AssemblyBoard

Tom's question about what good things did you learn in the Assembly has produced insightful discussion. Here is another question: What were the good things you did in the Assembly to serve the Lord? Was it all tainted by the system? What about outreaches that were not subject to leadership control and "training", such as the retirement home outreach, puppets ,or mimes? What about individual talks with people to encourage them or share the gospel? What about helping folks?  There are former Assembly members in agony over this question, especially those who spent most of their adult lives in the system. Do they have to write it all off as a waste, or worse, as tainted and harmful?

Margaret--

Thanks. Despite the "system" there were many good things done "for the Lord",
from very sincere hearts. And the Lord remembers every one of them--even to
the point of "putting our tears in a bottle". I'm glad you brought that to mind.
My wanderings you have noted; are my tears not stored in your vial, recorded in your book?
Ps. 56.

I personally really liked the outreach to the Union Rescue Mission.  I got to lead singing.  I got to preaching and I remember the thrill when men came forward.  I would sit in the audience and talk with the men and felt I did a little bit.

The nice thing about this was that this outreach was off the Assembly radar's screen.  No homeless person was going to drive from LA to Fullerton so there was really no interest or control from George and Betty.

I enjoyed being part of the campus ministry.  In my youthful zeal, I felt I was part of something important.  There are a million things I did wrong such as mass-handing out of tracts (instead of engaging in conversation like Elaine Finley-Minnamede did) and feeling a superiority over other Christian outreaches.  Nevertheless, in my youthful zeal, I felt I had a purpose and it kept me out of trouble.  At Orange Coast College and California State Long Beach, we weren't completely micro-managed by Tim or George so there was lots of room to feel like I was truly ministering.

In fact, I would say it was the campus ministry that really attracted me to the Assembly.

I think that the churches in Rev. 2 & 3 probably give some insight into this and Tom's thread. There were good things that they did that they must have learned in these churches. The Lord commends them for this. There were bad things that they also learned and did in these churches and the Lord warns them about this. So the bad did not necessarily erase the good. And the Lord didn't seem to think that the mention of this promoted or excused the system.

The main problem with the assembly: There was plenty that pointed out the bad, but we were unwilling to see it. No excuse. There was also plenty of time and opportunity to repent of it, but we did not. No excuse.

The result: The promised judgment of God fell... no doubt about that. If you don't believe that, you probably weren't there.

Tom:  I don't think you followed the complete postings on this thread or you could not have come to the conclusion that either Joe or I were accusing you of supporting GG or his vision by asking the question that you did.  Our responses were mostly aimed at a poster who saw your question as a verification of his own belief in the superiority of what that gathering produced!  He also offered a very condescending series of comments to Joe re. Joe's assessment of the legalism, etc.. in the group.

Explorer:  You make a good point re. our failed responsibility as members to hold leaders accountable.  As to the Churches Of Asia:  There was one church, Laodicea, that the Lord had nothing good to say about; and to me the Assm. fits that bill.  God was trying to convince Laodicea to make an honest assessment of their gathering, and for former members who are in denial of what the Assm. was this is still of utmost importance.

You will also notice that God found great value in Laodicea or He wouldn't even have bothered to try and recover them in the first place. Ultimately though, it is God's loving pursuit of us (wherever we are) that is "the good" that we need to see in whatever we go through.

It was the earnest and sincere believers in God, vs. outreach techniques, that were "the good" that we can highly value from our Assm. experience because this is what God values too.  When one goes looking for the "good" it is best to look to a place where that most likely can be found, and for me, rummaging through the Assembly toxic waste dump is not the best place to search (in the words of Forrest Gump: "sometimes there just ain't enough rocks-----!")  The "good" is injured former members finding healing and life in the true Gospel of the grace of God!   

                                                                        God Bless,  Mark C. 

I agree with that, but I don't think I made a point about that. Did I?

Sometimes, there are undocumented features, within the kingdom of high-speed, interconnectivity, wherein translation amplifies into paraphrase.

These are never-ending, cascading benefits of the Al Gore invention.

It took me about two minutes to actually answer this question in posts below.  It took others weeks to discuss, explain, philosophize, theologiize why such a question should not be asked or answered.

Not my idea of efficient, high-speed. ;D

Actually Dave, I may be mistaken, but I believe Trac4yt's reference to a "paraphrase" has to do with Explorer's
question regarding a "reference" Mark made about "Leadership". Since Explorer never actually said anything about
Leadership, Mark's reply could be taken as a "paraphrase" of her comments. A paraphrase does not necessarily repeat the exact words used---but can cover the general idea with either words added or extracted. If that isn't what Trac4yt meant, I stand corrected.

<ring!, ring!> "Hello?  Oh Hi Pete! What's that? You've got a question you want to ask, but your afraid it might take quite a while to find an answer? It might take weeks to discuss, philosophize and theologize before you could come to a valid explanation? Oh--that's a shame! Oh, wait a minute! I know this guy named Dave from the Bulletin Board--let me call him and see if he has two minutes.   Yeah--just two minutes. No, really, just two minutes. Oh I know, normally it could take weeks, but this guy is amazing!! Let me post your question on the Bulletin Board, give him a call, and we should have an answer within minutes.  I'll call you right back". ;D ;D

Just kidding with you Dave-----One thing I DID learn in the Assembly (I'm not sure if it's really good or not) is sarcasm.  ;D

I suspect that comment was aimed at me.

