AssemblyBoard

Brother George Displays His Unspeakable Gift

Los Angeles, CA - Brother George Geftakys, who was formerly excommunicated for his role in covering up his son’s spousal abuse as well as inappropriate liaisons with younger women, was recently welcomed at the Assembly in Los Angeles on the provision that he is not allowed to speak in the meeting.

Insiders report that Geftakys, in order to deliver the burden submitted to him from the kitchen of heaven, has recently joined the mime group Pilgrim Players in order to get around the restriction and continue to communicate the heavenly vision to his followers.

“It is, like, totally awesome how the Lord is moving,” said an insider and current member of the Los Angeles Pilgrim Players, “Praise the Lord!  Like, we have been doing this play called ‘The Mask’ that was made like thirty years ago but like God is on the move.  I mean, I don’t know what the mime means, but it sure looks glorious.”

Some viewers of the mime at a recent outreach expressed concerns especially when Brother George acted out a scene from Song of Solomon which included hip gyrations and kissy-lips that appeared to be directed towards a young twenty-year-old visitor wearing spandex athletic attire.

“That is simply an outrageous accusation against the Lord’s Servant,” responded an unnamed leading brother from West Los Angeles.  “It is obvious that brother George was simply being faithful to the text and challenging us to a higher level.  Besides, there were no witnesses.”

It is unclear how often George will be traveling with the mime group.  Insiders suggest that George will probably spend more time at the Assemblies in Riverside and San Francisco where his sins had never happened.

The previous post represents the personal opinions of its author, who is expressing his views under the protection of the First Amendment of the Constitutiion of the United States of America.

 The administrator and moderators of this bulletin board cannot accept any responsibility or liability for:

1. Bundles developing in the underwear of persons who object to the humorous tone of the post.

2. Physical problems resulting from busting a gut laughing while reading the aforementioned post.

Thomas Maddux
Moderator

 ;)

 ;D ;D ;D ;D

And all the saints said...........................

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

 A reworked Hymn should now be sung at assembly wosrhip, it should be called;

 Surround him with many Clowns

  Surround him with many clowns,
put George upon his throne.
Hark! How the assembly system drowns
all doctrine but its own.
Go to sleep my soul and sing,
of him who likes young ladies
and hail him as my assembly king
through all eternity

Surround him with the old assenbly life
who triumped over earthly accountability
and rose victorious in the strife
for those he came to enslave
his glories now we sing
who climbed and rose on high,
who climbed the heavenly ladder to bring
the assembly life lie

Is is just me or does anyone else think the last post has crossed the line in its mockery.

I would like to see it removed.

It's just you. You may have missed some of the previous songs regarding GG.

Why would that post cross the line?  It was kind of funny.  Sometimes the truth hurts!

I agree.

  I didn't like seeing that wonderful hymn used the way it was either Marty.  The lyrics speak of a very wonderful and sacred truth that are near and dear to my heart.

  The greatest mockery, however, is not how it was used above, rather it is the fact that these WLA folks (as well as those that think as they do) who are singing this blessed hymn with GG!

  Are you also outraged at what these WLA leaders have done in accepting GG back "into fellowship" Marty?  What is worse-----showing what a sham these GG defenders make of their Christian profession, or protesting against those that point out their deep hypocrisy via the means above?

   If you are not more disgusted with the WLA leaders, and their journey toward full-blown cult, than just protesting the sarcastic use of a song the WLA Assembly professes to believe in, but in practice denies, it is then a very inadequate response to make on your part.

  I think "Vista" used that particular hymn because he/she knew it was an Assembly favorite and wanted to point our the irony via his/her sarcasm.  It was not funny to me, rather it was sad but true, and one that breaks my heart.  I think maybe the Lord might feel the same way about those that worship with their lips but their heart is far from Him.

  The same may go for the phrase, "The Unspeakable Gift", which is taken from the NT and describes God's gift through the death of His Son for each one of us, and which parody started this thread.  Should we be using this wonderful biblical truth to point out the shameful behavior of an unrepentant former religious leader who used his place of power to feed his own lusts?!

