At the last gathering, we continued to fellowship about the topic of “how to pursue the truth.” What was the main content of the fellowship? We fellowshipped about the differences between people’s innate conditions and their corrupt dispositions, and we specifically fellowshipped on these two aspects as well. Through the fellowship, do you have a certain understanding of the work God intends to do and which aspects of people God wants to change in saving people? (Yes. Through God’s last fellowship, I understood that what God intends to change with His work is people’s corrupt dispositions.) In saving people, God intends to rid them of their corrupt dispositions; He doesn’t intend to change their innate conditions, right? (Right.) God expresses the truth and supplies people with the truth, and uses various methods of work—all this is aimed at people’s corrupt dispositions. Through His work, God enables people to cast off the dispositions that they rely on for survival, which have been corrupted by Satan. In this way, God’s words and the truth are worked into people, becoming their life. This is the ultimate result that God’s work aims to achieve. What did you grasp from the fellowship on this aspect? What content left the deepest impression on you? Think about it for a moment. (God’s last fellowship helped me correct a fallacious view I had. In the past, I thought that God would change people’s inherent caliber, abilities, and personality, but through God’s fellowship, I understood that God does not perform supernatural work. God’s work is to change people’s corrupt dispositions and their various fallacious thoughts and viewpoints, which are things of Satan. By practicing God’s words, people’s normal humanity is restored, and their conscience and reason become increasingly normal. At the same time, I also understood the importance of pursuing the truth. Only by pursuing the truth and practicing the truth can our corrupt dispositions be resolved; when God’s words become our life, we achieve being saved by God. These two aspects of God’s fellowship left a relatively deep impression on me.) The content of the last fellowship involved a truth related to visions; it involved some specific aspects of God’s work, the objects of God’s work, and the results it aims to achieve. Based on the content that was fellowshipped, some specific questions arose. These questions include which manifestations in daily life are considered one’s innate conditions, which manifestations reflect one’s character or their humanity essence—that is, what we commonly refer to as some manifestations of whether a person’s humanity is good or bad—and which manifestations are revelations of corrupt dispositions. These are specific questions, yes? Although when we previously fellowshipped on this topic we provided some examples, they were not very targeted or specific. Today, we will specifically fellowship on this issue to distinguish between the manifestations people reveal that are innate conditions, those that pertain to their character, and those that fall into the category of corrupt dispositions, distinguishing the specific manifestations of these three aspects. In this way, it will be clearer how people should correlate the myriad issues they encounter in their daily lives with these three aspects based on God’s words and the truth. This includes which of people’s revelations are innate aspects of normal humanity that do not need to be dealt with or restrained; which aspects are revelations of problems with people’s humanity, and how they should change and correct these, or resolve them through seeking the truth; and which manifestations fall into the category of corrupt dispositions, and how people should come to understand the essence of these dispositions and resolve and cast them off through accepting and practicing the truth. These all have specific manifestations, and of course, there are specific paths of practice involved. According to people’s different manifestations, we will fellowship on the principles and paths of practice so that people can understand how to face and resolve these issues, and so people can have more concrete attitudes and paths of practice for various problems. Does fellowshipping in this way sound good? (Yes.)

We have fellowshipped twice before on the three issues of innate conditions, humanity, and corrupt dispositions. Although we did not specifically explain which of these three issues people’s manifestations and revelations belong to in a targeted way, we did provide some examples when fellowshipping on each issue. In previous fellowships, when touching upon these three issues, we also fellowshipped on the essence of these issues or the paths and principles of practice involved. Now, regarding the three issues I just mentioned, I want everyone to first discuss what innate conditions refer to. You all can roughly fellowship on this to get a basic concept first. (God, do innate conditions refer to a person’s caliber, abilities, innate personality, and instincts?) We have fellowshipped on this content before, so you should all be familiar with it. Are there more? Are strengths and appearance considered innate conditions? (Yes.) What about one’s family background? (Yes, this too.) And lifestyle routines and habits, right? Anything else? (Also interests and hobbies.) There is a bit of a difference between interests and hobbies and strengths. Adding interests and hobbies introduces more specifics. Let’s list them in order: First is family background. Second is appearance. Third is personality. Fourth is instincts. Fifth is caliber. Sixth is strengths. Seventh is interests and hobbies. Eighth is abilities. And then lifestyle habits and lifestyle routines. These last two are similar but have some specific differences. These add up to a total of ten. Go ahead and read them out. (One: family background. Two: appearance. Three: personality. Four: instincts. Five: caliber. Six: strengths. Seven: interests and hobbies. Eight: abilities. Nine: lifestyle habits. Ten: lifestyle routines.) These are all innate conditions of people. Shouldn’t we also specifically fellowship about innate conditions? Without fellowshipping, can you make the proper differentiations on your own? (No.) In what situations can’t you make the differentiations? (Sometimes when we see certain manifestations in someone, we can’t tell if they are reflecting that person’s personality or instincts, or if they are revelations of corrupt dispositions.) (Also, lifestyle habits and lifestyle routines—I used to think these were formed based on acquired living conditions and background; I didn’t realize they could be innate conditions.) You see, when we break down some detailed and specific content within one major theme, on the surface, it seems like you know these specifics, but in real life, you get them a bit mixed up; you still aren’t very clear on how to distinguish them, right? (Right.) We still need to do some specific fellowshipping on this issue.

Regarding the three aspects we just mentioned—innate conditions, humanity, and corrupt dispositions—let’s list some specific contents for innate conditions and fellowship on them in detail one by one. For humanity and corrupt dispositions, we won’t list them out. While fellowshipping on the specific contents and manifestations of innate conditions, we will also touch upon some manifestations of humanity and the revelations of corrupt dispositions. When we fellowship on these, you can distinguish and differentiate whether they belong to innate conditions, which do not need to be changed, or if they belong to problems with people’s character or their corrupt dispositions, which need to be resolved through seeking the truth. By engaging in specific fellowship using specific examples and issues, the distinctions will become clearer, right? (Yes.) For example, some people come from poor families and are economically disadvantaged. They live in narrow circumstances; they’re always hard up and have to calculate and plan every expense. Their approach when it comes to spending money is to stretch every penny as far as it can go. They were born into such families and under such conditions. Which of the three aspects we fellowshipped on does this fall under? Is it an innate condition, humanity, or a corrupt disposition? This is an aspect of their family background, which is an innate condition, right? (Yes.) Is this family background good or bad? (From a human perspective, it’s bad.) They struggle to get by, their families are impoverished, their economic conditions are not affluent or well-off—these are issues related to their family background. Although this type of person was born into a poor family, has never dined on caviar, never worn brand-name clothing, never got to experience various luxuries, and never been in contact with anything high-end or any wealthy individuals or famous people, they possess conscience and reason. When interacting with others, they never take advantage. When they see someone enjoying good things or they see someone wealthy, although they feel envy, they never think of stealing or seizing others’ possessions. Which aspect does this type of person’s revelation pertain to? (Their character, their humanity.) It pertains to their humanity. Is the manifestation of their humanity in this aspect good or bad? (Their humanity is good and upright.) This cannot yet be deemed upright; it just means they don’t take advantage of small benefits and do not flatter the rich. They are able to treat such matters correctly. How is the humanity of this type of person? (Their humanity is relatively good.) This is an objective statement; their humanity is relatively good, meaning in terms of their character, they relatively have integrity and dignity. Although their family background is poor and not noble, they do not despise the poor and favor the rich, nor do they take advantage of others. There is another type of person: They were born into a wealthy family, or as nonbelievers would say, “born with a silver spoon in their mouth.” They have never had to worry about food or clothing, and everything is readily available for them; whatever food they want to eat is at hand. Their family conditions are particularly good, and their parents treat them very well. Which aspect does this pertain to? (This also pertains to their family background.) One’s family background is an innate condition. Although this type of person has a particularly good family background, with good economic conditions and no worries about food or clothing, and has seen good things and experienced what the world has to offer, when interacting with others, if they see someone who is better and more capable than themselves, or who notably excels in some area, or who has prestige among people, they feel jealous and rack their brains for ways to belittle them. Which aspect do these manifestations pertain to? (I think they pertain to both corrupt dispositions and humanity.) That’s right. These manifestations pertain to both their humanity and their corrupt dispositions. When this type of person sees someone better than themselves, they feel jealous, hateful, and want to suppress, torment, and exclude them; they want to surpass them. If they only have these thoughts but do not act on them, they are a person with bad humanity—is their humanity evil? (Yes.) If, based on this evil humanity, they feel defiant when they see someone better than themselves, pass judgment on them behind their back, and even engage in shady maneuvers to suppress them, these are specific manifestations of a corrupt disposition. What is the essence of this corrupt disposition? It is viciousness. These manifestations pertain to both humanity and a corrupt disposition. Even though this type of person’s family conditions are good and they dine and dress well, and you might expect them to be possessed of insight and tolerant of others, when interacting with people, they always want to take advantage of them and are always overly calculative. When they go out somewhere with others, they nitpick over who spent more money and who paid for the travel expenses, being unwilling to spend even an extra penny. When working with others, they always calculate who did more and who did less, and they are always thinking of ways to slack off. Which aspect does this pertain to? (It pertains to their humanity.) Which aspect of humanity? (Selfishness and baseness.) Selfishness and baseness, loving to take advantage of others, lacking integrity and dignity—this pertains to their character. When interacting with people, they are calculative and love to take advantage of others, even if the advantage to be gained is only a penny, and they look for every opportunity to gain an advantage. Regardless of whether it is from a public or private source, or whether from young or old people, they take advantage of everyone. No matter who it is, they don’t hold back, and they take advantage whenever the opportunity arises. They are especially exacting and calculative in their interactions with others. For example, last time you asked them for a favor, and now they feel you owe them. They will go out of their way to make you return the favor, and it has to be an even bigger favor than the one they did for you; only then do they feel it is a fair deal. Isn’t this being overly calculative? (Yes.) This is being overly calculative, particularly exacting with others, and very scheming. Even though they lack nothing in terms of food and clothing, and enjoy a better life in all aspects compared to others, whenever they see someone with something they haven’t seen before, they want to use it for a bit and try it out. They feel the need to have whatever others have. If they don’t have it, they feel uncomfortable and unbalanced in their heart, to the point of losing their appetite and being unable to sleep; only when they possess it themselves do they feel satisfied. What kind of issue is this? (This is still an issue of humanity.) These specific manifestations are issues of their humanity, not their innate conditions. Innate conditions only refer to their family background and the family circumstances they can enjoy, whereas their ways of conducting themselves and dealing with things pertain to their humanity. Their revelations and manifestations, such as their attitudes, methods, and motivations for the way they conduct themselves and deal with things, pertain to the issue of their character; it does not yet rise to the level of corrupt dispositions. They are selfish, exacting, overly calculative, scheming, and love to take advantage of others—are these manifestations of good or bad humanity? (These are manifestations of bad humanity.) All of these are manifestations of low character and bad humanity. Are these manifestations of bad humanity visible and perceptible to others? (Yes.)

