and attitude from which they act, even their attitude toward God, their faith, and their will and aspiration to do their duties—all of this must be under their control. How deep does that control go? They first brainwash and indoctrinate people, then go on to make all people do the same things as they do themselves. They become the “godfather.” To make people like this, antichrists use many methods: There’s misleading, inculcation, frightening, and what else? (Psychological attacks.) That’s part of misleading. What else? (Coercion and buying people off.) How do they buy people off? Some people run amok doing bad things while doing their duties in God’s house. Can antichrists see this clearly? It’s all too clear to them. Do they handle it, then? They do not. And why don’t they? They wish to use the matter to buy those people off; they say to them, “Not handling you is a favor I’ve done for you. You need to thank me. I saw you do a bad thing, but I didn’t report you, and I didn’t handle you. I was lenient. Don’t you now owe me a debt of gratitude going forward?” Those people are then grateful toward them and consider them their benefactors. Then, the antichrists and those people are just like pigs wallowing in the same sty. While they are in power, antichrists can buy off such people: those who do evil, who harm the interests of God’s house, who pass judgment on God in private, and who undermine the work of God’s house in private. This is the sort of gang of evil people that antichrists protect. Is this not a kind of control? (It is.) The fact is that antichrists know deep in their hearts that these people aren’t those who safeguard the interests of God’s house. They all know it—there’s a tacit understanding—and so, they’re working hand in glove. “We’re peas in a pod. You don’t consider the interests of god’s house. You fool god, and so do I; you don’t pursue the truth, and neither do I.” Antichrists buy such people off. Is this not buying them off? (It is.) They have no qualms about letting the interests of God’s house suffer. At the price of the interests of God’s house, they condone these people running amok doing bad things, and freeloading off God’s house. It’s as if they’re providing for these people, and these people are unconsciously grateful to them. When the time comes for God’s house to handle these evil people, how do they view the antichrists? They say to themselves, “Oh, no. They’ve already been dismissed. If they hadn’t, we’d have been able to enjoy ourselves a while longer—with their cover, no one was able to handle me.” They still feel so attached to the antichrists! It’s evident that all these things antichrists do are disruptions and disturbances, things that mislead people, and evil deeds that oppose God. And any person who doesn’t love the truth won’t hate these evil deeds, and they will even cover up for them. For instance, there was a certain leader who shielded antichrists. The Above asked him whether anyone in the church was causing disruptions and disturbances, or running amok doing bad things, or if there were any antichrists misleading people. The leader said, “Well, I’ll ask around. Let me check for you.” Wasn’t that part of his job? With that tone—“Let me check for you”—he coped with the Above, and they didn’t hear any more about it afterward. He didn’t check—he didn’t want to offend those people! And when the Above asked him again, “Did you check?” he said, “I did—there aren’t any.” Was that true? He was the biggest antichrist of all, the principal culprit for disturbing the church’s work, and for harming the interests of God’s house. He was an antichrist himself—what was there for him to check? With him there, whatever bad things the people beneath him did, whatever disruptions and disturbances they caused, no one could check up on these things. He blocked them from doing so. By implication, under such circumstances, had he not separated the people under him from God? He had. And whom did those people heed, having been separated from God by him? Didn’t they heed him? And so, he became the town bully, the bandit leader, the local tyrant—he got those people under his control. What method did he use? He tricked the Above and duped those below him. With the people below him, he bought them off and spoke pleasant words, and with the Above, he engaged in trickery—he didn’t let the Above know what was going on below. He said nothing about it to the Above, and he also created a facade. What facade did he create? He said to the Above, “There’s someone in our church who all the brothers and sisters report to be of poor humanity, to be incredibly malicious, and to be incapable of any duty. What do you say—can I handle her?” To hear him tell it, it was clear from that person’s manifestations that she was an evil person who should be handled. So, the Above said, “In that case, you may handle her. Have you handled her?” He said, “We handled her last month and cleared her out.” Were the facts truly as he said? What turned out to really be going on after more detailed questioning? That person didn’t get along with him. And there was a reason they didn’t get along: This leader didn’t do actual work, and he was always forming gangs and cliques among the brothers and sisters—he displayed the manifestations of an antichrist, and that person had discernment of him, and she reported and exposed those problems. As soon as she made that report, she was found out by the leader’s associate underlings, and she was consequently punished and cleared out by him. This antichrist did a good job of getting everyone beneath him to rise up against that person and reject her, and eventually, he handled that person and cleared her out, after which he reported this “good news” to the Above. That wasn’t what was really going on, in fact. Do such things happen in the church? They do. These antichrists suppress the brothers and sisters; they suppress those who can discern them and report their problems, as well as those who can see through to their nature essence. They even lodge complaints against their victims first, reporting to the Above that it’s those people who are causing a disturbance. Who’s actually causing a disturbance? It’s the antichrists who are disturbing and controlling the church.