Mark, you just can’t seem to get past the “assembly.”

Let me explain something to you. Never in those posts did I say anything about the goodness of the assembly system. But because something good may have come from the assembly you and Joe can’t stomach that.

I made a simple comment that I learned a discipline in the assembly that I doubt I would have gained outside the assembly. It’s like an athlete training. They will do better when a coach is pushing them as opposed to training on their own. I’ve had some experience with that as well. That has nothing to do with whether the coach is good or bad. It has to do with someone pushing you to do things you may not otherwise do.

Now Joe took my comment and made these statements about mormons and jws and how they are disciplined to study and its all for naught. So? Does that mean because they are lost students of the Bible we might as well all throw in the towel? Well I’ll tell you, I’m not. My God is bigger than that. I believe He is able to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. So I am going to trust Him for that. I am thankful that He used the assembly to push me. I would be just as thankful if He had used some other means but He didn’t.

Now back to the assembly. The assembly was neither good nor bad in the same way Calvary Chapel is neither good nor bad. These are vehicles that God uses for the brief period of time we are on this earth to affect our lives, that is if you believe God is at work in ones life. Some may find the experience of it less palatable than others but that does not make things good or bad. Life’s experiences are that way. I love watching football, my wife can’t stand it, does that make football good or bad?

Some people got saved in the assembly. Was the assembly good or bad? Some people joined a fraternity of friends they never had before. Was the assembly good or bad? Folks, it had nothing to do with the assembly. It had to do with God at work, if you believe that sort of thing.

“But the assembly taught heresy.” To the scholar that is a significant issue. To the guy who is going through bankruptcy and divorce, the simple knowledge that Christ died on the cross for his sins and that “as many as received Him to them He gave the right to be called son’s of God,” the other stuff may not be so important. As Paul says, “I determined to know nothing among you save Jesus Christ and Him crucified.”

I remember when the burden of sin was lifted off my back. It matter not to me about some speaking in tongues, some saying you can lose your salvation, some saying you must be baptized to be truly saved. I was just weeping for joy over the reality that I am now saved, saved, saved….I’m on my way to heaven.

“There were bad people in the assembly.” You can list a number of high profile Christian  leaders who have been involved in immorality, money fraud, drugs. Does that make their congregation bad? Does that make other leaders bad?

Some want to say the assembly was this evil entity that had only diabolical intents toward the members. Some will say the assembly was the best thing that ever happened to them. The fact of the matter is, the assembly is over. Its time to move on to what God has in His plan for us.

I check in here every 6 months or so, just to see what’s happening. Well, nothing has changed. It’s the same old stuff. Just like political talking heads. Is there nothing else in your lives? Now, to use a bulletin board as a means to keep in touch can be a good thing. But come on people. How many more years are you going to lament over your injustices? Just some thoughts. See you in 6 months, or maybe not.

Hi Marty,

  Yes, your suspicions are correct  ;).

  As to the allegation that "I just can't get past the Assembly":  The group "The Assembly", if it existed as just an isolated group that was "neither good nor bad," should indeed just be forgotten. However, what the Assembly believed and practiced is still alive and producing great damage in the World today via many other groups just like it.  Studying it's history is necessary in order to prevent that same history from being repeated again and to help those still in these groups.  Also, there will always be those who need help in recovering from their injuries. 

  The curse of spiritual abuse finds it's roots in human nature, and like the Stanford experiment demonstrates, easily escalates into a very ugly thing.  There are specific things to evaluate about a church that will indicate whether they are "good or evil."

  I, and others, have mentioned The 7 Churches of Asia from Rev. re. this topic and that God did indeed evaluate these churches; clearly his evaluation was a moral and spiritual one.  In other words, God cared what they taught and how they behaved as a group, not just as an individual believer in that organization.  These facts seem to fly in the face of the arguments in your last post that see a church as an inanimate object ("vehicles") and theological truth as impractical in nature (not touching our real lives).   

  The Assembly, however, was not an inanimate object;  not only was it theologically in error, it also practiced evil.  If we can't, or refuse to acknowledge this fact, then we as individuals have a moral problem.  If we participate in that group and have no problem with how others around us are treated---as long as I personally am benefiting from my involvement ( as in your experience of learning discipline Marty) then "how dwells the love of God in you?"

  This is part of the problem I have with asking the question re. "what good things did I learn, etc."  Let's say we ask this question of someone like Judy Geftakys.  And if she declines to respond should we come back to her with, "I feel sorry for you because you can't remember one good thing!"   

  If a former member wants to remember something good from their Assembly past--- fine, but don't insist that others must try to wade back into what was a horror for them and find "the good."  It is probably best for some to try and find the good they never really knew in a wholly new location: apart from any of their former Assembly associations.  In that sense, I would agree with you Marty that we must leave the Assembly behind--- and indeed I do.

  The one reason I still involve myself with discussions about the Assembly is because I believe "good" can come from not only understanding the negatives, but in the discovery of a true relationship with God that becomes apparent when free from those negatives.

                                                              God Bless,  Mark C.   

   

Hello All,

It's been ages since I visited this website.  After reading many posts, I think both Marty and Mark are right.  As regards to the topic:  of course there were good things I did.