Some people have well-defined facial features and were born with large, bright, and intelligent eyes that look animated and expressive. Since childhood, they have been quite likable. Which aspect does this fall under? (This pertains to their appearance.) Appearance belongs to innate conditions, right? (Yes.) Having large eyes and well-defined facial features, innately possessing the advantage of good looks—is this an aspect of corrupt dispositions? (No.) Does it pertain to issues of humanity? (No, it doesn’t.) It doesn’t pertain to humanity or corrupt dispositions, so nothing needs to be changed. Innate conditions are inborn; they were born with this appearance, and didn’t undergo any artificial enhancement or alteration. This is just how they are. Although they are naturally good-looking, they are always muddled when dealing with complex issues in daily life and don’t know how to handle them. They also lack discernment regarding people, events, and things. They are unclear about whom they can associate with and whom they should avoid. They don’t know who is evil and which associations might bring trouble. At twenty-some-odd years old, they don’t know these things, and even by thirty or forty, despite having some life experience, they still don’t know. Although they have big, expressive eyes, their mind is quite muddled. What kind of problem is this? (Is this a problem with their innate caliber?) Their innate caliber is not very good. They can never find the principles when interacting with others and dealing with things, and they cannot see through various types of people. They are often cheated, swindled, and toyed with by others. How is the caliber of this type of person? (Their caliber is relatively poor.) Their caliber is not good. Having expressive eyes doesn’t necessarily mean having a wise mind. Although in terms of their innate condition, they have good looks, their caliber is not great. However, there is one thing: During their school years, they excelled at acquiring textbook knowledge; they could memorize literature quickly and when learning math, physics, and chemistry, or a new language, they grasped the subject quickly. They smoothly got into university, pursued a master’s degree, and obtained a Ph.D. What should this fall under? Can it fall under their good caliber? (No.) So, what does it fall under? (It falls under their strengths, which are their innate condition.) That’s accurate. This type of person excels at studying, picking up knowledge, and academic subjects. They quickly grasp textbook knowledge and things that are theoretical and based on regulations, such as aspects related to professional skills and technology or formulas and regulations for math, physics, and chemistry, and remember them very well. This type of person excels at learning these things and has a particular knack for them. They can understand them at a glance, and they especially excel at exams and answering questions; when it comes to answering questions, they do so with ease—this is where they can best bring their strong points into play. You could say that this type of person is at ease in the sea of knowledge. Do these manifestations represent their caliber? (No.) They only represent that they have a particular strength. This type of person shows particularly excellent performance in the field of knowledge, letting people see that their strength in this area stands out. Because they have this strength, and because they have achieved certain accomplishments—earning a master’s and a doctorate degree, and obtaining a high level of education—among other people, they see themselves as knowledgeable individuals, scholars, and high-level intellectuals. The more books they read, the more they feel that they are a renowned individual, a superior person, and that everyone else is ordinary, without knowledge, unable to understand their mind or see through it, and not on the same level as them. As a result, they often feel superior to others and consider themselves exceptional and extraordinary. What manifestation is this? (A corrupt disposition.) Which aspect of corrupt dispositions? (Arrogance.) Their arrogant corrupt disposition leads them to look down on the masses and people from all walks of life even more after gaining a high level of education. Because of their high degree and diploma, after believing in God, they always want to have the final say in the church and aspire to be a leader. Every time there is an election, they hope to be elected. If they are not elected, they become negative and give themselves up as hopeless. Whatever the leaders and workers say, they do not want to listen to it and want to resist it. No matter what duty is assigned to them, they feel repulsed by this assignment and make judgments behind the scenes. In their heart, they think, “You don’t have much knowledge. Your words lack logic. In my heart of hearts I look down on you as a church leader. I refuse to capitulate to you! Don’t think you are better than me. Let’s compare—let’s see who’s got what it takes. Let’s see who can recite more of God’s words and who can share a greater understanding. If your fellowship isn’t as good as mine, I refuse to capitulate to you! Even though you were elected as a leader, I don’t need to listen to, implement, or obey everything you ask of me!” What manifestation is this? (A corrupt disposition.) This is a specific revelation of a corrupt disposition. Does this pertain to humanity? Because this type of person has a natural strength and, based on this foundation, studies extensively, acquires much knowledge, and gains social status, they feel superior to others, unique, and want to speak from a position above everyone else and act domineeringly; among people they always want to be the one who leads, to have others listen to them—does this type of person have a problem with their conscience and reason? (Yes, they do.) What kind of problem is this? Their strength made it very easy for them to attain a high level of education through studying. Is this strength itself a problem? Is the strength itself an aspect of corrupt dispositions? Is it a manifestation of bad humanity? (No.) However, because they have this strength, they acquired a lot of knowledge and attained a high level of education, aligning with society’s assessment and definition for status. This led them to believe that they should have the final say in the church, be an elite among any group of people, and be above everyone else. Does such humanity have any reason? Is such humanity good? (Their humanity is not good.) In what ways is their humanity not good? (They lack reason and conscience; they always want to be above others.) Always wanting to be above others is partly due to a corrupt disposition. In another sense, from the perspective of humanity, isn’t this somewhat shameless? (Yes.) God’s house is not society. Does God’s house compare academic qualifications when electing leaders? (No.) What does God’s house base the election of leaders on? It’s based on the truth principles, isn’t it? (Yes.) In God’s house, the election of leaders is based on the truth principles, not on who has higher academic qualifications. Do they know the principles for electing leaders? They do, but they treat these principles as mere bureaucratic statements and as mere theories, and don’t know how to practice or apply them in daily life. They constantly spread the idea that only those with high academic qualifications have good caliber, can understand the truth, and can lead others. Because they have high academic qualifications, some knowledge, and social status, thinking that God’s house operates the same way as society, they use their knowledge and high academic qualifications as capital to try to have the final say in God’s house. They want to replace the principles for electing leaders in God’s house with their own ways of viewing people and dealing with things and their own approaches, perspectives, and viewpoints on social standing and status. Isn’t this lacking in reason? (Yes.) What is another way to describe lacking reason? (Being shameless.) In plain terms, it’s shamelessness; another way to say it is that this type of person has very poor rationality. You see, although they have received so-called higher education and have read many books, none of those books or any teacher or educator has ever taught them how to act so as to have reason. After learning many things from books, they instead feel that they have gained capital and are superior to ordinary people. Although their strength is not a negative thing and is an innate condition, this strength can easily lead to a certain consequence—it causes them to become arrogant and conceited, lose their reason, and become audaciously brazen and shameless. Despite having read many books and picked up a lot of knowledge, they don’t understand the meaning of the word “shame.” Therefore, after gaining some academic qualifications, they use this as capital to show off everywhere, and they want to use it to gain status in God’s house and have the final say. They think, “I have high academic qualifications and I learn things quickly, which means I have good caliber. What’s more, I am deeply knowledgeable, I have seen much of the world, and I’m quick-witted, so I am qualified to lead others.” The implication is that their knowledge and strengths are the truth. All of these are manifestations of a lack of reason. Does this kind of person, who lacks reason, have integrity? Do they have dignity? (No.) Lacking integrity and dignity—is this a manifestation of good humanity or of despicable, base humanity? (It is a manifestation of despicable humanity.) Such people do not have good humanity. What they cherish the most are their academic qualifications, social status, personal worth, and standing. With these as their capital, they are extremely arrogant and conceited, and want to have the final say. This is a manifestation of despicable humanity. This issue involves two aspects: One pertains to their humanity and the other to their corrupt disposition. Their perspective on issues and their attitude and viewpoints in handling issues relate to their humanity. This kind of humanity leads to them developing specific actions, manifestations, and revelations, which are expressions of a corrupt disposition.