What are antichrists’ techniques for getting people to submit to them? One such technique is using various means to control you—to control your thoughts, your methods, the path you walk, and even, by means of the power they wield, the duty you do. If you get close to them, they’ll give you an easy duty that enables you to stand out; if you’re always disobedient to them, and always point out their faults, and expose the problem of their corruption, they’ll arrange for you to do a job that people don’t like—for instance, getting a young sister to do some dirty, tiring work. They arrange easy, clean jobs for whoever gets close to them, flatters them, and always says what they want to hear. This is how antichrists treat people and control them. That is, when it comes to power over staffing and transfers, who does what is all up to them, they’re in sole control. Is this merely a kind of ambition and desire? No, it’s not. Does this not correspond exactly with item eight of the manifestations of antichrists: “They would have others submit only to them, not the truth or God”? What does “They would have others submit only to them, not the truth or God” refer to? What’s wrong with this manifestation? In what way is it wrong? It’s that what they’d have people submit to goes entirely against the truth. It doesn’t accord with the truth principles. It goes entirely against the interests of God’s house and against God’s intentions; not a bit of it safeguards the interests of God’s house, and not a bit of it accords with the truth. What they’d have people submit to is entirely their own ambitions, desires, preferences, interests, and notions. Is this not the essence of the problem? This is one way antichrists’ essence manifests. Does this not get to the crux of the matter? This way that antichrists act should be easy to discern. There are some leaders and workers who put forward right and correct views, and though some people are unconvinced and can’t accept them, these leaders are able to persist in implementing those correct views and putting them into practice. What’s the difference between this behavior and that of antichrists? The two seem similar on the surface, but there’s a difference in their essence. What antichrists do is intentionally go against the truth and the work principles of God’s house, getting people to do what they say under the guise of them doing a duty for God’s house and submitting to the truth. This is wrong—egregiously, absurdly wrong. Some leaders and workers uphold correct views. That which accords with the truth principles should be upheld; this isn’t arrogance and self-righteousness, nor is it constraining people—it’s upholding the truth. The two behaviors seem similar on the outside, but their essences are different: One is upholding the truth principles, and the other is upholding mistaken views. What antichrists do is all in violation of the truth, in hostility to it, and entirely driven by their personal ambitions and desires—that’s why antichrists would have people submit only to them and not the truth or God. That is the crux of this item. What we talked about just now is an established fact. What do desires and ambitions refer to here? They refer to some people who don’t do obvious things that an antichrist would, yet still have these tendencies. They have these tendencies and manifestations, meaning they have these desires and ambitions. Whatever group they’re in, they always wish to command people like an official: “You, go make food!” “You, go notify so-and-so!” “Work hard at your duty, and have more loyalty—god’s watching!” Do they need to be saying that stuff? What sort of tone is that? Who are they to always be acting like a lord and master? They’re nothing, yet they’d dare to say such things—is that not a lack of reason? Some may say, “They’re blockheads.” But they’re no ordinary blockheads—they’re special ones. Special how? When they argue or deliberate about a matter with anyone, whether they’re right or not, they must ultimately prevail; whether they’re right or not, they must have the final say, call the shots, and make the decisions. Whatever their status may be, they wish to make the decisions. If another person should prevail by expressing a correct opinion, they get angry; they give up their post and stop their work—they quit, saying: “You can say whatever you like—it’s not like you do what I say, anyway!” Do they not have that ambition and desire? What consequences come of such people being lords and masters, of them being the ones in charge, of them becoming leaders? They become standard antichrists. Do you have such manifestations? That would not be a good thing! Wouldn’t it be a great calamity if a believer in God does not gain the truth, but instead becomes an antichrist?