1.  In the last 1-2 years I was there I was usually assigned to go by myself on outreaches.  I led a number of people to Christ and invited them only to other Bible believing churches.  I even discipled some secretly until someone from that church took over.  (The leadership never found out to my knowledge.)  I usually had church invitations from 2-3 different churches in my Bible pouch.  Although I was disgusted with the assembly at the time, I still thought it could change.

2.  The week before I left, I presented to a number of people in the assembly that I was leaving and why from a scriptural standpoint.

3.  The night I left, I met with the leadership and others.  I presented the truth and although they did not want to open their bibles, they heard it.  Even though I was "condemned to wander in outer darkness for all eternity as a disembodied spirit for leaving", God has opened my eyes and heart to experience His grace and truth and liberty we have in Christ.

God bless,

Eric

Hi Eric!

   Great to hear from you again and to have your contribution here!

  I suppose there is no way to really settle the dispute between Marty's view and mine because there are such strong emotions on either side.  I see the Assembly as an organization rooted in a kind of evil that is the worse kind of evil possible: where God and His word are misused as a means of abusive control.  God is good and His word is good, so one could say that there was "good" there to be found, and most certainly there were many individual members who sincerely intended to only do what was right.  I think Marty sees things as stated in the latter part of the above.

  Here's an example of what I'm trying to say in my argument re. this whole issue:

  At the end of WW2 Eisenhower thought that it was important to bring the local Germans to the death camps to see for themselves what had happened there.  Why?  He was afraid that it would be too easy to quickly forget what happened and that Germans (as well as the whole world) might try to deny that these evil events ever really happened.  I would say that Eisenhower's efforts paid great dividends for "good" in German society as a result. 

   The Germans who were forced to look had to face the horrifying fact that their passivity allowed Nazism to rise, even though they never supported such evil as the camps.  These Germans knew that evil was going on, but feared the personal cost of opposing it.  Sitting down after the War with these Germans who were personally against this evil, but passive in their opposition, and asking them: "what good things did you do while you were in Nazi Germany?" would not be the appropriate question to ask.

  Some of these Germans were probably good folks who hated much of what they saw going on in Germany at that time, but they probably were unwilling to consider just how evil this country had become.  Then, there were those who participated as abusers and for the salvation of these souls it was absolutely necessary for them to understand, confess, and repent of their participation. 

  Some will object to using Nazi Germany as being in any way analogous to the Assembly, but the moral principles are the same.  Also, the means of recovery from participation in any kind of evil must follow the same kind of path.

  The test that can be applied to whether or not my contention above is valid is to ask yourself, as a former member, the following question:   

 How do I respond to the "testimonies" of former members like, Judy Geftakys, Flora, Kristen, etc.?

1.) Do I tend to deny the veracity of their stories, or see them as only isolated events that have nothing to do with the Assembly as a group?

2.) Do I view my past in the group as not really being a participant in a group that did great evil?  One way to answer this question this way would be to say that, "I saw bad things but didn't agree with them." (The problem with this was that you were passive in the face of the wrong, as were the Germans. These Germans just couldn't believe that these horrible things had happened and had to be forced to come and look).

3.) Do you have no feelings of having wronged people by either your active or passive participation in the group? 

     I could add some questions to these, but the main idea is whether or not your heart is sensitive or hard when considering some of the bad things that went on in the group.

                                                     God Bless,  Mark C.

Personally, I doubt if all that is implied in the simple question that was originally asked.

How this all started is Tom said
1.  I am involved in a church plant.
2.  We would like to use ideas in this church plant.
3.  Any idea that you may have picked up in the Assembly that we could use?

It was a simple straight-forward question that I answered in two minutes without feeling that I was betraying those who suffered or looking at the Assembly in rose colored glasses or with any kind of emotion really. 

If someone asked me the same question about the Mormon church, I would talk about their radio and TV ads as good ideas without feeling the need to relate the question somehow to the history of Nazi Germany.

The strong responses is not about the question itself but the strong emotions people have about their cherished views they forged in the fires of recovery from the Assembly.  This is not a light thing.  We undercomers came out as a confused and hurting lot and it took lots of time, energy, and thinking to turn our world up right again. 

To me, this conversation is like a parent driving along with his son and asked casually, "Isn't that a lovely church steeple?"  The son whips around in anger and screams at the parent, "STOP SHOVING RELIGION DOWN MY THROAT!!!!" 

The problem is clearly not with the question but something going on under the surface.

From a link to Lee I..


Assuming your "churches" were churches that lasted
approximately 30 years at 4 meetings per week...

1) People chose to go to 6,240 meetings.  Followed Christ, 10,950 days.
2) People believing the essentials = 80-100%
3) People with variable views on the non-essentials = 80-100%
4) People praying for other people, weekly.  God hears, answers, remembers.
5) People learned a lot.
6) People reached out a lot.

It would seem a couple of things would be picked up along the way.

Dave---  you stated: (this is your take on Tom's original question):

"Personally, I doubt if all that is implied in the simple question that was originally asked.

How this all started is Tom said:
1.  I am involved in a church plant.
2.  We would like to use ideas in this church plant.
3.  Any idea that you may have picked up in the Assembly that we could use?