Some people are naturally not talkative; from a young age, they do not like to speak much. When interacting with others, they speak in simple, non-profuse terms, and when many things happen to them, they do not have many thoughts, nor do they have much language to express them. Even if they do express themselves, it is very simple. What kind of problem is this? (This is a problem regarding their personality.) This is a problem with their personality, which is part of their innate conditions. Their personality is naturally taciturn. They use simple language, don’t have very complex thoughts, and are reluctant to speak when interacting with others. When the truth is fellowshipped during gatherings, they only listen to others speak, and it’s already quite good if they can provide a simple response after others have finished speaking. If you ask them, “What is your understanding of this?” they will say, “My understanding is similar to yours.” If you ask them to be specific, they will say, “I think the same as you,” and then they have nothing more to say. This is just their personality; if you ask them to say more, they have nothing to say. This is part of their innate conditions. There is another type of person who, although they appear to not have much to say and are often taciturn on the outside, likes to ask about gossip in private, saying things like: “Which pastoral area is brother or sister So-and-so from? I heard they have believed in God for eight years—have they ever been a leader? How old are they? Is it true they got divorced and have a child?” What kind of manifestation is this? On the surface, they don’t talk much and don’t like to speak in public settings. Their language isn’t very rich, and they lack the words to communicate normally with others. However, in other regards, they have plenty to say and always like to inquire about others, saying things like: “Did that person have double eyelid surgery? Her skin is so fair—does she often go to beauty salons?” or “I see that So-and-so always uses the latest computer, and their clothes are all name brands and quite expensive. Is their family well-off? What kind of business does their family do? Is their father an official?” What problems do these manifestations involve? (They involve problems with their humanity.) Liking to ask about gossip, collecting information about trivial personal matters, and enjoying chatting about other people’s affairs—these are manifestations related to one’s humanity. Are these manifestations good? (No.) In what ways are they not good? What problems of humanity do they involve? They haven’t harmed or tormented anyone, nor have they hurt others’ interests, so why are these manifestations considered bad? (They always want to know about other people’s affairs, constantly snooping into others’ business behind their backs. There is a problem with the reason of their humanity.) It relates to the reason of their humanity. If they were to candidly and straightforwardly ask, for example, “Brother So-and-so, how old are you?” would this be a normal manifestation of humanity? (Yes.) Isn’t asking in this way open and aboveboard? Isn’t it proper? (Yes.) So why do some people not ask questions or say things directly to those involved? Why do they resort to pulling shady maneuvers behind others’ backs? If a topic can be asked about or discussed in person, it should be brought out into the open. Why whisper secrets behind others’ backs? Doesn’t this involve a certain attitude and method of conducting oneself and dealing with things? Is this attitude and method good? (No.) Why is this attitude and method not considered good? Do these people who like to secretly inquire about things enjoy digging into others’ privacy and scrutinizing people behind their backs? (Yes.) Why do they like to scrutinize people behind their backs? If they have questions, why don’t they ask them directly? Is there a difficulty in asking face-to-face? They feel it’s not easy or possible to ask directly, so they inquire behind others’ backs. Isn’t this why they act this way? (Yes.) Actually, some things can be asked directly, such as asking someone questions like: “How many years have you believed in God? Have you attended college? What is your level of education? How old are you?” These can all be asked face-to-face. If some people are unwilling to tell you, then don’t ask, and don’t inquire behind their backs either. If you think they would be willing to share certain things with you, or if you two are familiar and they trust you enough to talk, then you can ask them directly. Why insist on going all around to inquire behind their backs? Is that really necessary? Doesn’t that seem quite base? These people don’t dare to ask directly because they’re afraid the other person won’t tell them. But they strongly want to know and find out about these things. If they don’t find out, they will feel uneasy, but once they get the information, they feel at ease inside, as if they’ve obtained a precious treasure. What kind of people are they? Taking pleasure in inquiring about and grasping others’ private matters or personal information—such people are prone to gossip and judging others, aren’t they? (Yes.) If you believe the other person would be willing to answer your questions, you can ask them and find out about these things directly. If the other person feels that some of your questions are excessive and go beyond what you should ask, and they refuse to answer you, that’s fine. If they don’t want to answer you or don’t want you to know certain things, then don’t inquire behind their backs either. If you insist on knowing someone else’s information or private matters, for one thing, they will start to regard you suspiciously: “Why do you want to know these things? Why are you trying to find out about me behind my back? Are you looking to control me, torment me, or sell me out?” That’s one aspect. For another thing, what necessity is there for you to know about others? What right do you have to know things about them? Do you want to gather information on everyone? You have to know about everything—are you specialized in collecting information? Is this your job? God’s house has not given anyone such a commission. If you constantly try to inquire about others’ private affairs, inquiring about things they don’t want you to know, it makes them find you very annoying. How is the humanity of someone who others find annoying? At the very least, this person is shameless. What do nonbelievers call such a person? An audacious scoundrel. Their humanity is base, they lack dignity, and they want to inquire into everything, conducting themselves improperly. Isn’t this how they are? (Yes.) Is the humanity of this type of person good or bad? (Their humanity is bad.) Their humanity is, at the very least, not good. This is one manifestation within the category of not having good humanity—behaving improperly and always pulling shady maneuvers. On the surface, they seem polite, respectful, and courteous toward you, appearing to be well-mannered and proper in how they conduct themselves. However, behind your back, they pull shady maneuvers, inquiring about your age, family background, and other aspects of you, without openly discussing or asking you directly. When interacting and chatting with others, they are not candid or straightforward; instead, they always pull shady maneuvers behind people’s backs, doing things that can’t bear the light of day. They constantly ponder others’ private affairs and just what others are thinking, always preoccupied with such matters. The humanity of this type of person is not good, and in any group, such people are disliked by everyone. It’s not that people don’t want you to know personal things or that they’re hiding something from you; it’s that your humanity and your method of conducting yourself and dealing with things make others dislike you. The reason people dislike you is that your method of conducting yourself and dealing with things is somewhat sleazy; the tactics you use are base and sordid, rather than proper and aboveboard. Some people appear to have no issues when interacting with others face-to-face, but behind their backs, they always do things in a furtive manner. When others step away, they quickly open their computers to see whom they’ve been chatting with, what they’ve talked about, what they’ve written in their diaries, and what insights they have. Sometimes, when someone has a password on their computer, they try to coax it out by saying, “Did you change your computer password? I just changed mine to 1234567, maybe you should change yours too.” What’s the purpose of saying this? “I’m telling you my password—you should tell me yours too, so I can have a chance to check your computer.” Some people even dare to rifle through others’ bags and belongings when they are not around. For example, if they see someone wearing a new pair of headphones and want to know how the sound quality is, they might dare to take the headphones and listen when the person isn’t around. If you openly ask to borrow that person’s headphones, and they agree, then you can rightfully try them out. If they don’t agree, then you shouldn’t try them. Isn’t that the proper way to handle it? Whether or not others agree, you should handle things openly in front of them, not behind their backs. This type of person just can’t do that—they always pull shady maneuvers. To what extent? As soon as you step away, they immediately go through your things, checking what you’ve written in your spiritual devotion notes and quickly copying it down, afraid of missing anything. On the surface, they seem to yearn for the truth, but their actions behind the scenes are sordid. When they see you buy a new computer, they feel jealous. Outwardly, they say the new computer is great and fast, but inwardly, they think, “Fast? I hope it breaks some day!” One day, you mention that the new computer isn’t working well and is slow, and they secretly feel elated: “Serves you right for using a new one! I haven’t even gotten to use one, so it’s better if you can’t either!” Their mind is full of base, sordid thoughts that can’t bear the light of day. Some people see that someone has a nice-looking piece of clothing, and they want to try it on too. But instead of asking directly, they just have to wait for an opportunity to secretly put it on when the person isn’t around. They look at themselves in the mirror, thinking they look great, but as soon as they hear the footsteps of the person returning, they quickly take it off and put it back in its place. Although the shady maneuvers of this type of person and their ways of handling things may not involve a corrupt disposition or be as serious as a corrupt disposition, their attitude toward conducting themselves and dealing with things and the way they treat people are quite repulsive and detestable, and this affects the normal lives of others on some level. Therefore, it can be said that this type of person has serious issues with their humanity. How serious? They are improper in how they conduct themselves, pull many shady maneuvers behind the scenes, and their way of handling problems is sleazy and sordid. They are always secretive; they never do things openly, and always do things behind people’s backs. When others aren’t around, aren’t paying attention, or when no one can see or discover what they are doing, they furtively do things. The humanity of this type of person is not good. They always live in dark corners, shrouded in an atmosphere of darkness, unable to face the light or other people. Their humanity is base and sordid. Are these manifestations of their base humanity instinctive? (No.) They feel embarrassed to do things in front of others; they prefer to do them behind their backs, and when acting behind others’ backs, they show no restraint whatsoever. Does this have anything to do with their personality? (No.) If you say that these shady maneuvers or what they reveal and live out in their humanity relate to a certain aspect of corrupt dispositions, that wouldn’t be accurate. However, their shady maneuvers are constant. On the surface, it seems like they haven’t committed any major mistakes, and when the church assigns them a duty, most of the time they put their hearts into it and are obedient; they even seem rather proper on the outside. But behind the scenes, it’s a different story—like a mouse, as soon as no one is watching, they start pulling shady maneuvers and getting up to things. Aren’t these people just like mice? Think about it—if this is their humanity and the way they interact with others and deal with things, if the moral character of their humanity is of this kind and they have this kind of humanity essence, how do they treat God and the truth? Do they treat God and the truth in the same way they treat people? (Yes.) They also pull shady maneuvers behind the scenes, don’t they? They try every possible way to avoid the supervision of leaders and workers, acting one way in front of them and another way behind their backs. They do not accept God’s scrutiny, nor do they accept the truth in the depths of their hearts. No matter what God’s words say, they approach them in their own way, pulling some shady maneuvers and doing some things for show, so that outwardly, no one can see any problems or wrongdoings. Outwardly, they appear to do nothing wrong and seem to be practicing the truth, but behind the scenes, they have already pulled their shady maneuvers, and the wrongs have already been committed in secret, without anyone knowing. They do not believe in or accept God’s scrutiny, and therefore, they do not accept the truth. What does this involve? It involves corrupt dispositions. When they treat God, the truth, and their duty with this kind of humanity and this way of interacting with others and dealing with things, the specific manifestations of their humanity that they reveal involve corrupt dispositions. What do these corrupt dispositions include? At the very least, they include deceitfulness. If their actions are even more secretive and deceptive, what does it involve? (It escalates to wickedness.) It involves the deceitfulness and wickedness within their corrupt dispositions. Additionally, deep in their hearts, they always harbor doubts about the truth and about God’s scrutiny. This is deeply ingrained in them. They think, “No one knows what I do behind the scenes. I haven’t seen God anywhere, so God surely doesn’t know either—only I know.” Doesn’t this also involve a corrupt disposition? Which aspect of corrupt dispositions does this relate to? (Is it intransigence?) They do have an intransigent disposition within them. So, is the essence of these thoughts an aversion to the truth? (Yes.) Their attitude toward the truth is one of resistance and opposition. Besides being intransigent, they are particularly averse to the truth, which makes this a serious issue. Once it involves a corrupt disposition, it’s more serious than just poor humanity. It involves rebellion against God, opposition to God, and the essence of going against the truth. It involves a person’s attitude toward God and the truth. Once it involves a corrupt disposition, it involves the truth principles and the need to resolve corrupt dispositions with the truth.

Some people are naturally tall and have graceful figures, and, moreover, they have well-proportioned, clean, refined features which others find pleasing. Whatever they wear, people admire them, saying, “They really are like a walking magazine ad—so handsome, so beautiful, so stunning!” Does this fall under their innate conditions, their humanity, or their corrupt dispositions? (This is their natural appearance.) They were born with good looks. Because they’re naturally attractive and have a good figure, from a young age, their elders praised them, their classmates envied them, and their parents especially doted on them. Every day, their parents dressed them up, and before they were three or five years old, one day they were dressed like a little girl, and the next day like a little boy. In short, they were loved like a cherished little toy. As they grow up, they become particularly fond of looking good. Raised in a modern, privileged living environment, they develop the habit of dressing up. Especially after gaining access to various fashion insights, they begin to enjoy matching colors, fits, and styles; they dress especially tastefully, exuding a refined demeanor. Even a simple T-shirt and jeans look different on them, and when paired with a harmoniously colored pair of shoes, their style becomes even more impressive—they’re absolutely stunning and incredibly handsome. Just seeing them is a treat for the eyes. Whenever they appear in public places or on the streets they’re sure to turn a lot of heads. Because they were born with good looks and have this innate condition, and they know how to dress well, exuding a particularly refined demeanor no matter how they dress up, both same-sex and opposite-sex individuals particularly enjoy interacting and associating with them. People are eager to sit close talking and chatting with them, and to interact with them closely, so that their beauty can bring enjoyment to them. Is this their fault? (No.) Because of their favorable innate condition, people are always tolerant of any problems, faults, or shortcomings they may have. Thus, wherever they go, they are particularly well-received and popular. Even if they say something unpleasant, others still find it enjoyable to hear. When their temper flares or they cop an attitude, people don’t mind or take offense—they even feel it’s like a reward from them. As these experiences accumulate, their innate condition gives them a sense of superiority. They begin to think, “Being good-looking, having a refined demeanor, and being well-dressed allow me to be popular wherever I go—this is fantastic! This society, this humankind, really values this. It seems that this innate condition my parents gave me is my capital. Finding a job is easier, and during exams, if I want to cheat off someone’s paper, all I need to do is give them a look, and they’ll offer it to me.” Many people of the opposite sex pursue them, and among the same sex, there are also many who treat them well and constantly praise their beauty and good looks. Over time, this makes them increasingly enjoy this advantage. This advantage brings them many conveniences, many benefits, and lots of preferential treatment, allowing them to enjoy many things. So, in this kind of environment, they develop certain requirements for themselves. They won’t leave the house without putting on makeup, and if they get so much as a pimple, they don’t dare to be seen. They are cautious about their diet, avoiding spicy foods and soy sauce, worrying to themselves: “When will this pimple go away? I can’t pop it—I’m afraid it’ll leave a scar. But if I don’t pop it, would the members of the opposite sex who once admired me see it and think I’m no longer attractive, no longer the person of their dreams? Would they start being indifferent to me? What should I do? I guess I’ll have to wait until the pimple goes away before going out. I absolutely can’t let people see me like this; it would ruin the perfect image I have in their minds.” Some people have to perfectly match the colors, fits, and styles of their outfits. Before going out, they have to check themselves in the mirror from every angle, and some even take selfies to make sure they look perfect in sunlight or under artificial lighting, making sure that aspects like their skin, complexion, hairstyle, clothing, and demeanor are pleasing to the eye and garner the fondness of others, and only then do they feel ready to go out. Even after starting to do duty, they still maintain this lifestyle. If, due to special circumstances, they haven’t showered that day and someone of the opposite sex approaches, they quickly avoid them. They feel that if they haven’t showered, they aren’t fit to be seen. Because they have so many demands on their appearance and demeanor, it affects their daily life. If they go somewhere where they can’t shower, they feel distressed and suffer to a great extent, and are unable to eat or sleep well. They think, “What am I going to do if I can’t shower? I’ve never gone more than three days without a shower. If I start to smell, will people look down on me? Won’t my image no longer be perfect? Won’t I no longer be others’ dream person? What should I do?” If they find themselves in a place with poor living conditions and meals that aren’t nutritious enough or well-balanced, they start to worry: “Will this affect my skin? Will my skin become rough or age? Will I get wrinkles? I can’t stay in this place—I need to get out of here!” The sense of superiority brought by their innate condition makes their life especially complicated, causing them to live in a particularly exhausting and restrained way. They are extremely concerned about others’ opinions of them, particularly about how others assess their attire, demeanor, and bearing, caring so much about how others perceive them—so much that it reaches what extent? To the extent that it affects their normal life, work, and performance of duty. The sense of superiority that comes from their appearance has made them very superficial, very concerned with their looks, and very concerned with how others perceive them. What kind of problem is this? Are all these manifestations a correct attitude for handling issues in daily life? (No.) Are these warped views that they’ve developed throughout the course of their daily life? (Yes.) So, what do these manifestations relate to? (They relate to their humanity.) Which aspect of their humanity does this concern? What is the issue with how they conduct themselves? Is it superficiality? (Yes.) Superficiality is one issue within their humanity. What else? Vanity, concern with how others perceive them, the desire to be the most perfect person in others’ eyes, and a particular fragility and inability to endure hardship. Additionally, there’s also selfishness. To maintain their image, they have everyone wait upon and serve them, while they refuse to endure even the slightest hardship. The sense of superiority brought by their natural appearance makes them want everyone to revolve around them. The central focus of their daily life and the goal they aim to achieve are to maintain their outward appearance. On one occasion, for instance, while taking a photo, someone notices a piece of lettuce stuck in their teeth when they smile. From that moment on, they stop eating leafy greens. Even if that is the only option available and they have no choice but to eat it, they immediately rinse their mouth after eating and absolutely must check in the mirror to see that nothing is stuck in their teeth before daring to go out and see others. Is this an issue within their humanity? (Yes.) These common issues in daily life fall within the scope of humanity and haven’t escalated to the level of a corrupt disposition. The issues they deal with are all only related to aspects of human life—they try to maintain their beauty and high level of attention from others by focusing on their physical appearance and internal demands. Whatever they do—whether it’s eating, dressing up, or enduring hardship and paying a price—in handling these issues, their viewpoints and attitude are all geared toward maintaining their outward image so that they always appear pleasing to the eye, ensuring that others have a good impression of them and that they attract a high level of attention. Does this involve their humanity? (Yes.) These manifestations all involve their humanity—they show that their humanity is overly superficial.