How do nonbelievers view people? When they encounter a person, they look first at their appearance and clothing; when they listen to others speak, they always want to see whether they’re possessed of learning. If they find that your appearance and clothing aren’t much to look at, and that you aren’t very well-educated or knowledgeable, they scorn you, and want to get the upper hand when they talk with you. I say, “If you want to argue, then go ahead—you talk.” I hold My tongue; I yield. Most people in God’s house listen to Me, wherever I go. So, I look for chances to hear others speak, to let others do more of the talking—I’m trying to let everyone speak from the heart, and talk about the difficulties inside them, and of their knowledge. As I listen, I can hear some deviations. I can hear a few of their problems and shortcomings, what problems have arisen with the path they walk, and which area of the church’s work isn’t being done well, what problems remain with it, and whether they need resolving. I concentrate on listening for these things. If we’re debating some issue—if I say a cup is paper, for instance, and you insist on saying it’s plastic, I’ll say, “Fine. You’re right.” I won’t argue with you. Some people think, “If You’re right, why don’t You argue?” It depends on the issue. If it’s something that touches on the truth, it’s only right for you to heed Me; if it’s some external affair, then no matter what you say, I won’t get involved—such things have nothing to do with Me. There’s no use in arguing about such things. There are some people who discuss certain matters of state. To them, I say, “As I understand it, this is how that thing is.” I tack on “as I understand it” at the beginning; there’s a bit of self-knowledge in that. I bring out a fact I know to illustrate the matter, saying, “Here’s the situation as it is now, but if there are some special circumstances, I don’t know about those.” It’s all I can do to evaluate the matter with such a fact, but I’m not showing off how much I know. I’m just giving them a bit of information as a reference—I don’t mean to assume a higher station than theirs and suppress them, to show them how brilliant I am, that I know everything, that they don’t know anything. That’s not My perspective. When some people are chatting with Me, I mention a bit of information they don’t know, and they say, “You spend all day inside—what do you know?” They don’t know that information, yet they want to argue and fight with Me over it. I say, “That’s right. I don’t go out, but I do know this one thing. I’m just telling you about it, and that’s it—believe it or not.” What’s there to argue about in that? Arguing about this sort of thing is a disposition. Some people even want to compete for superiority when it comes to an external matter, saying: “How did you come to know about this? Why don’t I know about it? Why can you talk about the long and short of it, while I can’t?” For instance, I say, “Over the years I’ve been staying here, I’ve discovered something distinctive about the climate: It’s fairly humid.” This is an observation I’ve come to after staying in this place for a long time—it’s a fact. Yet some people hear that and say, “Is that how things really are? How come I haven’t felt the humidity, then?” Just because you haven’t felt the humidity, that doesn’t mean it’s not humid. You can’t just go by what you feel—you have to go by the data. The daily weather forecasts go into great detail, and once you’ve seen enough of them, you’ll know that it is, in fact, humid here. It’s not something I just imagined, and I’m not talking based on a feeling. And why is that? There’s always moss at the shady bases of walls all year round; in springtime, there are some places I wouldn’t dare walk, they’re so slippery. This observation came from Me going through this, experiencing it, seeing it with My own eyes, and personally feeling it. Talking in this way isn’t going against the facts, right? But there are some people who challenge Me over these things when they talk to Me—I say it’s humid here, and they just say it isn’t. Are these not muddled people? (They are.) Some statements are made on the basis of reality, as they come from experience, and aren’t imagined out of thin air. Why do I say they’re not imaginings? Because they lay out the details clearly, thoroughly, and systematically, and when a person sees and experiences what was described in those statements, it matches up exactly with what was said. Are those statements not then accurate? (It is.) Yet even with these accurate statements, there are some people who are always contentious, and they argue with Me in this way. What is it they’re arguing for? Is this mortal combat? Are they fighting for their lives? That’s not what they’re arguing for, they just want to compete over who knows more. They just like to argue—this is a disposition. How do you think such people ought to be treated? Do they need to be exposed, and argued with until you’re flushed with anger? (No.) With such ignorant people, there’s no use in arguing. It’s degrading. Just let them be. Won’t that do? What’s the use in arguing with such foolish and rash people? If there’s an argument or debate because someone does not understand some matter that touches on the truth, that’s alright—but isn’t it ignorant to argue about these external affairs? The disposition of antichrists is, primarily, that of not accepting the truth, of being arrogant and self-righteous, of being averse to the truth. Antichrists don’t even accept any right words, or remarks and sayings that accord with the facts, and they will research them, and dispute and argue with you about them—and that’s to say nothing of the truth. Is that not a disposition? (It is.) What disposition is it? Arrogance. What they mean is, “You just understand a bit of the truth, don’t you? You don’t understand external affairs, so you’d be right to listen to me about them! Don’t run your mouth—it really makes me mad. These external affairs aren’t yours to manage. With your responsibilities, with speaking the truth, I’ll listen to you—but stop talking about these external matters. Shut up, why don’t you! You’ve never encountered these matters, so what do you know? You need to listen to me!” In everything, they’d have people listen to them. They wish to conquer everyone, without even looking to see who it is. What disposition is that? Is there any reason at all in it? (No.)