  How about the former members, who while not "breaking bread with GG", still deny the sinful practices that clearly went on in the Assembly of GG?  Or, how about those former leaders that admit these things but refuse to come forward and condemn their shameful Assembly history?

  True worship of Jesus Christ that "crowns Him with many crowns," in more than singing and as former/present Assembly members we must honestly face the above questions, as they will one day have to face that King and answer personally, as shall we all.

                                                    God Bless,  Mark C.

   

Mark,

I think you are right on your pointing out what the greatest outrage really is.

When WLA received GG back into "fellowship" they, IMHO, simply validated his way of operating.

Although I do not have firsthand knowledge of what I am about to say, in that I did not witness the actual events, folks who were there have told me the following.

In the years before the assembly was founded GG fellowshipped among the Plymouth Bretheren in Southern California.  During that time he was accused of committing adultery.

He was disciplined by his local assembly.  He never, however, admitted what he had done.  He did, however, tell the early leading brothers in Fullerton that these PB leaders had "written a letter" about him.  He did not, however, say what the letter contained other than to say that "they lied about me."

It is my understanding that after a period of time they allowed him back into fellowship, and he was invited to preach in several assembliies.  He was not allowed to become an elder.

It looks like these folks in WLA are letting him get away with the same game again.   :o    :'(

Imagine how different things might have been if the PB elders from his past had come forward and told folks of his history with them.  They knew that he was starting a work among young people, but they uttered not a word.

Sad then, sadder now.

Thomas Maddux

Often good satire is an appropriate means to express outrage and communicate the lunacy of the situation.  The book Animal Farm probably did more to illustrate the hypocracy and failure of Communism (and to a much wider audience) that a direct verbal attack.  I'm not sure outrage and satire are mutually exclusive.

Imagine how different things might have been for WLA et al if ....


In the final analysis, the facts would indicate that it was not satire that exposed the Geftakys system for what what it is.  Unless, of course, I am unaware of recent developments and WLA has seen the light after reading your post.

Marcia

I don't think it is an either/or thing as you suggest but more of a both/and thing.  Both are appropriate means to describe our criticism to the silly things our former comrads are doing.  I enjoy both when done well.

Just a final comment in response to some of these posts by Mark and Tom and others regarding the issue I raised. Then I will fade off into oblivion.

As usual, you boys have again diverted the conversation to confuse the issue. It has nothing to do with what people are doing in WLA or what people are doing in other assembly gatherings. It has nothing to do with ones degree of outrage or lack thereof on how some decide to meet and whom they decide to accept.

It has to do with the posts on this bb.

See, I can’t control what others do but I can control what I do. I can’t stop George. I can’t stop the assemblies. I can’t stop the Mormons, the JW’s, the Masons, the Divine Light Mission, the abortionists, the democrats, the Dutch, etc, etc. Shame on me that my outrage doesn’t include mocking that which I, and my brethren use to glorify the God of creation.

Using hymns that have been used to worship the One true God and His Son by millions of Christians over the centuries for your satire, in my opinion, is inappropriate. Maybe this particular hymn was sung in the assembly. Does that now make it fodder for pigs? Does butchering what honors God justify that action because we don’t like what others are doing? Is there no other means by which you can get your point across other than this method?
 
If this bb is to be considered “Christian” it will only be so if the content of it honors Christ. Anything else is secular and worldly. For us unassuming blokes please be clear on your purpose. From my observations I don’t see where you are any better than those you criticize

 Hi Marty,

   I'm glad that you responded, and as I said in my previous post, I agree that I did not like the fact that the hymn was used as a parody.  So, including me as one of "the boys" (I don't think Marcia will appreciate such an inclusion as well ;)) was wrong on your part.

   Your frustration at not being able to "control" the BB, as the kind of Christ honoring place that you would like is an objection that has been raised in the past.  It seems that many have opinions as to how they believe  the BB should operate. Those that can't seem to get their way often just announce that they will leave.

  This BB is not "a Christian BB", like say a church would be.  A church is not a place for open discussion of different opinions from those that have widely different perspectives, while this internet site is such a place.  The use of "control", as you term it, in a place like this BB, is very difficult to achieve.