There is another type of person who goes all out to show off whenever members of the opposite sex are around, trying to dress in a more special way and apply makeup to appear more seductive. For example, their behavior and appearance are still normal when they are with brothers or sisters with whom they are particularly familiar, but as soon as someone of the opposite sex in their own age range comes on the scene, they get all excited inside and feel compelled to adopt a special attire and appearance. Some women immediately apply lipstick to make their lips more vivid, touch up their eyebrows, and if time allows, add some blush. Normally, they wear their hair in a ponytail, but once they encounter someone of the opposite sex who is to their liking or whom they find appealing, they spruce up their image by letting their hair down to shoulder length. Some men, meanwhile, make their hair shinier, style it into a Korean, Hong Kong, or Western haircut, trim their facial hair, put on a pair of glasses, change into better clothes, and, if conditions allow, spray on some cologne, all to attract the opposite sex. When speaking with members of the opposite sex, they frequently toss in some fancy words to show off, aiming to display their cultural refinement, elegance, wit, and sense of humor. Their intention behind all these actions is very deliberate—they do it solely to attract the opposite sex. Some people, when they are around someone of the opposite sex whom they like, or someone of the opposite sex who is of a similar age, become even more lively, and talk more, and express themselves better, and their eyes become more animated, and stop being dull and glassy, and their facial expressions also become particularly varied. What’s going on here? Why do they appear especially affected and unnatural when they see the opposite sex? When members of the opposite sex first meet, they are usually a bit shy, but after a few encounters, they become more familiar, and behave more naturally. However, some people become particularly lively and stimulated whenever they see the opposite sex. What kind of issue is this? (It’s about seduction, which rises to the level of a corrupt disposition.) What kind of corrupt disposition is this? (Wickedness.) Do they not have a problem with their humanity? (They do.) Strictly speaking, this is a problem with the humanity of such people. What aspect of their humanity is problematic here? It’s a problem of interactions with the opposite sex. How do nonbelievers describe this? They call it an “issue of approach,” don’t they? (Yes.) If it involves a corrupt disposition, it can passably be summed up as wickedness; but more aptly put, it is an issue of one’s approach toward interactions with the opposite sex relating to one’s humanity. When faced with the opposite sex, some people become particularly lively, and particularly positive and proactive. What these “particularlys” manifest is an issue of approach relating to one’s humanity. Is this approach normal or abnormal? (Abnormal.) So then, can it be described as wicked? Is it appropriate to say it’s wicked? Is it okay to say it’s a bit vile? (Yes.) Such people are a bit vile. Wherever there is someone of the opposite sex they fancy, they gravitate toward that person’s group, insist on sitting next to them, and engage in physical contact and make eyes at them. This reflects a problem with their character—they are unruly, ill-behaved, and vile. If a person is superficial, then their manifestations should be the same whether they are in the presence of the same sex or the opposite sex—they just want to look good, and to be liked, admired, and appreciated by others. This is a problem of being superficial in their humanity. However, if their intent is to attract the opposite sex and pester them, then it becomes an issue of their approach toward interactions with the opposite sex. If a person is excessively superficial such that it affects their normal life, it’s just a defect or issue in one aspect of their humanity. But if someone dresses specifically to attract members of the opposite sex, aiming to appear sexy, alluring, and to turn heads, then that’s wicked, vile, and indicative of a poor approach. Some people become even more vile the more people are present, always seeking contact with the opposite sex and showing off in front of them. Whatever is trendy among nonbelievers, they will dress that way. Especially when attending gatherings or appearing on camera, the more members of the opposite sex there are, the more they want to dress up. Some women wear camisole tops, let their hair down, apply vivid lipstick, and add blush. Some even contour their noses, apply eye shadow, and wear all kinds of jewelry. They dress in whatever way will attract the opposite sex. This is more serious than being superficial. If superficiality is a defect or flaw in one aspect of one’s humanity, and is a minor issue, then the wicked and vile aspects of opposite-sex relations are a major issue. A superficial person may not necessarily engage in licentious activities, but among those who are both wicked and vile, over ninety percent are likely to become involved in licentious activities. Why do I say that? If a person places great importance on their interactions with the opposite sex, and particularly enjoys showing off and displaying themselves in front of members of the opposite sex, then such a person is very likely to get members of the opposite sex to fall for them. What is the purpose of getting members of the opposite sex to fall for them? It is to engage in improper relationships. If they can casually seduce someone of the opposite sex, doesn’t this indicate that they are very casual when it comes to relationships with the opposite sex? (Yes.) Such people have no dignity; they casually hit on others and even take the initiative in making a move. The more people they hit on, the happier they become, and they never turn anyone down as long as they like them. What kind of person is this? Leaving aside for now what corrupt dispositions they have, is this kind of humanity good? (No.) No matter what advantages or shortcomings they may have in other aspects of their humanity, if they are especially casual, frivolous, and indulgent in terms of their approach toward interactions with the opposite sex, this alone is enough to show that their humanity is not good. If they can err or overstep the mark at any time or place, isn’t this a serious problem? (Yes.) Is such a person reliable? (No.) What is the root of their unreliability? It lies in their wicked nature. They can entertain lustful thoughts at any time and place, and can seduce the opposite sex at any time and place—their minds are occupied solely by these thoughts. If the environment or conditions don’t allow, or they don’t have enough time to dress up, they still find a way; they use flirtatious glances and show off their figure or their expressions, making eyes at others to seduce them. Such people are worthless; they are so unreliable! They are frivolous, dissolute, and casual, and at any time and place they can seduce others into sinning and commit transgressions; such people have no sense of shame in their humanity, they are irredeemable. Are such people frightening? (Yes.) And they don’t think that these are shameful things; no matter how many people are around, they openly dress and show off like this, behaving indulgently and seducing others in this way. Others don’t even know what is going on—while they are still focused on their normal work, chatting, or conversing together, these individuals have already started hitting on someone by casting them flirtatious glances. Look at how disgusting and frightening such people are! They don’t have any shame, do they? People without shame continuously commit transgressions, and what is their ultimate outcome? (They will end up being punished in hell.) What do God’s words say? “Transgressions Will Lead Man to Hell.” Therefore, if the issues with your humanity are very serious, you are in great danger. If a person’s poor humanity in some regard is a defect, there might be opportunities to correct it. However, if some aspect of their humanity is poor because they naturally have no sense of shame, and are able to seduce others at any time and place, and—even if they haven’t revealed an obvious corrupt disposition—they can still commit serious transgressions that lead to severe consequences, then such people have no boundaries in how they conduct themselves, their character is particularly poor, and if they commit a few transgressions, it could ruin them. Regarding issues of humanity, they have blocked their own path forward. This is because their humanity is so poor and their transgressions are so numerous that it is enough to send them to hell, and things will be over for them before they have any opportunity to walk the path of pursuing the truth and attaining salvation. The lack of a sense of shame is a very serious issue concerning one’s humanity. Strictly speaking, it doesn’t rise to the level of a corrupt disposition; it’s simply a way, an attitude, that a person adopts in conducting oneself and dealing with certain matters. This attitude relates to their humanity and can lead to transgressions, making the problem serious.

Some people love dancing and learn dance routines very quickly. After the teacher demonstrates three times, they’ve basically mastered the rhythm and movements of a dance and can perform it accurately. They dance quite well too, having won awards, and they hope to pursue a career related to dance, perhaps as a dance teacher or performer. What aspect does this relate to? (This relates to their interests and hobbies.) This is their strength; it is an interest and a hobby of theirs. They learn dancing very quickly, which shows that they are very good at dancing; they naturally grasp this kind of thing with accuracy and pick it up easily. This is a strength, is it not? (Yes.) They have a strength in this regard. After learning to dance, they also enjoy dancing, are eager to dance; and what’s more, they plan to pursue a career related to dance in the future, and intend to let dance accompany their future life and future journey—this relates to their interests and hobbies. Dance is both their strength and their interest and hobby—this is an innate condition of theirs. Some people have this innate condition, and after they start believing in God, they also enjoy watching dance videos. So, they take up the duty of dancing in God’s house, hoping that what they have learned can be leveraged in doing their duty and can be of use in God’s house, and that they can prepare their own good deeds to be remembered by God. They have a solid foundation in dance, and they also learn various types of dance quickly. While creating dance programs according to the requirements of God’s house, they are willing to teach others everything they have learned without holding anything back. Although they have learned more types of dance than others and are more proficient in their profession, they do not put on airs. They get along amicably with others and very patiently teach what they have learned to the brothers and sisters. What is this a manifestation of? (It’s a manifestation of their humanity.) Is their humanity good or not? (Their humanity is good.) In what ways is it good? (They are able to teach others everything they know without holding anything back, allowing others to also gain what they have—this is good humanity.) They are able to teach others everything they have learned without holding anything back. What other merits do they have? They don’t really show off. This type of person’s humanity is good. Because they have a strength in dance, they take up a dance-related duty in God’s house. But after some time, due to the needs of the work, God’s house arranges for them to do other suitable work. They think to themselves, “Have I wasted the twenty years I spent learning dance? Now that I’m asked to do work unrelated to dance, I feel so discontent! Why not let me use my strength, my forte, instead of making me a team leader or supervisor? This isn’t my strength, and I don’t know how to do it. This is something I never expected.” Although outwardly they say, “This is all part of God’s arrangements, and I am willing to submit,” in actuality, no matter what the leaders say, they are unwilling to accept it and do not take it in. They think, “You people lack professional knowledge and yet you come to lead us. All you do is talk about doctrine. You’re no better than me!” What is this a manifestation of? (Inner defiance.) What kind of issue is this? Is this a revelation of a corrupt disposition? (Yes.) Although their humanity is generally passable—they are willing to cooperate with others, be kind, and be a good person, not disrupting and disturbing or causing mischief and trouble—and in terms of their subjective desire, they are willing to submit to the arrangements of God’s house and do their duty well, when it comes to their status, or to matters that don’t align with their own notions and desires, do they have submission? Do they show any manifestations of seeking the truth? (No.) So, what do they manifest? (What they manifest is resistance, complaining, and a lack of submission to the arrangements of God’s house.) That’s right. So, what kind of problem can these manifestations be summed up as? (A corrupt disposition.) Although outwardly their humanity seems kind and they don’t openly oppose, raise an outcry, or pass judgment on leaders, their attitude toward these matters is a revelation of their corrupt disposition. What kind of corrupt disposition do they reveal? (An arrogant disposition.) That’s right, arrogance. They think that they are skilled in a certain area and that their humanity is pretty good, so they use this as capital to resist submitting to the church leaders’ arrangements. They do not seek the truth and want to do whatever duty they prefer. Even when the church assigns them a suitable duty, they cannot accept it, and if something doesn’t align with their notions and imaginings, even if it is an arrangement of God’s house, they refuse to submit. These are revelations of rebelliousness and an arrogant disposition. Look at this series of manifestations they exhibit: From the strengths of their innate conditions, to their humanity, and finally to their corrupt disposition—their manifestations cover these three different aspects. The strengths of their innate conditions are something they were born with, and there’s nothing to criticize in that. Whatever they are skilled at, it doesn’t mean they don’t have a corrupt disposition, nor can it show whether their character is good or bad. However, one’s sense of superiority brought about by certain innate conditions, or the positioning and characterization imposed by worldly public opinion upon them, can warp their humanity. What does this warping mean? It means that because a person possesses some innate conditions that are viewed relatively favorably by others, and they receive admiration and esteem from some people in society, they develop an incorrect characterization of their own value and position. They think that they are pretty good, that they are superior to others, and begin to look down on people, always believing they are right and everything about themselves is good, and they want others to listen to them and follow them. In that case, their views and standpoints on things are all wrong. With these erroneous views and standpoints, a person will follow the world and evil humankind. What is the implication of following evil humankind and the evil world? The implication is that you will live according to the fallacious thoughts and viewpoints that come from this evil world and evil humankind, and that you will use these fallacious thoughts, viewpoints, and sayings to distinguish and characterize everything. For example, let’s say you are fairly good-looking, with well-defined features and a good figure—these are innate conditions, which are given by God. There’s nothing wrong with this; it’s simply a fact. However, under the wrong positioning by this society and this evil humankind, this fact can lead you to become cocky and indulgent, superficial, and proud. That is to say, due to possessing innate, superior conditions, combined with the conditioning, temptation, and shaping of the various fallacious thoughts and viewpoints from this society and humankind, your humanity becomes warped. What does “warped” refer to? You possessing these innate conditions is in itself entirely normal—being good-looking isn’t anything extraordinary; it doesn’t mean you understand the truth, nor does it mean you are noble. It simply means you look nice, appear presentable, and that people might be willing to glance at you a bit more; you’re not annoying or unpleasant to others, and that’s all. However, in a societal environment where thoughts of beauty, attractiveness, and classy, high-end glamor are idolized, this trend pushes you to an extreme, making your humanity become proud, indulgent, and superficial. Having good looks is an innate condition. God gave you this innate condition not to make you proud, indulgent, or superficial, but rather, He wishes you to view it normally: “Thank God for giving me this innate condition, this appearance. It’s God’s grace and conferment. I should be thankful to God. I have nothing to boast about.” With such an innate condition, what a person should do is view people and things and conduct themselves and act according to God’s teachings. However, after accepting various thoughts and viewpoints from society and Satan, they come to see beauty and attractiveness as a form of capital. They then use this capital to gain favor from every person in every group, leveraging this innate, basic condition to obtain what they want. Some even use this innate condition to do things that break the law, violate moral boundaries, or go against humanity. The reason a person’s humanity contains some warped and extreme things is due to the aggravating influence of some heresies, fallacies, and erroneous public opinions from society and evil humankind. Because people innately lack the truth and the ability to discern, they naturally accept these public opinions, sayings, and theories that are from society and evil humankind. They take these negative things as if they were correct, and under the guidance of these fallacious and evil thoughts and viewpoints, their conscience and reason are not elevated or purified, but are instead warped and damaged. If this society didn’t praise or laud handsome men and beautiful women, and if there were no external thoughts tempting or shaping you—if, wherever you went, no one lauded you for your good looks, gave you special treatment, or tempted or pressured you to do various things—you would see that having naturally good looks is entirely normal and not worth boasting about. This means that you would do the things you should do based on your inherent, fundamental condition, and wouldn’t do things you shouldn’t do just because you have such a superior innate condition. However, due to the temptation and corruption of the external environment, you come to believe that having naturally good looks is something extraordinary and that it makes you better than everyone else. Lacking any self-restraint, you use your attractive looks to seduce others, breaking through the restraint of conscience and reason and crossing the boundaries of self-conduct. In different environments, you can reveal various corrupt dispositions, exploiting your superior innate condition and using various tactics to obtain the benefits you desire. This is the relationship between innate conditions, humanity, and corrupt dispositions. Sometimes, there is a certain connection between these three aspects, and of course, sometimes there is a necessary connection between the first two or the last two. Do you understand? (We understand a bit more now.) What should you know as a minimum? Any innate condition is not in itself wrong; it is simply a basic condition of one’s humanity. When it comes to people’s humanities there are good and bad, positive and negative. So, how does a corrupt disposition arise? It arises when, based on their inherent, innate conditions, a person is conditioned by various thoughts and philosophies of Satan, and this conditioning leads to the formation of various erroneous viewpoints, which then become a kind of life essence that the person relies on to survive. This is what a corrupt disposition is.