It was a simple straight-forward question that I answered in two minutes ... "

That would be great if that was what Tom "actually said" but it wasn't. Not trying to be "nit-picky" here--just
stating the case. If you feel it was "implied" in Tom's question, fine. But the question at the end of Tom's post is really quite open-ended--"what good things did you learn" could apply to almost anything.


The original post was not asking for ideas--it stated something "learned in the Assembly", and then asked "what was your experience--what good did you learn?

Original Post:
Folks,

Many have discussed the pain and suffering aspects of their assembly experience.  Some have spoken of problems that followed them out.

Tomorrow night I will attend a planning meeting for a church plant that I am currently involved in.  I will be sharing some ideas about outreach.

Guess where I learned them?  That's right, in the Assembly. 

It will be interesting to see what "normal" Christians think of these ideas.  Of course, I will remove elements that I now see as weird or counterproductive.

This will be interesting.

How about your own experience.  What good things did you learn?

Tom Maddux

Tom was not asking for "ideas" to use for his "church plant"(as you state #3). He is stating that he learned some things he is going to use, and is interested in seeing how those people react to his ideas. He then asks in a general manner: "How about your experience. What good things did you learn?" This is not a question regarding giving him ideas, this is a general question about what "good things" we learned in the Assembly. Your two minute
answer may have satisfied you, in that whatever you learned you felt was "good" for you. This is very subjective---but objectively, this question could take quite some time to answer: What do you mean by "good"? Good that came from a negative? Good that came from a positive?  Is it really an objective question at all?Sorry, but a very short answer just ain't gonna cut it when trying to answer a general question like that. Again, your short answer my satisfy your interpretation of what is meant by "good", and your take on Tom's original post, but it won't satisfy all, especially when you go back and carefully read what the post really asked. Unfortunately, a "subjective" question was asked: "what was your experience", which is hard to determine in
an objective manner when you consider all of the variables.

Also note how Tom's post started--I think this is important also towards seeing how some interpret his "question".  He proceeds from "problems" others experienced that "followed them out", then goes on to tell about what he feels was a "positive" lesson in his case---all well and good, but as Mark has suggested, some (such as abused wives) will not see the "good" that was "learned" by him in quite the same way, or from you in your simplified manner.

The very question, and the way it was asked will lead to disagreement. Naturally it will---and that's a "good" thing actually!! We don't all have to fall into line with some pat answer that makes everyone happy. I admit, I overreacted due to the post of someone obviously defending the system, and then speaking in a condescending manner towards me. I will not retread all of that ground. I just believe it is not all as simple as you are trying to make it sound in your post. Didn't mean to go off Thread subject with long post, but felt I needed to respond to your post, because it held incorrect information.

An addition:

By the way I am very surprised at this statement you made:

If someone asked me the same question about the Mormon church, I would talk about their radio and TV ads as good ideas without feeling the need to relate the question somehow to the history of Nazi Germany.

I realize that you mean the radio and TV ads as used by Mormons are a good concept, but I have
A question Dave---when speaking to that "someone" about the Mormon church, mentioning the "good ideas" they have concerning radio and TV ads, would you also mention that they are completely deceptive ads, and designed to lead one into a cult? Because that is the real truth.  These innocent good "ideas" from the Mormon Chuch orginate from evil and lead to evil, no matter how much of a  "good idea" they may appear to be. And that was the whole basis of the counter-argument being given concerning the "good" learned in the Assembly in other posts. Can one speak of the "good ideas" or the "good thing learned" without also mentioning the deception/ deceptive place where these ideas originated? Can we learn "good things" from Mormons without also mentioning that it is "evil" that has produced that very church?  Can we mention the good things we learned in the Assembly without also mentioning what type of group it really was? That has been my whole argument.

Tracy (I'm going to give you a real name  ;)) and Dave,

  Tracy your accounting system only lists positives.  If you want to develop a true picture of the real net value of the Assembly you will have to add in the negatives.  It is apparent you were not a member of the group and so are unaware of certain negatives. When you give values that suggest that all hours spent in flipping to many bible verses equals "following Christ", you are making a huge assumption.

  When we punch in the negative numbers we have to assign values to these--- How many points do we give to wife beating, child molestation, those driven away from faith in Christ and to suicide for not being able to live up to the "holy calling", etc.? For instance, is one wife beating equal to one hour of "following Christ" in the meetings?

 Dave, I admit that this is a highly charged emotional issue for many and causes reactions to Tom's question that seem to be unreasonable.  To understand why this is I will take your Father and Son driving by the church illustration and add some things to it.

  Dad drives by church with son inside and points to the church and the son reacts violently demanding that his father not shove religion down his throat.  Then the Dad asks, "why did you react like that Son?  After all, it was just a simple pointing out of a church."  "Well, Dad, I never told you but I was molested by the pastor of that church when I went to VBS as a child."  "Well son", the Dad answers, "I went to that church and the pastor never molested me and I had a great time reading the bible there and following Christ.  Can't you just please try and get something positive out your church experience by remembering all the Sunday school lessons that you learned?"

  Some former members are like the Dad and some are like the Son.  A dismissal of the injury and pain of those like the Son because of ones own positive experiences is myopic in nature and really is immoral.  So, you are right Dave, there are many things going on under the surface that don't appear here.