Tell Me, is getting along with Me easy or difficult? (Easy.) How can you tell? Why do you say it’s easy? I’ll tell you, and you can see whether My explanation of Myself is right and accurate. First, My rationality is normal. How can this normalness be explained? It means that I have accurate standards and an accurate perspective with regard to all matters. In that way, aren’t My views and statements regarding each sort of thing, and My attitude toward each sort of thing, all normal? (Yes.) They’re normal—at least, they accord with the standards for normal humanity. Second, the truth is keeping Me in check. These are two things that normal rationality at the very least possesses. And there’s one more aspect to this: The reason you can see that it’s easy to get along with Me is that I have the right measure and I know the standards when it comes to people of each sort. I have the right measure, as well as ways and means for how I treat leaders and ordinary brothers and sisters, for how I treat the elderly and the young, for how I treat arrogant people who are liable to show off, and for how I treat those who do and don’t have spiritual understanding, and so on, for each sort of person. What primarily is this right measure, and these ways and means? They are going along with the truth principles, not doing things at random. Suppose, for instance, I were to esteem you for being a university student, or to scorn you for being a peasant—those are not the principles. So, how do I grasp these principles? Through looking at a person’s caliber and humanity, at the duty they do, at their faith in God, and at their attitude toward the truth. I regard people based on a combination of these various aspects. There’s yet another reason why you see Me as easy to get along with, which is something many people perhaps have notions about and are unable to accept. They think, “You have status, but why don’t You seem like someone with status? You don’t assert Your status; You aren’t all high and mighty. In people’s minds, they think that they should look up to You—but why is it that when people see You, they find it most fitting to regard You from the same level, or even to look down on You?” And so, they think it is easy to get along with Me, and they relax. Is that not so? That’s how it is. They consequently think I’m nothing to be afraid of, and that getting along with Me in this way is great. Tell Me, if I were to suppress you at every turn, and prune you for no good reason, and rebuke you and lecture you all day with a dark expression on My face, would things not then be different? You’d think, “You’re so hard to get along with, with Your eccentric personality and Your mood swings!” I wouldn’t be easy to get along with then. It’s precisely because I seem normal to you in all of My aspects, in My personality, in My pleasures and angers, in My sorrows and joys, and because in your mind’s eye, you think that people with standing and high status ought to be high and mighty, yet the Me you see now is just so ordinary—that’s precisely why you let your guard down and feel I’m easy to get along with. Besides, do you find that I use bureaucratic jargon when I speak? (No.) I don’t—when it comes to things you don’t understand, I help you as much as I can with whatever I can, and I rarely deride you. Why do I rarely do that? There are times when I feel very exasperated and can’t help but say a few words deriding you, but I must also consider that you may become weak, and so I speak that way to you as little as possible. Instead, I’m tolerant, forgiving, and patient. I help you as much as I can, where I can, and I teach you as much as I can, of what I can—this is what I do in most circumstances. And why is that? It’s because the majority of people are most lacking when it comes to matters of testimony for God and understanding the truth—but when it comes to eating, drinking, and making merry, or clothes and makeup, or gaming, or any such worldly matters, people know all about these things. On the other hand, regarding matters of belief in God, and matters that touch on the truth, people are ignorant; when it comes to testifying for God, and using their professional skills, their strengths, and their gifts to do a bit of the work of testifying for God, to produce some work that testifies for God, they have nothing to say. What am I to do, when I see such a situation? I must teach you, coaching you bit by bit, and teaching you as best I can. I select the things that I understand, and know, and can do, and I teach them to you, on and on, until a piece of work is finished. I teach you all that I can, as much as I can—and as for the things that I can’t teach or that can’t be learned, whatever you understand of them, that’s how much you understand. Let this take its natural course. I won’t force you to understand those things. Ultimately, there are some who say, “Those of us who understand a profession have yielded to a layman. We, who understand this profession, have been unable to get anything done, and this person who doesn’t know anything about this profession always has to teach us. It’s so humiliating!” This isn’t humiliating. All of mankind draws a blank when it comes to testifying for God as a believer—if people were born able to testify for God, then no one would oppose Him! It’s because people are the ilk of Satan and have a nature essence that’s hostile to God that they’re unable to do things that involve the truth and testimony for God. So, what are people to do, then? So long as they put forth their greatest efforts to do what they can, that’s enough. If I have the energy to offer help and coaching, I help. If I don’t, or if I’m busy with other things and can’t make the time, then you just do what you can. That’s in line with the principles, isn’t it? It’s the only way it can be. I don’t force you to go beyond your capabilities. It’s useless—it can’t be done. In the end, people think: “You’re quite easy to get along with, and Your requirements are easy to achieve. You tell us what to do, and we’ll do as You say.” Some people may get pruned on occasion. Most