 It is better to "remove" a post one disagrees with by making an argument against it, vs. just editing it out.  You have made some good arguments against using the hymn as a parody and now let's see how others view it.

  There is some of what goes on here that "I don't like", but if I were to leave then I've retreated from the argument and given over the BB to the particular view I oppose.  In other words, silence is not always golden--- sometimes it's yellow!  If you wish to make the BB more "Christ honoring" then try to make your best arguments against those that you believe are not doing so.

  The BB is a "public" forum (so it is more like 'the world' than a church) where former members of the Assembly discuss issues that are relevant to them.  You are free to share your opinions, but in such a open forum your only option is persuassion, vs. trying to control via the threat of non-participation, etc..  This BB is very frustrating for those that would like to dominate, vs being just another participant trying to share their opinion. 

  The only "controls" on the BB are in place against those that refuse to make their argument and instead wish to engage in bashing those that they disagree with.  While I am very patient with those that make ad hominen attacks against me, if there is any hope to get the antagonist to actually argue their point I will allow them to continue. There comes a point when it is obvious that there is not going to be any real discussion, and all the poster wants to do is personally attack.

  As to the effectiveness of this BB:  I have no real hope that anything will convince those with cult like devotion to GG to reconsider their stand, but for those that still have a hankering for the good ol' days of the Assembly (sans GG), and are not clear re. what was going on in the group; there is hope of recovery.

  I don't agree that the parody writer "is just as bad as WLA leaders" anymore than cartoon writers from Denmark are just as evil as Moslem rioters.  It is far worse to participate in the sin of GG then to point it out via sarcasm, and for those that can't see this it shows that they are still living under the shadow of the old evil empire of GG.

  If you believe that you are right I would encourage you to continue to try to persuade others that you are correct.   There are many that read, but never post, and the silent majority may benefit from hearing your perspective and be influenced to accept your views.  Your abandonment of the discussion may cause some potential adherents to your views to think you are unable to make your case.

                                                                        God Bless,  Mark C.

 

Marty:

Boys?  Blokes? 

Matt

Thanks for that clarification.

If it is not christian, then christian argument and perspective is then irrelevant.

My mistake.

Hi Marty,

  Just because this BB is not for the exclusive use of professed belivers in Christ it does not mean that Christians are not allowed to provide their opinions here.
 
 You have taken my comments out of context and as a result have perverted their meaning.  Most of those who post here maintain faith in Christ, but it is a public internet site, and as such, is more like a gathering in a public setting vs. a private organization that can set terms for invovlement (like a church.)

  Again, let's wait and see how others respond to your contention that it is "just as bad to use that hymn in parody as to break bread with GG."  You may find that there are other Christians here who share your views.

                                                                  God bless,  Mark C.

Marty

I am going to reply to your post because what you have said demonstrates the deleterious effects of your association with the George Geftakys assemblies upon your own thinking.  You have made it very clear that you reason legalistically.

You said:

1. You may not be able to control what others do, but you are attempting to make an argument for your belief that it is wrong to use the tune to a hymn in a parody.  You have demanded that the post be deleted, meaning that you wish to control what other readers of the board can read.  Having failed to achieve that goal, you have now begun to insinuate that anyone who does not follow your laws of conduct is acting in an "unchristian" manner.

2. In order to convince me, Marty, you need to do two things: a. State what the law actually is.  b. Provide support for its validity. In other words, tell us how you know that this law actually is a law.  You have done neither. 

Your law seems to be something like, "You shall not parody anyone's behavior using a tune that is used in a song Christians have sung while worshipping." 

I would be most intrested to know just how you discovered this law.  I do not recall having ever read it in my Bible.  That is why I said you "reason legalistically."  The essence of legalism is setting up a non-biblical standard of behavior and demanding that others conform to it.  It also usually includes judging or criticizing those who do not conform. 

3. Another aspect of legalistic reasoning is that matters of mere personal taste are elevated to the status of divine law.  I did not find the parody enjoyable, and Mark has said that he did not care for it either.  But my likes and dislikes are not equal to the law of God.