                                                                            God Bless,  Mark C.

  

My calc = every day by faith...not a calc by reading volume
..Morning, afternoon, evening, job, meals, etc.

(trials factored in) :)

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


Was wife beating taught there?


Were all your leaders taught to molest there?

Tracy,

  "Was wife beating taught in the Assembly?"  (Tracy's question in the last post).

  I think you must be kidding with me, but I'll go ahead and answer your question as if it was posed sincerely.  The Assm. was a closed in community that didn't operate like a regular church.  Many of us lived in homes together and all areas of our lives were monitored and controlled.  The "teaching" that was the most damaging was not that which was received from the pulpit. 

  There are different ways to "teach" something: one is by spoken/written instruction, and the other is by example.  Every committed member knew the message behind the message because we knew how things really operated.  It was this instruction that was the most powerful and really represented the Assembly experience.

  Re. the "wife abuse" situation, for instance:  Betty Geftakys blamed Judy G. because David G. kept beating her up!  Obviously Betty wasn't teaching that Assm. husbands should beat their wives, only that if it happens it is because the wife is not properly submitting to her husband and thus causing the husband to beat her to a pulp!  Many different leaders were aware of this abusive situation and nothing was done to bring it to a halt!  Indeed, it was excused, covered up, and Dave enjoyed a position of leadership in the Assembly (along with many other special favors).  What's the lesson to be learned there?

  There were "wife training" meetings instituted to teach the wife how to "submit" and to learn to do so in silence.  Wives "usurping the authority" of the husband was seen as a big problem as some of these women were considered "rebellious" in their allegiance to the group.  By instructing that the first priority of faithfulness to God was mindless subjection and fidelity to the Leaders we were brought into a different kind of ethic that clearly was cultic.  It was called "biblical", but the truth was twisted in Assembly practices.  Now, if you attended a meeting you might hear taught "Wives, submit to you husband-----" and you would miss the "deeper meaning", but our other instruction provided us with the real interpretation of the teaching here.

  Another example: A child was molested by a very loyal brother to the group.  When this was discovered the leaders excused the behavior and applied absolutely no discipline toward the offender!  Why?  I was told by one leading brother, "anyone of us could have done this too, and the brother has already confessed his sin to God"!  When I asked, "what about the little girl?" I was told "the family has left fellowship."  I got the secret teaching here which was the central moral precept of the group: those that leave are worthless and only committed members have any value at all.  The brother continued on with the group as if nothing had happened at all!

  I could go on and on with example after example of just this kind of "teaching" and if anyone can't see how pervasive and evil this instruction was in this group--- well, then I'm "sorry for you" (to quote another post).

  I would recommend that you visit the Assembly Reflections site and read the many articles and testimonies that explain how this cultic organization really functioned for a better understanding(that is, if you aren't just pulling my leg here).

                                                              God Bless,  Mark C.

So, a "leader" was not teaching this.
Assumed, is other leaders were not beating their wives.
Assumed, is other leaders were not teaching church husbands to beat their wives.
Assumed, is other leaders were not instructing single men to beat their wives if they should marry.

Assumed, the wife beaten was involved 30, or so, years with her leader husband in your churches?  Did she or he want help?

Unique situation?
 :)

From m.c...

What might have been your course of action?
Would your leaders agree with you?
Why or why not?
 :)

Perhaps, to Tom and all..

Extract every possible lesson learned, good instruction, good method, etc. and apply it in your next course of action.  Leverage it for the Master's glory.

God taught you much through it all.  And He's not done.

Just simply leave out everything God doesn't want.


 :)

Tracy,

 Re. the "teaching of wife beating":  No, it was not an isolated event, though the best example, because Betty Geftakys was the wife of George Geftakys the founder and leader of the group.  GG and Betty knew about it, and yes Judy early, often, and desperately sought help from the leaders only to have the issue turned back upon herself!

 Again, instruction from leaders does not have to be a direct order like, "thou shalt beat thine wife."  David G. was instructed, via Betty making Judy the reason for David's rage, so that he himself was not responsible for controlling his anger.  The dysfunctional culture of the Assembly was based on "God's govt." ruling over the members.  We were taught from the pulpit, and otherwise, that we were to submit to the leaders as God's men and to do so even if they were wrong.  If we dared to challenge we were marked out as rebels---- and if we did not submit we would be forced out!  This instruction was also given re. the marriage relationship, except that the "rebellious wife" was not forced out---- indeed, she had nowhere to go.

  For a wife going along with the program and loyal to the group her experiences would be tolerable.  For a wife who dared to publicly question the teaching or practices of the group her husband would get a good talking to urging him to "have the power over your wife brother." (This was told to me, btw, and then spread all through the group that my wife was negative and not in submission to me.  Tom will remember this).  Though I did not beat my wife as a result of the above kind of instruction, I did try to intimidate her via declaring the "promises" of God re. those who refuse to obey authority! :'(  Something in me prevented me from taking it any further (physical violence) but sometimes emotional violence can be just as destructive.  Especially, when you start to bring in God's word as a justification for what you're doing.

  Your questions take on a kind of legal narrowness where you almost become obtuse as to what is really right or wrong here.  As demonstrated in your next question.

 Re. the child abuse and what I would advise the leaders to have done. 