Just now, we fellowshipped about the different manifestations of innate conditions, humanity, and corrupt dispositions. We listed ten innate conditions, and we also just fellowshipped about various manifestations related to humanity. Now, let’s summarize: What different manifestations of humanity did we fellowship about? (In terms of humanity, there are manifestations of good humanity and those of bad humanity. God just gave some examples. Some people naturally have a particular strength in a certain area and are skilled in a certain technical profession, and they are able to teach others without holding anything back. There are also some people who don’t take advantage of others. These are manifestations of relatively good humanity. God also provided examples of manifestations of bad humanity. For instance, having base and sordid humanity, and constantly liking to snoop around for gossip behind others’ backs; and, in terms of one’s approach in interactions with the opposite sex, being casual, and lacking dignity and integrity; and being selfish, base, and loving to take advantage of others, as well as being overly calculative in one’s interactions with others, without any ounce of conscience or reason—these are all manifestations of bad humanity.) Among the manifestations of bad humanity, what is the worst? Which type of person is the most disagreeable to you? (Those who have no sense of shame and are especially casual in their interactions with the opposite sex.) Casual, dissolute, and lacking a sense of shame. A more cultured way of putting it is that these people “know no shame.” In plain language, they are “shameless,” or closer to the mark, “downright barefaced.” No one likes such people.

Some people were born in a place where eating chili peppers is common; perhaps because of the climate, or because their family has a habit and likes eating chili peppers, they eat them every day, and their daily diet is often dominated by spicy flavors. This is obviously an innate condition. Which of the innate conditions is it? (A lifestyle habit.) Their lifestyle habit is that they cannot do without spicy flavors in their daily diet; everything they eat must have a spicy taste. How far does this preference go? They even add spice to sweet foods, eat hamburgers and pizza with spicy flavors, and even put chili peppers in tea and coffee—this is the extent of their spicy food consumption. This is a lifestyle habit. Is there any right or wrong in this? (No.) The preference for spicy food is caused by one’s living environment and lifestyle habits; there is no right or wrong in this. Some people eat spicy food to an excessive degree; if there is no spicy food, then they won’t eat. No matter whether you can accept it or not, they insist on eating spicy food, and no one can change it. In short, the love of eating chili peppers is a lifestyle habit, there is no problem with it, and it does not involve the truth. Some people say, “This lifestyle habit is so extreme; should it be considered a negative thing? Should it be criticized or regulated? Should we promote some health knowledge, and spread the idea that the principles of eating and lifestyle habits should prioritize health?” Can you be certain that eating chili peppers and spicy foods is unhealthy? They have been eating this way for many years, for several generations, and they are quite healthy. In particular, people in some places eat chili peppers to such an extent that it is hard for others to accept. When people see how spicy their food is, they feel uncomfortable, yet these individuals are strong, healthy, and fairly well-built, with the stamina and endurance to do physical work. This proves that eating chili peppers does no harm and does not affect health; and it seems that their spicy diet also aligns with health principles. The love of eating chili peppers is an innate lifestyle habit. Regardless of whether or not others like it or can accept it, as long as a person enjoys it and it does not affect the lives or diets of others, it can be maintained. There is no right or wrong in this; it is not a major issue, and God’s house does not make any judgments about it. Some people say, “Eating chili peppers is bad for the stomach.” If you’re worried that it’s bad for your stomach, you can simply choose not to eat them. If others have been eating spicy food for a long time and their stomach becomes uncomfortable, they will sense it themselves and make their own choice. So, everyone has their own tastes—whether they like sweet, sour, bitter, or spicy flavors, it’s a personal matter. No matter how you eat or to what extent, there’s no need to feel guilty. As long as the conditions and environment allow it, you can put aside all worries and eat without scruples. As far as I’m concerned, there aren’t any prescriptions regarding this. If anyone has something to say about it, you can respond with, “This is my freedom, it’s my right, and you don’t need to interfere. Even if I eat a meal consisting solely of chili peppers, that’s none of your business. Whether it harms my stomach or not is my own responsibility, not yours.” Is it okay to speak like this? (Yes.) That’s your own business; it doesn’t concern others, and it doesn’t concern Me either. Why do I say this? Because this matter doesn’t involve the truth, it doesn’t involve a corrupt disposition, and it is not one of the issues God aims to resolve in saving people. Therefore, when it comes to issues of lifestyle habits, we can disregard them. This is not something positive, but it’s also not something negative—it’s simply a preference some people have.

Some people who do hosting like to eat chili peppers, and they want to have spicy food for all three meals of the day. So, when they cook, they prepare spicy dishes for every meal. Some people who have never eaten chili peppers find it hard to handle and suggest that non-spicy dishes be made instead. However, the one cooking is unwilling to accept this and says, “That won’t do. I’m used to eating spicy food; if I don’t make it spicy, it doesn’t taste good to me. You should practice eating spicy food; after eating it for some time, you’ll get used to it and won’t be afraid of the spiciness.” What is the problem here? (There is a problem with their humanity.) What kind of problem does their humanity have? (They’re forcing things onto others.) Forcing things onto others is not good. Is this not compelling others to do what they don’t want to do? Such people attempt to put themselves at the center of everything they do, believing that what they like is the best, and that others must accept it. If they like something, they try to make others like it too; everyone must satisfy them. Isn’t this selfish and base? Not only do they force things onto others, but there is also a bit of maliciousness in it. Is this type of person’s humanity good? (No.) People with poor humanity cannot bring benefit to others; they can only cause hurt, and in severe cases, they can even bring harm. Such people are too selfish and base, and they are also unreasonably rude. If a person has reason, they might say, “I like to eat spicy food, but some people don’t. So when I cook, I can’t just think about myself. I need to make both spicy and non-spicy dishes, so that both I and everyone else are satisfied. The principle I follow when doing my duty is to satisfy everyone, ensuring everyone eats well, and not to focus only on myself. I must do this duty well according to the principles.” What do you think of someone like this? (Their humanity is comparatively good.) In what ways is it good? (They know to care for others and look after others. It’s not that they just satisfy themselves.) They are comparatively kind, right? Good humanity includes kindness—being considerate of others and looking after them. Does this involve one’s humanity? (Yes.) Regardless of a person’s age, gender, or temperament, if they have good humanity, the people around them and those who interact with them will benefit. More specifically, some people will receive support and help from them, while others will be cared for by them in daily life. This is one manifestation of good humanity.