of them come away from that fine, with the correct comprehension. A few people give up their work, and a few cause disturbances in secret, don’t try hard to do their duty, and don’t do actual work. Such people are then replaced. If you’re not willing to do the work, then step down. Why must you be the one being used for it? We’ll replace you—that’s all there is to it. Simple, isn’t it? If in the future, those people should repent, change, and do their work well, they’ll be given another chance—and if they still cause disruptions and disturbances in the same way, they’ll never be used again. I’d be better off using someone obedient. What’s the use of being entangled with people of that sort all the time? Right? That would be hard for them and exhausting for Me. There are principles for how I handle these things, and there are principles for how I get along with others, too. Another reason why I am easy to get along with is that in getting along with people, I never require things that are too demanding of them. Do whatever you can; for the things you can’t do, I’ll talk you through them, one by one. Do what you can with all your heart; if you don’t do it with all your heart, I won’t force you to do so. As for the rest, that is, how you believe in God, that’s your own business. If you don’t gain anything in the end, you’ll have no one to blame. What do you think of My principles for how I treat people? Do you feel that they are a bit indulgent? That’s absolutely not the case—the way I handle this is in complete alignment with the principles. What principles are those? Listen to Me, and you’ll understand.

I, God incarnate, work within humanity—can I entirely replace the Holy Spirit, or God’s Spirit, in doing work? No, I can’t. So, I don’t try to go beyond My limits, saying that I’d like to replace God in heaven and do all of His work. That would be magnifying Myself—I am not capable of that. I am an ordinary person. Whatever I can do, I do. I do what I can do well; I do it to completion, and I do it properly. I put My heart and all My strength into doing it. That is enough. That’s the work that falls to Me. Yet if I couldn’t understand this, and felt defiant toward this fact, and didn’t acknowledge it, but always tried to pretend to be great, always trying to shine, always trying to show off some incredible skills, would that accord with the principles? No. Do you think that I understand this matter? I do, all too well! The scope of what God’s flesh can say and what work the flesh can do is the scope of the work that He does in the flesh. Beyond this scope, people privately experiencing God’s disciplining and pruning, and the enlightenment and guidance of the Holy Spirit, and even God bestowing visions, and whom God will perfect and whom He’ll eliminate, and what view and attitude God has regarding all people—these things are all God’s business. If you’re in close contact with Me, I can see these things, too—but no matter how I look, how much of them can I see? There’s a limit to the number of people I can see, and the number I come into contact with—how could this possibly include every single person? That would be impossible. Shouldn’t you be clear on this matter? Tell Me, am I clear on this matter? I am. This is what a normal person should do. I don’t think about things that aren’t those I should do. Are people capable of this? They aren’t—they lack that rationality. Some people ask Me, “Aren’t You always secretly looking into things? Aren’t You always making inquiries about who’s doing what and what bad things they’re saying about You in private, or who’s secretly passing judgment on You and doing research on You?” I will be honest with you: I have never inquired into those things. Who’s in charge of those things? God’s Spirit is—God scrutinizes all; He scrutinizes all of the earth and He scrutinizes people’s hearts. If you don’t believe in God’s scrutiny, then isn’t your reason abnormal? (Yes, it is.) Then you’re not somebody who truly believes in God, you’re adopting the wrong position, and a big problem has occurred. I require you to believe in God, and I believe in this absolutely. So, My words and deeds are built on this foundation. I don’t do things beyond My bounds; I don’t do things beyond the scope of My abilities. Is that not a disposition? (It is.) Some people don’t see it like that. They think I have this identity, this status, and this power, so they wonder why I don’t act in that way. They think that I need to understand more things, and get a grasp on more things, so that I appear to have more standing, greater status, more abilities, and more authority. However much authority and however many abilities God gives Me, that’s what I possess. These are not things that I struggle for, nor things that I snatch. God’s authority, His abilities, and His almightiness aren’t things that can be represented by an insignificant flesh. If you’re not clear on that, then something’s wrong with your reason. If you can’t see through this matter after many years of believing in God, then you are too foolish and ignorant. There are many things that I don’t ask about—but do I know about them in My heart? (You do.) What do I know? Do I know everyone’s name? Do I know how many years each person has believed in God for? I don’t need to know those things. It’s enough for Me to know everyone’s states, what everybody lacks, the degree to which they’ve gained life entry, and what truths everybody ought to hear, and be watered with, and be provided with. Knowing these things is sufficient. Is this not what falls to Me? To know what falls to Me—what I should say and the work I should do—is that not rationality? (It is.) How does such rationality come about? If God incarnate didn’t even have this rationality, if He didn’t even have that standard for measuring all things and all events, what truth would He have to speak of then? If God incarnate were to fight with God’s Spirit and compete with Him for status, wouldn’t something have gone wrong? Wouldn’t that be incorrect? Could things be like that? No—that’s something that could never occur.