 1.) Don't make excuses for the sin, ignore it, and sweep it under the rug.

 2.) Bring the brother into the leading bros. meeting and talk with him.

 3.) Place him under church discipline where he is not allowed to partake, take away his leadership duties in any ministries he may be involved with.

 4.) Have him write an apology letter to the parents and the child where he begs their forgiveness.

 5.) Place him in a treatment program for pedophiles. (those with these kind of problems usually need some specialized help).

                                                    God Bless,  Mark C.

       

mc,

Did this D. and J. ever display affection over many years?

I assume they displayed some kind of Christian service together that others would notice.  Surely a lot of good that they both did to help others.

The wife got beat up for many, many years?  Daily?
Did she ever consider it non-Biblical when the first punch was thrown?

If she talked to leaders, did they tell her to actually take more punches?
I would assume fellow leaders would want to see both helped.
You're saying they didn't?

Why did she insist it stop after so many years?
Was there a new relationship and, perhaps, assets/legal strategy difficulties became part of it?

It sounds like this was one isolated couple.

If there were hundreds or thousands of church members, surely they weren't behaving the same way were they?

I would assume many husbands would have "return-fire-response" from their wives and incur some battle scars to show from it.  :o

It still seems much can be "harvested" from your church experience and applied to the next church involvements.
 :)

from m.c...


Sounds like a management decision of which you had no part in.

Sounds like it can get complicated.

Lots of churches have a lot of difficult cases to work through.

Was it taught policy to deal with such a problem this way through
all your churches?

Would there be improvement/better solution the next time?

Again, seems as though much good can be leveraged from your churches, into new churches, through so much that went on over so many years.

 :)

Tracy,

 Now I know that you are pulling my leg!  You sound like a defense attorney trying to find explanations for getting a guilty client (in this case abusive churches/cults) off!

  There is nothing complicated or difficult at all with dealing with someone admitting they committed child abuse---- what would you have done?  Would you be confused as to what course to take?  Would you have excused the behavior, covered it up, and left this victim without even an apology?  Of course not! But for some reason you feel the need to defend those who have demonstrated this kind of evil.

  Re. the verse you shared: "forgetting those things that are past."  This verse has often been pulled out of context to mean that victims of unrepentant evildoers should just forget what was done to them and not hold their abusers accountable.  This allows these false religionists to carry on with their antics into the new places they will go---- sharing another kind of harvest.  Paul did not mean by that verse to stand passive in the face of those who have a history of evil and refuse to repent of it.

  As to your list of questions re. Judy:  Again, the list reads like a version of the OJ defense where we know where the guilt lies, but the main intention is to try and explain away the facts in an effort to subvert justice!  You can read her story for yourself on the Assembly Reflections site and see exactly how it happened, and also read many others who experienced other kinds of abuse.  I urge you to educate yourself about what really went on there.

                                                           God Bless,  Mark C. 

 

For Tom's original point, I'd repeat...

"Again, seems as though much good can be leveraged from your churches, into new churches, through so much that went on over so many years."

Extract all the good things learned and apply where ever you go.


 :)

Y'know,

After reading Trac4yt's posts minimizing and dismissing the bad aspects of the assembly culture and the behavior of leaders, I am reminded of a poster from the past named FrankRuthAffirmingSondraandawholebunchofothernames.

Could this possibly be the 10th coming?   ;)

Tom Maddux

First Technician: "Geftakavision activated".
2nd Technician: "Check!"
First Technician: "Geftakablinders on. Tunnel Vision fine-tuned".
2nd Technician: "Check!"
First Technician: "Run AC2114 voice sequence test"
2nd Technician: "Beginning AC2114 voice sequence test".

AC2114: "The Ass...sss...em-b-b-bly wa-wa-sn't s-ss-so-o  b-b-b-b-aaa-d".

2nd Technician: "AC2114 voice sequence failure. Stutter detected. Hey Boss, by da way,
what's an AC2114 anyways?"
First Technician: "Assembly Clone #2114, you nitwit..we've been working on them for years now!"
2nd Technician: "Oh, dats right. I forgot. Sorry boss.  Voice sequence repair--vocals unified. Beginning
second attempt, vocal sequence on my mark---go."

AC2114: "Abuse, what abuse? It must have been very isolated. Wife beating? It could all be
hearsay. Let it all go. Take what are good experiences and forget the bad. Why are you all so bitter?"

2nd Technician: "Hey boss, dis "AC2114 Trac4yt Geftakaclone" sounds exactly like the "AC2112 Frankgeftakaclone"
and the "AC2113 Ruthgeftakaclone" we woiked on foist. Why do they all sound the same boss?"

First Techincian: "Because they're clones you nitwit! They're designed that way. It happens during the "assembly" process. Now get the headcovering, this one's ready for action".

2nd Technician: "Head covering in place Boss. AC2114 vertical and ready for release. During "assembly" huh?

Yikes!
Sounds like pentecostal* reverbs into in-house lingo.
 :o

--------------
* a non-cessationist axiom is assumed.

Tracy,

  I am blessed with the gift of interpretation ( ;)) and will explain to you what Joe and Tom are saying.

In the past there have been clandestine (they hide their names behind pseudonyms. One in particular, who has assumed different names that Joe mentions in his clone post  8)) Assembly defenders who refuse to accept any negative evidence re. Assembly conduct.