There are also people who love spicy food so much that even when they go out to do their duty, they specifically look for places that serve spicy dishes when it’s time to eat. If they have a meal without spicy food, they feel uncomfortable inside: “Not being able to eat spicy food here, doing my duty really feels unappealing. I want to go home, where I can enjoy spicy food at every meal—that would hit the spot! Without chili peppers, nothing has any taste; even braised pork loses its flavor. What should I do?” So, they keep searching for places where they can eat chili peppers. Later, they find out about a restaurant that specializes in spicy food, but it’s over an hour’s drive away. They say, “No matter how far it is, I have to go! If I don’t eat something spicy today, I won’t do my duty. If I don’t get my spicy food, I won’t feel at ease, and I just can’t get through the day!” Someone tells them, “The environment outside is dangerous right now, and this area is pretty chaotic! Let’s not go there to eat.” But they don’t listen, and say, “What’s there to be afraid of? Eating is what matters! Don’t you usually go out too? Don’t be afraid, nothing will happen—God will protect us!” After eating, they are pleased. As long as they get to eat chili peppers and the delicious food they hanker after, everything feels just right, and they are so happy that they can’t stop smiling, even in their sleep. What kind of humanity is this? (A selfish and base humanity.) In addition to being selfish and base, there is another characteristic: They do not consider the objective environment or conditions when they want to do something. As long as they can satisfy their own desires and preferences, that is all that matters. They are willing to pay any price just for one bite of something they want to eat—even if it means going to great lengths, they will do whatever it takes to achieve their goal. Is this merely being selfish and base? Isn’t this also willfulness? (Yes.) This is willfulness in the extreme! Anyone who is with them has to pay the price for their willfulness and endure grievances because of it. Whatever they say goes, and whatever they want to do is what happens. Today, they’re in a bad mood, so they don’t want to eat. When asked why they aren’t eating, they say, “I’m angry today, I’m in a bad mood, so I don’t feel like eating.” Later in the evening, when it’s time to rest, they don’t go to sleep either, saying they can’t sleep and want to sing to express their emotions. Someone tries to persuade them, saying, “You’ll affect others’ sleep if you sing.” They respond, “I’m in a bad mood right now. I want to sing. Whether you can sleep or not is none of my concern. I’m in a bad mood, and yet no one is comforting me or caring for me—you’re all so selfish!” Isn’t this being willful? They’re extremely willful; they don’t behave themselves, and do whatever they please. When they’re happy, nothing others say bothers them, and they even say, “I’m a broad-minded person. I don’t like to fuss over things.” But when they’re not happy, everyone has to be extremely careful with their words, seeking to not upset them, as doing so could lead to big trouble. They might throw tantrums, smash things, and even refuse to eat. In more severe cases, they might want to give up their duty, down tools and go home, all while saying, “None of you treat me well; you’re all bullying me. There are no good people in the world!” Isn’t this being willful? (Yes.) Is willfulness a problem within one’s humanity? (Yes.) They’re extremely willful—everyone has to cater to them, and if things don’t go their way, they immediately turn hostile, and their explosive temper flares up. No one can cross them, and everyone has to coax them. Despite them not being young anymore, their humanity remains immature, like that of a child. No matter where they do their duty, they never follow public rules. When they’re happy and want to talk, everyone has to listen, and if someone doesn’t listen, they hold a grudge against that person. When you speak to them, you have to smile; if you show no expression and don’t seem that willing to listen, they get angry and lose their temper. In the church, they do whatever they want, whenever they want, without regard for how it affects the normal life routines of others. As long as they feel comfortable and are in a good mood, that’s all that matters to them, and others aren’t allowed to raise any objections. If anyone raises an objection to show disgust or unhappiness, it provokes them, and they won’t let it go. Some people like this are young, with immature humanity, but others are in their forties, fifties, or even seventies or eighties, and they still have this kind of humanity in old age, being especially willful. Regardless of whether the environment or conditions allow it, they do whatever they want. For example, they arrive at a place where the conditions don’t allow for showering, but they insist on taking a shower, saying, “At home, I take a shower every day; I can’t go without one.” However, this place lacks the proper conditions; even taking a shower once a week is difficult. So what would you do? A person with normal humanity knows how to approach and handle this situation. If the weather is humid and stuffy, getting a basin of water and simply wiping down at night so they can sleep is enough—this is a hardship that can be endured. It’s not impossible to overcome. However, this type of person can’t handle it; if they don’t shower, they can’t sleep, can’t eat, and even feel like they can’t survive, as if they’re enduring a huge humiliation. Just how willful are they? They’re so willful that they can’t do their duty normally, can’t interact or get along with others normally, and can’t even live like a normal person. To others, this type of person seems like they have a mental disorder. If they have a good relationship with someone, they’re inseparable, as if they were one person. But if they have a bad relationship with someone or if someone has ever offended them, they can go their whole life without speaking to that person. When they do see them, they roll their eyes, and their face immediately darkens, as if they’re facing an enemy—particularly extreme. Is the humanity of this kind of person normal? (No.) This kind of person is extremely willful, and their humanity is not normal. What does “not normal” mean? It means they lack normal humanity. Can such people have normal interactions and cooperation with others? Can they live normally among people? Can they do their duty well? (No.) As long as they want to achieve their goal—whether it’s having a meal, enjoying good treatment, or doing something they want to do—it must be fulfilled. If not, it feels as if the sky is falling, as if their world is coming to an end. They become perturbed and start to grumble, complaining about others, complaining about the environment, and even complaining about God, saying, “What kind of environment has God arranged for me, making me suffer so much? Why haven’t others encountered such environments and suffered like this? Why am I the one suffering? God is biased!” You see, their demonic nature has emerged, right? Is this kind of humanity up to standard? (No.) Such people need to be dealt with. How should this kind of person be dealt with? (Send them away to an ordinary church.) If they reach the point where they can no longer do their duty, only causing disruptions and disturbances when they do their duty, making everyone who sees them feel disgusted and annoyed, and others are unable to get along with them, then they should be sent away immediately—this kind of person is like stinking dog poop. Willfulness includes being selfish, base, and also unreasonably rude. Sometimes it also includes being overly calculative, harsh, and even vicious and malicious. When this type of person does their duty for a period of time, everyone is deeply harmed, and whoever sees them is frightened. If you try to avoid them and not provoke them, they’ll still have something to say: “What are you hiding from, a thief? How did I offend you to make you avoid me?” But if you approach them and try to say something, they still won’t engage in a normal conversation with you. They lack normal humanity, and those who interact with them suffer not only verbal harm but also harm to their integrity, emotional harm, and even some physical harm. Such people are truly detestable! Would it be appropriate to categorize them as having bad humanity? (Yes.) This type of person has bad humanity and is willful. A willful person not only fails to edify others but also makes them feel annoyed and disgusted, and they can’t get along with anyone. Tell Me, can a willful person accept the truth? (No.) Then what kind of disposition do they have inside? (Intransigence.) Their intransigence is obvious, but there is something else as well—what is it? (Being averse to the truth.) That’s right. Having the corrupt dispositions of being intransigent and averse to the truth—these are two characteristics of willful people. This type of person is not only willful but also selfish and unreasonably rude. Their unreasonable rudeness includes an element of bothering others unreasonably and arbitrarily. When you interact with them, speaking kindly doesn’t work—they think you have ulterior motives. If you speak sternly, they think you’re bullying them, but after their willfulness has caused harm to others, they’ll still say, “I didn’t mean to hurt you. If you feel hurt, I apologize.” Although these words sound nice, when the person who was hurt doesn’t forgive them and even criticizes them, the willful person gets angry and says, “You just can’t let it go—aren’t you just taking advantage of my apology? Do you think I’m easy to push around because I apologized? And now you’re pointing out my flaws! Do I have flaws? Are you qualified to point them out?” Isn’t this a case of not accepting the truth? (Yes.) This involves their corrupt disposition. These traits in their humanity naturally also manifest themselves in certain traits of corrupt dispositions—they are connected. The characteristics of corrupt dispositions in people of this type include intransigence, aversion to the truth, and a bit of viciousness. These aspects are the traits of their corrupt dispositions.

Innate conditions include one more aspect, which is human instinct. For example, after some people believe in God, they see the CCP government’s frenzied oppression, arrests, and cruel treatment of God’s chosen people, and they become frightened, agitated, timid, and scared. Sometimes, their legs even go weak, and they constantly want to go to the restroom. What is this a manifestation of? (Instinct.) This is an instinctive reaction. Within normal humanity, when it comes to certain terrifying events, situations involving people’s own lives, or matters that could bring danger to themselves, whether it’s upon hearing information or when confronted with reality, they will have some instinctive reactions, feeling timid and scared. At the same time, their bodies will naturally exhibit some normal reactions, such as being flustered, muscle spasms, temporary deafness or blindness, as well as dry mouth, weak legs, profuse sweating, loss of control over bladder or bowels. Are these reactions likely to occur? (Yes.) These reactions, whether controlled by the nervous system or caused by some other reason, in any case, are responses brought about in the flesh by an external factor, and these reactions are collectively referred to as instinct. The body’s ability to endure has its limits; once it exceeds the limits of a person’s courage, the body will display some instinctive reactions. These reactions may be seen by others as weaknesses, or they might seem laughable, pitiful, or worthy of sympathy, but these are undeniably manifestations of a person’s innate instincts. There are also people who, when faced with danger, will hold their heads and cry, shed tears, or even scream loudly; others may curl up in a dark corner to hide—all such responses are instinctive reactions. These instinctive reactions, whether it’s crying, laughing, or being so excessively frightened that they do something humiliating—is there any right or wrong in these? (No.) So, for those who become afraid when they hear about the government arresting believers, can we say that these people are cowardly and lack humanity? (No.) Is the statement, “Believing in God should come with faith; one should not be afraid!” correct? (No.) “This is weakness, a manifestation of cowardice and incompetence. It shows a lack of faith in God, and it shows that they do not know to rely on God. Such a person is not an overcomer!” Can we say this? (No.) Why not? (It’s simply a physiological reaction that occurs when someone faces external circumstances.) This is a normal physiological reaction, not a manifestation driven by a corrupt disposition. This means that when people have these manifestations and revelations in such circumstances, it is not due to the influence of a corrupt disposition, nor is it because they’re being dominated by some thought or viewpoint within their humanity. These reactions are not something you preconceive; it’s not that when faced with such circumstances, you suddenly have wild thoughts, and then, as you think about it more, you panic, your body convulses, or you even lose control of your bladder or bowels. That’s not the reason behind these reactions. Rather, it’s because after hearing about these events or this news, without any deliberate thought, without any mental filtering or processing, your body quite naturally produces some instinctive physiological reactions. So, this kind of natural reaction is brought about by the innate instincts of the flesh. It carries no right or wrong, no distinction between strength and weakness, and certainly no differentiation between positive and negative. Some people say, “No matter how the government carries out its arrests, I’m not afraid!” I would say, that makes you a blockhead then. When the great red dragon tortures you, let’s see if you’re afraid or not—at that time, it’ll be impossible for you not to cry out. What will you think when the pain reaches its peak? “I’d rather die. If I die, I’ll be free, I won’t be in pain anymore.” These are all instinctive reactions of the flesh, and none of these are an issue. Some people might say, “I’m not afraid; if someone hits me, I’ll hit back, and if I can’t win, I’ll just run away.” But when you run and someone points a gun at you, your legs will go weak, your heart will grow timid, and you won’t be shouting “I’m not afraid” anymore. When your life is at stake, you’ll also be afraid of dying—this is your instinctive reaction. Since these are instinctive reactions, no matter what manifestations one has or what revelations of human weakness one has, it’s not considered wrong, nor is it shameful, and God does not condemn it. Naturally, you shouldn’t try to inhibit these reactions, and onlookers shouldn’t mock them either, because everyone is the same—everyone is made up of flesh and blood. The instinctive reactions of flesh and blood are like this; you’re like this, they’re like this, everyone is like this. It’s like when a person encounters a wolf; what is their first instinctive reaction? “Run! Run as fast as possible!” And while running, they look to see if the wolf has caught up with them, worrying: “What if it catches up with me? What if it bites my neck—will I die? If only I had a gun or an iron rod.” They only think of these things while they’re running. But regardless of what you think about, your first instinctive reaction is definitely to quickly escape its pursuit, to run as fast and as far as possible, to avoid being caught and eaten. These are all instinctive reactions. What is your instinctive reaction? It’s about saving yourself, protecting your own life, and ensuring that your life isn’t put in danger. No matter whether these instinctive reactions may seem cowardly, intolerable, or shameful to an observer, they are actually not shameful, because they are the normal manifestations of people who are flesh and blood; they are natural revelations. An instinctive reaction is simply a natural revelation, and there is nothing shameful about it. For example, you will laugh when you hear a joke. Even if you have food or water in your mouth, you will laugh nevertheless, because this is an instinctive reaction. An instinctive reaction is a God-given, innate function, which will naturally occur and play out when the conditions are right. So, when it comes to instinctive reactions, they are natural revelations. They might be revelations of a weakness or defect of humanity, or they might be revelations of a natural manifestation of your flesh. Regardless, since it is an instinctive reaction, there is no right or wrong. If you feel ashamed, it shows that you lack insight and that your humanity is quite superficial—you want to leave a good impression on others. If you try to inhibit your instinctive reactions, it proves that you are foolish and that there is an issue with your reason. In special dangerous environments and situations, even if you are so scared that you wet your pants, you shouldn’t see it as something shameful. In fact, this is a manifestation of normal humanity. Anyone would have these manifestations in such circumstances—even famous or great people are no exception. In harsh circumstances, there are no supermen—you’re just an ordinary person, nothing exceptional, and nothing to brag about. Even if you were so scared that you wet your pants, and others found out, it’s not a disgraceful thing, as this way, people won’t look up to you or idolize you, and at the very least, you’ll be safe. This should be clear now, right? Instinctive human reactions are very normal and natural. For example, when your hair is dirty and your scalp itches, you instinctively scratch it. Even if your nails get filled with dirt afterward and people think you’re unseemly or unhygienic, what can you do? When your hair is dirty, there will be dirt, because you are flesh and blood, made of dust, and you should acknowledge this fact. This situation is simply telling you that your hair is dirty and needs to be washed. When your scalp itches, scratching is an instinctive reaction. An instinctive reaction is a natural, normal response, a normal manifestation under the innate conditions and nervous system that God created. Even though sometimes the manifestations might make you feel embarrassed, unseemly, or undignified, you shouldn’t try to change or inhibit them. For one thing, doing so helps you treat human instincts correctly; for another, it is also edifying and beneficial for how you conduct yourself. Once you gain a certain understanding and awareness of this aspect, when interacting and dealing with others, if certain aspects of human fleshly instinct naturally manifest and are revealed, you won’t need to deliberately cover them up. And if, sometimes, an embarrassing situation really does arise, there’ll be no need to explain, or to disguise it or put up a facade, because it is a revelation of normal humanity, and it is also an instinctive human reaction—all of this is within the bounds of what a normal person can accept. For example, when people eat beans, their bodies naturally produce some gas, and instinctively they will burp or pass gas. This is a very natural thing. Young men and women often feel that such manifestations are shameful, but there is actually nothing shameful about it. This is simply a normal instinctive reaction of the body, and it has nothing to do with principles of how to conduct oneself or act. Although some people may not understand or may be dissatisfied with it, it definitely doesn’t rise to the level of having no boundaries for one’s self-conduct, having a poor upbringing, being unruly, willful, selfish, or having bad or evil humanity—there’s no need to escalate it to this extent. This issue doesn’t involve self-conduct, and it certainly has nothing to do with a corrupt disposition. There’s no need to overstate the matter. These things should be approached correctly.