Some people always worry and say, “Are You always making inquiries about us and always doing research on us in secret? Is God always trying to gauge what we think about Him and how we view Him in our hearts?” I don’t think about such things. They’re superfluous! What’s the use of thinking about those things? All of this is within God’s scrutiny. There’s a scope to the actions of God’s Spirit, and even more so for the actions of God incarnate. God incarnate is God, He is the outlet and expression of the truth, and the work He does in this stage is representative of this stage, not the last. God incarnate can only do the work that’s within this period and this scope. Can this work be representative of the next stage, then? Well, we don’t know what will happen in the future. That’s God’s own business. I don’t overreach. I do what’s Mine to do; I do the things I should and can do. I never push Myself beyond My limits, saying, “I’m almighty! I’m great!” That’s God’s Spirit; God incarnate only represents an expression and outlet for the work that God is doing during this period. The scope of His work and what work He’s to do have already been determined by God. If you were to say, “Christ incarnate is almighty,” would you be right or wrong? Half right, half wrong. God’s Spirit is almighty; Christ can’t be said to be almighty. You should say that God is almighty. That’s an on-point and accurate way to put it, and one that accords with the facts. What rationality must I possess? Everyone says I am God, God Himself, that I am God incarnate, so do I believe that I could then stand in for God Himself, for His Spirit? I couldn’t. Even if God gave Me that power and ability, I couldn’t accomplish that. If I could stand in for God in that way, wouldn’t that be a kind of virtual blasphemy against His disposition and essence? The flesh is so limited! That’s not the way to understand it; that isn’t the angle to approach this topic from. Isn’t that so? (It is.) So, because I have these thoughts, these principles for doing things, and considerations in doing each thing, I don’t seem like God to many people, and there are even some who, before they come into contact with Me, harbor some fantasies, imaginings, and notions, who are careful and cautious in their actions, and then as soon as they meet Me, they think, “He’s just a person, isn’t he? There’s nothing scary about him.” After this, they let their hair down—they grow bold, and they dare to run amok doing bad things. What are they called? Disbelievers. If you only believe in God incarnate, and not in God’s Spirit, then you’re a disbeliever; and if you only believe in God’s Spirit, and not God incarnate, then you’re likewise a disbeliever. God incarnate and God’s Spirit are one—They’re one. They don’t fight with each other, much less are They separate from each other, and less still is each Their own entity. They are one—it’s just that God incarnate must approach His work and God from the perspective of the flesh. That’s the business of the flesh, and it has nothing to do with you—it’s Christ’s business, and it has nothing to do with mankind. You can’t say, “So you think you’re an ordinary person, too. Fine, we’re the same sort of people, then—we’re all the same.” Is it okay to say that? It’s a mistake. Some people say, “You seem quite easy to get along with, so let’s drop the formalities. Let’s treat each other like buddies, like friends; let’s be each other’s confidantes—let’s make friends with each other.” Is that okay? Those people do not have spiritual understanding; they are disbelievers. The more you share your feelings with them, and talk to them about the truth, the facts, and the truth reality, the more they scorn you—these people are disbelievers. The more you speak about profound mysteries, and say catchphrases, doctrines, and abstractions, and the more you assert your status, flaunt, and show off, the more they esteem you—these are disbelievers. When they see someone who’s principled and measured in their actions, whose actions accord with the truth, who can approach positive and negative things with clear boundaries and discernment—the more like that someone is, the more they look down on them, and find them beneath their notice—these are disbelievers.