This poster, and others like them, are like holocaust deniers.  They have an agenda that drives them to attempt to take clear cut evil that has a victim and turn the tables where the victim is actually to blame.  Your postings re. Judy G. and the child abuse issue seem to follow this same kind of attempt to explain away the culpability of the offenders and place doubt on the claims of those violated.

They also use many of the same verses that you have used to justify their agenda; pulling them out of the context as a means to lead folks down the logical maze to their conclusion----ie, "there was no abuse and your experiences are all imagined---- just forget it and live for Christ."

When you post thoughts like you have it is like rubbing salt in the wounds of these victims--- why?  because you are basically saying that the hurt person most likely is making more of it than it was, and "if it did happen they probably caused it by their own actions."  This would be similar to Betty G.'s advice to Judy.

Another aspect of this kind of poster is that though there is a great deal of material available at www.geftakysassembly.com that documents a pervasive history of abusive leadership and deep seated cultic activity in these churches they, like the holocaust denier, will never consider these facts. 

If you are just an innocent poster who has no agenda, who happens to be visiting this site, I hope my explanation is helpful.  If you are not, you will be easily outed and your agenda will fail.

                                                               God Bless, Mark C. 

 

m.c.

Wow...oooookkkk
 :)

Tracy,

  Would you mind answering some questions for me?  First, is Tracy you real name, or if it is not would it bother you to share it?

 Can you tell me something of your background (just general info. re. your church affiliation, and what your Christian experiences have been)?

 How did you find your way to this particular BB and why do you find it interesting?

Have you had any previous dealings with cults or abusive churches?  If so, how were you involved?

Has the church you presently attend have/had problems like you hear discussed on this BB?

                                                                        God Bless,  Mark C.

 Dear Friends,

  It doesn't appear that Tracy will answer the questions I posed.  That's too bad because I think it would be interesting to find out where he/she was coming from. 

   These kind of challenges that Tracy raised are good, because it makes us think, but I like to know if the challenger is more than just acting as an advocate for the Devil, or a real live representative of the same  ;).

  I remember being on another BB in years past that addressed mostly cults.  They got into the real heavies--- you know the clear cut cults like the Branch Davidians, Heaven's Gate, etc.  Cult leaders sometimes would get on these BB's; and boy were they slick!

 I had an online discussion, so to speak, with the heir apparent to The Branch Davidians (this was after Waco and the demise of the former leader David Koresch).  However, he never would address my questions in his answers and instead would start in on giving me a message from scripture.  Nothing in what he said sounded dangerous---- in fact he sounded very biblical and mild---- however, he would not only never concede my point, he never would actually address it.  He would kind of slide off into his agenda.

  There was another guy, from I think The Potters House group (there's all kinds of groups with this name, so I'm not saying all of them are like this guy I talked with).  This guy would never consider any negative evaluation of what he taught or practiced.  If you challenged him you were attacking "God's Servant" (where have we heard that before).  He was particularly gifted at invoking passages that urged me to emphasize the good, while also warning what happens to those that "dwell on the negative."  In other words, he could subtly turn the tables and make the issue your "negative spirit" vs.  problems with what he taught and practiced.

  These kind of people above, if you wouldn't give into the guilt trip that they would try and place on you,  would just stomp off in anger and leave the BB with a loud denunciation, or some just would leave, figuring their magic wasn't working.  When all is said and done, they are not interested in honest give and take discussion because their interest is in trying to blur clear lines of distinction between good and evil re. their particular group.  Their groups are "all about the bible, prayer, outreach, living holy--- and isn't that good?!"  "Why do you bother to ask about the character of our leaders, how we treat the members, or those not in the group, etc." 

  Tracy's "assumptions" re. our Assm. experiences demonstrate this tactic:

 1.) 30 years of meetings, 4 times a week= 6,240.
 2.) Followed Christ 2,950 days.
 3.) People believing the essentials 80%-100% of the time.
 4.) People praying for other people.
 5.) People learned a lot.
 6.) People reached out a lot.

  It would seem a couple of things would be picked up along the way.

  All good stuff!  I mean, except for possibly 20%, but since we were all following Christ that 20% of non-essentials probably was really closer to 1 %---- and at that, it's just a non-essential, and not a big deal anyway! ::)

  If what Tracy assumes above is correct then every bible based cult or abusive church that ever existed, or will exist, brings great pleasure to God.  Why?  because each one of them can meet the above requirement as listed, and in spades!

  What is essential in a God pleasing church?  Not the public religious performance, or being able to recite 80%-100% of correct dogma!  What is essential, and what was largely lacking in the group, was an expression of the love of God.  Allowing wife beaters and child abusers to flourish unpunished in your group is essentially evil!  Using your place of leadership in the church to meet your own sinful needs for power, wealth, sex, etc. is also 100% evil!

  Obviously, the bible, prayer, outreach, etc. is something that can be used for good--- but to make it actually "good" the heart has to be right with God.  Without this all of Tracy's list, at best, is nothing more than a clanging bell, and at worst can be used as a whip to intimidate and manipulate God's little ones.