Some people, because they were born in underdeveloped countries or environments, or into families with poor conditions, aren’t so particular about things in their lives. They may not be meticulous about food hygiene, they may wear the same clothes for a long time without washing them, and may not even notice if their clothes smell of sweat. What kind of manifestation is this? (It is a manifestation of one’s lifestyle habits.) This is a matter of lifestyle habits; it’s not paying much attention to hygiene. Some people use the same towel for washing their face and feet, and then use it to wipe sweat when they go out working during the day. Sometimes, if they see someone injured, they even use that same towel to cover the wound. They show no concern for hygiene at all. What issue is this? This has a certain connection with the conditions of the family they were born into. Some people come from families with good living conditions, where each person has multiple towels and bath towels, with clear distinctions between those used for the face and those used for the feet. They bathe and wash their face every day, and the towels and bath towels are also washed daily, so it seems that they are especially fastidious. How are such habits formed? They’re the result of having a certain economic foundation and financial conditions in the family, which lead to these refined lifestyle habits. This makes a person appear very attentive to hygiene and respectable. On the surface, it seems they are very fastidious, but in actuality, behind all this are the innate conditions that have led to it. So, why are some people not attentive to these things? Some people are naturally not inclined to pay much attention to such matters, and even if they have the means, they don’t take these things too seriously—this is not a significant issue. For others, it’s due to their family conditions and environment. In a family of seven or eight people, they might all use the same towel for washing their face and feet, with one person using it after another. Some people even go to bed without washing their feet and still sleep soundly. This doesn’t affect their daily life or their self-conduct. Those who are fastidious might say, “But there are germs on your feet—they’re so dirty!” To which others might respond, “Feet aren’t dirty; they’re covered all day and don’t come into contact with the outside world, so there aren’t any germs, just some foot sweat. People think foot sweat is dirty, but it’s actually not. In some places, feet are even used to produce food. Who knows, the food you buy in the market might have been made by mixing dough with people’s feet. You can’t see that, and you eat it—yet you still think yourself so fastidious!” Whether someone is particular or not, all of this is lifestyle habits or ways of living that are shaped by innate conditions. This doesn’t have anything to do with how they conduct themselves. So, what kinds of manifestations involve a person’s conduct? For example, when faced with a dangerous situation, when being hunted by the great red dragon, everyone feels tense and scared, and they will have some instinctive reactions. However, some people might say, “No matter how tense and scared we all are right now, we must calm down and deal with the problems of the situation. We should first cover for the leaders and workers, and the brothers and sisters from other regions, so they can leave quickly.” But others might think differently: “Cover for them? What about me? What if I can’t escape in the end? I need to run first! Whoever runs first won’t get caught, and won’t be sentenced or tortured.” You see, when faced with danger, although everyone has the same instinctive reaction of fright, some people prioritize protecting others and put the safety of their own life in the background—such people demonstrate love and kindness. Others, however, first think of themselves, running off without considering others—this is selfishness. Actually, in the sense of conscience of their humanity, does this latter group know that they should first protect the leaders and workers and the brothers and sisters from other regions? In terms of rationale, do they get this? (Yes.) When everyone equally understands this rationale and has instinctive reactions, people differ in terms of their manifestations. This reflects the differences in humanity between individuals. Some people are selfish and base, only looking out for themselves and ignoring others, while others are kind-hearted, able to be selfless and considerate of others, prioritizing their protection and not acting selfishly. Does this reflect different types of humanity? (Yes.) This makes the distinction clear. So, of these types of people, with their two different types of humanity, which type of person is able to accept the truth and cast off their corrupt disposition? (The type of person with good humanity is able to accept the truth and easily cast off their corrupt disposition.) What about selfish people? (It’s not easy for them to practice the truth; even if they understand it, they can’t put it into practice, so it’s hard for them to cast off their corrupt disposition.) Exactly. So, while everyone may reveal a corrupt disposition, if people’s humanities are different, then they will likewise differ in terms of whether they can cast off their corrupt disposition. When people have different types of humanity, they respond to the same situation with different attitudes and approaches. This determines whether a person can ultimately accept the truth and positive things, whether they can walk the path of pursuing the truth, and whether they can cast off their corrupt disposition. One’s humanity is crucial, isn’t it? When encountering danger, everyone will have some instinctive reactions—they all feel fright, panic, and terror, they are uncertain, afraid of death, and want to run away. In such a critical situation, a person with good and kind humanity will first think of protecting the leaders and workers, and the brothers and sisters from other regions—what they think about first is the safety of others. Although they also have instinctive reactions—fright, panic, terror—and naturally also possess the instinct for self-protection, the way they handle the situation is not to protect themselves first but to protect others. This is the way a person with kind humanity conducts themselves. And what about the way a selfish person conducts themselves? They might think of others, but they don’t protect them—they protect themselves first. Therefore, people with kind humanity, who can empathize with and protect others, are likely to accept the truth. The conscience and reason of their humanity align with the conditions needed to accept the truth and to cast off their corrupt disposition. As for the selfish type of person, even if they understand the truth, they neither accept nor practice it. When faced with danger, their humanity manifests self-protection and selfishness. It’s therefore evident, judging from this humanity which they manifest, that they lack the basic conditions necessary to accept the truth and cast off their corrupt disposition. This means that in situations where practicing the truth is required, their conscience and reason lose their function. They act against their conscience and reason. They do not choose to seek the truth and do the just things that they should do, but instead they choose to go against their conscience and reason, and even go against moral justice and against the truth, fully satisfying their selfish desires and the needs of their interests to protect themselves and preserve all their interests. Therefore, it will not be easy for this type of person to walk the path of pursuing the truth or the path of salvation. The implication of this is that their corrupt disposition is very difficult to cast off. To put it somewhat prudently, instead of saying that they are unable to cast off their corrupt disposition, we will say that it is very difficult for them to do so. So, looking at the issue now, does whether a person can cast off their corrupt disposition and attain salvation entirely depend on their innate conditions? (No.) What does it depend on? (Their humanity.) It depends on their character, and whether the conscience and reason of their humanity can function when they face various people, events, and things. In other words, it depends on whether they act according to their conscience and reason when things happen. If a person acts under the direction of their conscience and reason, they will choose positive things and choose the truth. However, if they act against their conscience and reason, then regardless of how much truth they understand or whether their caliber is high or low, they will go against moral justice, go against the truth principles, and even forfeit their humanity. What does this make clear to you? Is humanity crucial? (Yes.) If a person, regardless of the situation, acts against their conscience and reason and against moral justice whenever it relates to their interests, they will forfeit their humanity. They will do anything to secure and protect their own interests. So, when faced with a situation, they won’t choose to act according to their conscience and reason. Instead, they will go against them for the sake of their own interests, sacrificing their integrity and dignity to achieve their goals. Looking at it from this perspective, no matter how well this type of person usually behaves, they pursue nothing but their own interests—their corrupt disposition is very difficult to cast off. They do not accept the truth—the more critical the moment, and the more they are confronted with reality, the more they choose to go against their conscience, reason, and the truth; and the more critical the moment, the more they reveal their corrupt disposition of being averse to the truth and their selfish, base humanity. Therefore, for this type of person, it is very difficult to cast off their corrupt disposition. By now, is it clear that a person’s humanity is a fundamental condition for casting off a corrupt disposition? What kind of humanity a person has determines whether they can ultimately cast off their corrupt disposition, whether they can ultimately walk the path of pursuing the truth, and whether they can ultimately attain salvation.