You seem to feel that yours are!  You said:

I have no argument with this.  I am inclinded to agree.  But you have gone much farther than this.  You have also said:

"Inappropriate" and "dishonoring to Christ" do not mean the same thing.  Belching in public is inappropriate, which is why we say "excuse me" when we accidentally do so.  Dishonoring Christ is much more serious.  However, you have not told us exactly why the parody dishonors Christ, and how you know this to be true.

What you have done instead is to elevate your personal tastes to the status of divine law, and have proceeded to judge your brethren on the basis of your own law.  You have become the Lawgiver and the Judge!

You might think of this behavior as "honoring to Christ".   I think many will agree that it is simply idolatry, in that you are placing yourself on a par with God. 

4. I have enountered this argument about the use of hymns on one other occassion.  Many years ago I made up a humorous ditty about coffee drinking.  It was to the tune of a hymn, and ended with the phrase, "earth has no sorrow that coffee cannot cure."  A prominent brother heard it, and said to me, "Well brother, at least it wasn't a worship hymn."

His name was George Geftakys.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

nor can you stop people from mocking them. freedom allows the good and bad, within limits. granted, that was pretty bad. the wording was childish and unimaginative, and the meter and rhyme were all wrong.

seriously tho, you sound very passionate and earnest conerning your faith. i respect that, but i have been around earnest passionate believers all my life and i have seen how rigid it can make people sometimes. this is an open public forum, not restricted to christians. someone appeared out of nowhere and spouted out a mocking poem that resembled a hymn and then vanished again. its not mocking god, its mocking george and those in the assembly. *shrug* its distasteful and unhelpful, but it happens. sometimes people come up with hilarious bits and it feels nice to be able to laugh about something that was so painful. sometimes its a lemon. but i think its more important to not be overly controlling than to make sure that nothing gets posted that would offend passionate, earnest and somewhat rigid believers.

brian

Folks,

Several years ago, prior to the "fall" of George Geftakys, my wife and I were walking on the campus of Cal State Fullerton.  As we walked we noticed several groups of people sitting on the lawn in the shade of a row of small trees.  Since it was a hot day their peculiar dress attracted my attention.

The men were dressed in suits or at least sport coats and ties.  The women were wearing ankle length dresses and skirts.  At first I thought, "how uncomfortable they must be".  Then it dawned on me....these folks were assembly members, and they were having "Prayer and Meditation" after a seminar session.

 (For those of you who don't know, these sessions were an added session after a two hour rambling, disorganized talk by George Geftakys during his seminars.  One was supposed to review and clarify the profound truths that you had received, then apply them to your life.  In reality it quickly became clear that most of the folks hadn't followed what he said at all, so most of the time was spent on "what it means to me".)

Anyway, here were these poor folks sweltering in the heat in thier nearly formal dress clothes while Caryl and I strolled comfortably in clothing appropriate to the weather.  We shuddered and walked on, thankiing God we had awakened enough to leave ten or twelve years earlier.

The reason I bring this up is to point out how this sorry state of affairs came about.  You see, it was a matter of what was "honoring to Christ".  No legalist ever gets up and says, "I propose that we make up some burdensome rules that will make our lives miserable, will feed our pride when we keep them, and will provide us with lots of reasons to despise other Christians."  It doesn't work that way.

Instead, the unbiblical standards are introduced in sugar coated form.  The exterior does not say M&M's.  It says, "Honoring to Christ".

In the case of the Assembly dress code, the rules had thier origin in the early lives of George and Betty Geftakys.  In those days, our society was much more formal.  I can recall travelling to San Francisco with my parents in the mid-fifties.  When we went downtown my mom wore a dress, a hat, and white gloves.  It was the way a lady was expected to dress.

GG and BG grew up in the 30's and 40's, and shared this view of dignified dress.  So, suits, ties, and long dresses became, for the Assemlby, what was "Honoring to Christ."  They baptized current, (for them), customs of dress and turned them into rules for acceptable Christian conduct.  The clothing became a visible sign of true commitment to Christ.  Of course, the members of "churches" could then be disparaged and mocked for their "carnal" mode of dress.  Women wearing pants to church...the very idea! 

