@paul: Unfortunately you begin with assumptions that I consider untrue and then lay questions on top of them. How can such questions be answered truthfully when the underlying context is untrue?
As a simple example, you wrote: "The only way Steve has ever made money and felt fulfilled in his life is by providing value. That is the only experience he's had with LoA."
Those statements are untrue of course. I expressed essentially the opposite PoV in my writing on multiple occasions. You've also confused money with abundance... and financial value with creative value. This makes for some very muddled questions. Forgive me, but I don't know how to honestly answer questions that begin with assumptions that are false to me.
Just to give you another perspective, if I were to use a similar process to pose questions to you, it would look something like this:
Paul believes the best way to make money is to trick others into giving him something for nothing. He justifies this attitude and suppresses any feelings of guilt by telling himself that he's the most important person on earth and that therefore, other people and their needs don't really matter. He believes he deserves everything he can get for himself.
Q: Paul, how does conning people for a living help you feel happy and fulfilled? What are the best ways you've learned to trick people into giving you money without giving them anything in return?
Of course these statements and questions are unfair because they make assumptions about your context you may not agree with.
I think the underlying problem is that you're coming from a context that's different from mine, and you're projecting many assumptions from your context onto mine. Unfortunately, many of those assumptions are not true from one context to the next. This works both ways, since in order to understand your context, I have to let go of my own and see the world through your perspective. Otherwise I'd end up making a lot of false assumptions about your experience of reality, like assuming you must be an evil con artist. Obviously such an assumption won't lead to a deeper understanding.
If you'd truly like to understand the lightworker context in more depth -- which of course isn't the self-denying, make-life-harder-than-necessary context you seem to frame it as -- I encourage you to relax some of your assumptions first. Consider tackling the subject like a scientist as opposed to a cross-examining attorney.