Some people are naturally taciturn, with a personality that is gentle and tolerant. They seldom fuss over things or dispute with others, nor are they overly raucous. Their speech is not ostentatious, and their voices are soft. Outwardly, they appear especially gentle, and they do things in a methodical and unhurried manner. There are even some bashful people who do not like to have much verbal communication with others and are unwilling to have too much interaction with people. Wherever they go, they basically do not have any sense of presence. What kind of issue do these manifestations relate to? (This is an issue to do with their personality.) This is an issue with their innate personality. These people have this kind of personality on the outside, and inwardly their thoughts are also very simple. They are relatively nice to others, interact with others relatively fairly, do not take advantage of others, and when they receive favors or help from others, they repay them, and they also remember the kindness of others in their hearts. These people outwardly appear to have good humanity: They are harmless to both humans and animals; they are tolerant, sensitive toward others, and do not fuss over things with others; they do not get entangled in disputes, nor do they gossip about others; they do not pass judgment on people behind their backs, and they never proactively attack or harm others; when someone is in difficulty, as long as they can help, they will never refuse, and they do not ask for anything in return. Most people would say that these individuals are quite easygoing. So, do these people outwardly appear to have good humanity? (Yes.) But on one occasion, God’s house asks them about how things are going: “How is the work of your church leaders? What do the brothers and sisters think of them? Has the gospel work had any results during this period? Has anyone disrupted or disturbed the work of the church?” They mull this over: “Why are they asking me about this? What are they getting at? Are they implying that I should say the leaders aren’t doing well? Are they looking to dismiss our leaders? They are trying to worm words out of me and get confirmation from me. Well, I’m not going to say anything. If the leaders are dismissed one day, and they find out that I reported their issues, won’t they hold a grudge against me?” So they reply, “The leaders have been doing a pretty good job recently; I haven’t noticed any issues.” That’s all they say. When they’re asked again, “You really haven’t noticed any issues?” they reply, “How about you ask Sister So-and-so to tell you, she frequently interacts with the leaders. They associate quite often and she knows them well. I don’t know them that well.” But actually, they think to themselves: “Even if I do know, I can’t say anything. If I speak up and the leaders are dismissed later, won’t they hold a grudge against me? Even if they aren’t dismissed, if they find out I said something bad about them, won’t they make things difficult for me? Could they torment me? Would my duty be taken away? I can’t say anything!” What kind of manifestation is this? (It’s a manifestation of deceitfulness.) And what kind of problem does this relate to? A corrupt disposition. This kind of person outwardly seems to have a naturally good personality and good humanity, but whenever it comes to evaluating others or reporting issues, they claim they don’t know, saying that they’ve been a believer for a short time and don’t understand the truth, that they’re too foolish to see through things. No matter whose problems they notice, they never report it or speak up about it. When someone passes judgment on the leaders behind their backs or does their duty perfunctorily, they pretend not to notice or know about it and never report anything. When the leaders ask, “You’ve spent a lot of time with So-and-so; what is their performance of duty usually like? Are they able to endure hardship and pay a price?” they respond, “Well, I see that they get up pretty early in the morning and go to bed quite late at night.” In actuality, they had long since noticed that this person often watches the videos of the nonbelieving world and does not pay a price in doing their duty, but they do not speak the truth; they always maintain a superficial harmony with everyone. Outwardly, their innate personality seems fine, and their humanity appears good as well, but what is hidden beneath this appearance of good humanity? They are people pleasers; they are people pleasers who offend no one, never harm anyone, never take advantage of others, and never make enemies. What is their principle for conducting themselves? (To offend no one.) They offend no one, harm no one, and only seek to protect themselves. Is this being slippery? (Yes.) Even when someone sincerely fellowships with them, saying, “We’ve spent the most time together doing our duties. Please point out any issues you see with me. I promise to accept it and change. Please also fellowship with me about the principles of practice in this regard”—even when the other person is so earnest, they still don’t tell the truth. Instead, they insincerely say, “You’re much better than me. Actually, none of you realize it, but I’m really weak. I get negative, and I’m also rebellious.” No matter how sincerely others ask them to, they still won’t say anything. They absolutely refuse to offend anyone and will never make a single truthful statement. They won’t speak the truth to anyone, keeping everything buried in their hearts. From this, it can be seen that it’s not that they have no thoughts, because they aren’t robots, and they don’t live in a vacuum. They do have opinions about different people and matters, but they never express them or share or convey them to anyone. They just keep everything to themselves, in part because they do not want others to see through them, and in part because they do not want to offend anyone. So, what is their principle for conducting themselves? Do they have no principles? (Yes.) They have no principles. They never seek the truth or uphold principles. They only focus on defending and safeguarding themselves. As long as they don’t get hurt, they don’t care about what God requires. They have no principles or boundaries in how they conduct themselves, and they offend no one—they are simply people pleasers. Therefore, in the eyes of others, they are also seen as good people because those who interact with them often receive their help, and whenever others ask them for anything, they never refuse, leading people to believe they are good people. However, if you closely examine the principles by which they conduct themselves, you’ll find that they have no principles for conducting themselves. When it comes to issues related to corrupt dispositions, will they seek the truth to resolve them? Will they practice according to the truth principles? (No.) The answer is definitely no. These people hold on to their own subjective understanding, believing that they have good humanity and kind hearts. They think that they never harbor ill intentions toward others, or at the very least, would not actively harm others or damage their interests. Whenever others have any request or need, they always respond. In their understanding, they believe that not offending or harming anyone makes them good people. By not making any enemies, they think they won’t put themselves in any dangerous situation, and no one will see them as an enemy. This way, they won’t get hurt and will remain safe. What is the goal of people of this type in how they conduct themselves? Their only aim is self-protection; for them it is sufficient to live in what they believe is the most comfortable and secure haven and comfort zone. They have no intention of changing the principles and boundaries in how they conduct themselves, or the direction of their conduct, and they certainly have no intention of casting off their corrupt dispositions. These people are people pleasers and trouble avoiders. No matter how others fellowship about the truth principles or about the boundaries and principles of how to conduct oneself, they won’t change the way they conduct themselves. So, do these people have good humanity? (No.) Can these people accept the truth or uphold principles? (No.) Why can’t they uphold the truth principles? Because in their minds, their standard for conducting themselves is to be people pleasers. When it comes to any matter that requires having an opinion or taking a stance, they remain silent, maintain an indifferent attitude, and take a hands-off approach, remaining unconcerned and aloof as if it doesn’t concern them. As a result, they have no edge in how they conduct themselves and act; they are like a slippery eel. They don’t care about the people and events around them. No matter how significant the issues are in any environment or with any person, they have no interest in caring, inquiring, or knowing about them. They believe that as long as it doesn’t involve them, there’s no need to be concerned. There’s a saying for this, how does it go? “Seek not merit, but to avoid blame.” This is also a principle by which people pleasers conduct themselves. What are the characteristics of such people’s corrupt dispositions? Deceitfulness, wickedness, intransigence, a refusal to accept the truth—they possess nearly all the characteristics of corrupt dispositions. Outwardly, they may not do evil and rarely commit transgressions, but if you observe the principles and ways in which they conduct themselves, the most notable feature is that they never uphold the truth principles and have no boundaries in how they conduct themselves. Even when someone insults them or hurts their dignity, they can put up with it and laugh it off, never revealing or manifesting their inner thoughts. Outwardly, they seem very tolerant, with kind humanity, and show no intention of attacking or seeking revenge. However, it’s not that they have no thoughts—they remember what you did, and at the right moment, they will come out and protect and defend themselves, giving you a certain counterattack that you might not even notice. They are not upholding the truth principles; the principles and the boundaries in how they conduct themselves are solely to defend their own interests, safety, and reputation. For people like this, it is correct to describe them as wicked, and to describe them as intransigent, deceitful, and averse to the truth. Some people might say, “They haven’t harmed others’ interests or done anything evil, so how can you say they have these corrupt dispositions? What are you basing this on?” It’s based on their thoughts, viewpoints, and attitudes when it comes to how they view people and things and how they conduct themselves and act. Have you noticed this? (Now we see it.) Why is it that you couldn’t see it before? What about them misled you? (We thought they were quite easygoing in their speech and actions, and in how they interacted and cooperated with others, and they didn’t hurt anyone, so we assumed they had good humanity. We were misled by their outward facade.) Outwardly having a gentle personality and never attacking people and hurting animals does not mean that someone has good humanity. What kind of revelations of humanity represent truly good humanity? (For one thing, not harming others or taking advantage of them. Additionally, when danger arises, one’s first thought is to protect the leaders and workers, as well as the brothers and sisters who pursue the truth, without considering one’s own safety, and being able to put the interests of God’s house first in every situation. These are all manifestations of good humanity.) To be kind-hearted, loving, patient and tolerant, respectful of others, willing to consider others, to not take advantage of people, to be relatively upright, as well as humble, low-key, and not overbearing: possessing these qualities of humanity, combined with the ability to uphold the truth principles and safeguard the interests of God’s house—this is good humanity. If someone outwardly possesses qualities of humanity like tolerance, patience, kindness, not taking advantage of others, sensitivity toward others, caring for others, but when it comes to the interests of God’s house, they readily hand them over and even actively sell them out, do they have good humanity? (No.) This means their humanity is not good. How is good humanity measured? What is the minimum requirement? (At the very least, being able to safeguard the interests of God’s house.) Being able to safeguard the interests of God’s house; and then, on this foundation, being able to cooperate harmoniously with others, being kind-hearted and tolerant, not taking advantage of others, and being able to be patient and understand others’ weaknesses, being sensitive toward others, being able to be loving, being able to help and support others, and care for those who are weak, and so on—these are all characteristics of good humanity. Conversely, selfishness, baseness, greed, being harsh and overly calculating with others, loving to gossip and oppress people, being willful, showy, particularly superficial, wicked, dissolute, brazen, and lacking a sense of shame—what kind of manifestations are these? (These are manifestations of bad humanity.) Can someone with these manifestations still safeguard the interests of God’s house? (No.) Possessing the manifestations of good humanity, along with the ability to safeguard the interests of God’s house—this is what truly good humanity is.

Some people outwardly appear very kind; they are able to be patient with and tolerant of others, and they possess all the characteristics of good humanity. But when it comes to the work of the church, God’s offerings, or the interests of God’s house, they are able to sell out all of this. Would you say that this kind of person has good humanity? (No.) For example, when buying things for the brothers and sisters, some people choose items that are of good quality, cheap in price, and practical. But when it comes to spending offerings to buy things, they opt for expensive goods. Even if it’s just a tractor, they’ll even want to get one with navigation. No matter what they’re buying, they always go for the best, the most expensive, and the high-tech options, refusing to consider anything cheaper. Usually, they seem to get along normally with others; they don’t take advantage of people, are quite tolerant, and treat others well in all ways. But when it comes to spending offerings, their ruthless side emerges, and their sinister face comes out. Can they be considered as having good humanity? (No.) Is their good humanity truly genuine? It’s just outward pretense and affectation, it’s all a facade. When it really comes to matters involving the interests of God’s house, especially when it comes to spending offerings, their greed surfaces, and their sinister face, devilish visage, and ferocious demeanor are revealed. Is this good humanity? (No.) For example, someone is applying for the copyright of The Word Appears in the Flesh, and they say: “If we apply in the name of the church as an organization, it will save a lot of money. But if we apply in the name of Christ incarnate, it will cost much more. We should save money on this; offerings must not be spent carelessly!” Is this statement correct? Do they have principles in handling such an important matter? Just who were these words expressed by, God or the church? (They were expressed by God.) So who should the copyright belong to? Is it more appropriate for it to belong to God or to the church? (It’s more appropriate for it to belong to God.) This is a crucial issue. What are the consequences of focusing on saving money in such a critical matter? What problems could arise? The consequences could be unimaginable! If you disregard the interests of God’s house and only consider saving money, what kind of person does that make you? Do such people have a conscience or humanity? (They have no humanity.) No matter how kind or tolerant such people may seem on the outside, do they truly have humanity? (No.) In the church, all expenses for food, drink, and daily needs are covered entirely by God’s offerings. Have I ever been petty with you about these expenses? The only requirement is that you avoid waste, but have I ever scrutinized your normal expenses? (No.) In all aspects, I have been mindful of you and never scrutinized your expenses, yet you turn around and cut corners with Me. Is this not a lack of humanity? (Yes, it is.) No matter how kind or tolerant toward people someone without humanity appears, it’s just a facade. When it really comes to moments where conscience and reason should come into play, they are revealed as being devoid of all humanity. Are they even human? (No.) They cannot be called human. When I make purchases, I also shop carefully and frugally, considering when items are discounted and suitable ways to buy them, and if something is practical, suitable, and reasonably priced, I’ll purchase it. But I don’t buy recklessly, I don’t spend money on unworthy purchases. However, there are some expenses that can’t be avoided and must be spent, and in those cases, I spend according to principles. I also try to be frugal with My own food, clothing, and daily needs. It’s not about buying whatever I want; I have to carefully consider My purchases. You see, I dress simply, appropriately, and presentably. My spending follows principles: I buy what is necessary and practical, and I don’t buy what isn’t. Don’t squander or waste money; don’t spend money that shouldn’t be spent; save where you should, and avoid unnecessary expenses—these are the principles. However, when some people without humanity see an opportunity to spend God’s offerings, their eyes widen. As long as it involves spending on people’s food, clothing, housing, or transportation, they rush to take action. Especially when it comes to buying clothes for others or doling out living expenses, they become overly enthusiastic and very generous. In their hearts, they think, “Well, it’s not my money being spent. It’s God’s money being spent, and this helps my reputation, so why not?” So they take the opportunity to splurge. In their hearts, they harbor ill intentions, wanting nothing more than to do harm to God’s house! But if it were their own money, they’d calculate everything, refusing to spend even a penny more than necessary. No matter how kind they usually appear, such people do not have good humanity. In My view, their attitude toward God’s offerings speaks volumes. The fact that they can squander offerings and are totally devoid of a God-fearing heart shows, at the very least, that they are not kind, they are base, and they have poor humanity. Isn’t this the case? (Yes, it is.)

There are many manifestations related to one’s innate conditions, humanity, and corrupt dispositions. We’ve skimmed a portion of them today; there are likely other manifestations, which we can cover in future fellowships. Let’s end our fellowship here for today. Goodbye!

September 23, 2023