The "Honoring to Christ" standard is very useful to legalists.  It can be applied to nearly any area of life.  A few I have encountered are hair styles, vacation destinations, car purchases, television, reading novels, cosmetics, smoking, dietary choices, which movies to view, or whether or not to view them at all, on and on.  Among the Mennonites entire books have been written for and against the hideous evil of women's wearing wedding rings.   :o  :'(

What it usually boils down to is:
A. What I like and approve of is "Honoring to Christ".
B. What I do not like and do not approve of is "Not Honoring to Christ."

So, "what I like" is elevated to the status of Divine Law.   That, my friends, in not Honoring to Christ.

"...Who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage.  But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you."  Galatians 2:4-5.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

Members of the AB,

Thank you for your honesty in agreeing or disagreeing regarding my use of a parody to illustrate my opinion of those still playing church in the Assembly created by George Geftakys. Thank you for not deleting my post because of the method of communication I chose. I knew it would make a strong statement, but I wanted to make a strong statement regarding present assembly involvement in the U.S. and Nigeria, especially now that George is involved.
 I appreciate that some of you reponded to what I communicated not how I communicated.
I think that those who strongly oposed my method are really more opposed to my opinion. It is assembly minded to be more concerned with looking holy rather than being holy.

Vista

Interesting note from cyberhymnal.org:  http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/m/y/mysavior.htm

There ap­peared in Lon­don a man who styled him­self the mes­si­ah, and for ma­ny weeks a large crowd was at­tract­ed to him. One night, how­ev­er, as he was talk­ing in one of the open squares in the city, a small band of the Sal­va­tion Ar­my passed along, sing­ing,

                 “I shall know Him, I shall know Him,
                 By the print of the nails in His hand.”

The great throng joined in the cho­rus. Fin­al­ly some­one point­ed at the self-styled Christ and said, “Look at his hands and see if the print of the nails is there.” They did as di­rect­ed, but no print ap­peared, and they at once left off fol­low­ing him.

Crosby


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When my life work is ended, and I cross the swelling tide,
When the bright and glorious morning I shall see;
I shall know my Redeemer when I reach the other side,
And His smile will be the first to welcome me.

Refrain

I shall know Him, I shall know Him,
And redeemed by His side I shall stand,
I shall know Him, I shall know Him,
By the print of the nails in His hand.

Oh, the soul thrilling rapture when I view His blessčd face,
And the luster of His kindly beaming eye;
How my full heart will praise Him for the mercy, love and grace,
That prepare for me a mansion in the sky.

Refrain

Oh, the dear ones in glory, how they beckon me to come,
And our parting at the river I recall;
To the sweet vales of Eden they will sing my welcome home;
But I long to meet my Savior first of all.

Refrain

Through the gates to the city in a robe of spotless white,
He will lead me where no tears will ever fall;
In the glad song of ages I shall mingle with delight;
But I long to meet my Savior first of all.

Refrain

The Assembly God:  "Vista, you have deeply offended me by using a sacred song as
a parody. As a consequence I want you to wash all of the windows in the Crystal
Cathedral".

Perhaps a hymn  used for a parody is not the best method one could use, but I think
the God who created the platypus, Eddie Murphy, Billy Crystal, George Burns, Bob Hope,
Jack Benny, Henny Youngman, etc. etc. must have a great sense of humor. It's amazing
how those who follow the Assembly God, or still hold some reverence for him, become
exactly like him. How much greater, kinder, tender, merciful, loving and Father-like is the
true and living God of the Bible. How anyone would want to continue to follow that false
god, and welcome the man responsible for the teachings regarding that god, truly amazes
me beyond belief. May God open their eyes and their hearts.

Ephesians 4:29
Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear.

Proverbs 12:23
A prudent man conceals knowledge, But the heart of fools proclaims folly.

Proverbs 14:24
The crown of the wise is their riches, But the folly of fools is foolishness.

Proverbs 24:9
The devising of folly is sin, And the scoffer is an abomination to men.

Ecclesiastes 2:13
And I saw that wisdom excels folly as light excels darkness.

Observer