    Did we learn a few good things from that past experience?  Yep---- not everyone that comes quoting the bible, urging us to "seek the high calling of God in Christ Jesus," has God's or our best interests in mind.  I also know now that the practice of believers is just as essential as is their statement of faith, and that those that minimize this do so for a reason. 

                                                                    God Bless,  Mark C.         

from mc:


Since wife beaters were allowed to "flourish unpunished"..

Did D., the wife beater, teach your church to beat their wives?
Did leaders tell D. to keep beating his wife?
Did J. insist with D. to not beat her early on?
How many wife beaters did your church have?
If D. beat his wife, did it make your church evil for 30 years?

from mc:

How did hundreds or thousands make, "the heart..right with God" when they did all of these things?  When you talked to someone about Christ, did the Word not have power for 30 years?

Did God block their prayers and service for 30 years?
If someone prayed for you in the 30 years, was that blocked by God?

Leverage all your learning for your Master's glory.
Your mentors borrowed from their mentors who borrowed from their mentors.

Leverage good mentoring and take it everywhere.

 :)

P.S.  Sure sounds like Lee I. took heed, a link provided by a Margaret.  Sounds like an ace!




P.P.S.

from mc:

Was this your calc?

..and now a break for the weather..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu9MGgjooHw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu9MGgjooHw)

 ;)

Always get up again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXXm696UbKY&mode=related&search= (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXXm696UbKY&mode=related&search=)

 Tracy,

  I don't see why I have to answer your questions if you won't answer mine------ What are you trying to hide?

But, for the benefit of others I will attempt again to point out the flaws in you basic presuppositions:

1.)Yes "D. the wife beater" did teach the church to beat their wives.  How?

 By example, which is the very best means of instruction available.

   2.) Yes, Leaders did tell D. to keep beating his wife?  How so?
 
 An example might be helpful here.  Suppose a police man from Birmingham Alabama in the 1950's was standing on a corner while a black woman was being beaten by white racists.  This policeman never told the whites' to beat the woman, yet he stands passively by ignoring the situation.  After the abusers leave the policeman comes over to the black woman and tells her, "you know it was really your fault because you tried to go into the lunch counter and eat with the white folks."  Federal investigators get involved and the policeman denies the incident is really happening and blames the black woman for inciting the attack.  This is precisely the nature of the Assembly's handling of the situation and it is patently evil.

   3.) "Did J. insist that D. not beat her early on?"  ::) This question is absurd!  What possible difference could this have made?!  D. also beat his children (Rachel's story at the Reflections site) and the Assembly child training instruction taught the use of extreme corporal punishment.  If a child doesn't insist that an abuser stop is it then okay for the abuse to continue?  Not only is this question foolish it demonstrates a moral insensitivity that is contra the heart of God!

  4.) As to "how many wife beaters did our group have?":  Much of the private activity within a cult is hidden, and not many polls are taken, so an exact number would be impossible to provide.  I have already answered this question (which you have refused to respond to) by sharing a story from my own past in the group.  Please try to get the point this time that it was the system of spiritual and emotional abuse established by the leaders that caused this "evil to flouish."  I left before the Assembly started "the wife training meetings", where husbands were instructed to subdue and control their wives.  Possibly some others could offer some insight as to what was "taught" in these gatherings.

    To understand how this works please read:  "The Subtle Power Of Spiritual Abuse", by David Johnson and Jeff VanVonderan, and "Churches That Abuse" by Dr. Ronald Enroth.

     5.)What made our church evil for 30 years?  Wow! it would be impossible to answer this in one post, as there are two websites filled with reams of documentated evidence available on the topic.  You ask the question but you aren't really interested in an answer.

     I'll try another metaphor in an attempt to illustrate how a group that practices prayer, bible reading, outreach, etc.(good) can still be pronouned bad (evil) by God.  This was done by Jesus in the giving of the parable of "The Good Samaritan."  I think we're all familiar with the Gospel story where a wounded man is ignored by two religious types.  These religious types were in the 80-100 % category of being essentially correct that you mentioned in your list.  Yet, Jesus credits the heretical Samaritan with a greater understanding of God's love than these! The Pharisees had the bible, prayer, outreach, but their whole religious system was evil and supported an ethical expression that is thoroughly rejected by Christ--(see MT. 23 the entire chapter).

   6.) Did God hear our prayers in the group?  He always listens if we are indeed crying out to him (vs. praying with ourselves as in the Pharisee and publican parable).  The problem is, as in Laodicea, are we listening to his answers?!  He answered me by showing me the basic evil in the group and for me to get out post-haste!

   Absolutely we must "leverage" out learning opportunities---- however, we must learn the right lessons from that past or there is the danger we will recreate the same kind of evil in the new places where we go.

  Lee does not post here.  His comments were not an evaluation of the true character of the group or that everyone in the group was effected as he was.  He was writing re. a very narrow range of experience he had as a child in the group where he enjoyed a status as a child of the man who was 2nd in command (much different than a regular member).  At the end Lee was terribly mistreated, but in his piece he does not mention this.  Had he, it would have offered much more perspective.  If he is an "Ace" it was because he escaped an evil system and went on to grow in Christ.

  PPS---- Yes, my new calc.'s are based on the subtraction necessary when a mind may have wandered for a second or two, a mother had to take a child to the bathroom to spank him/her, etc.  ;)

                                                                                      God Bless,  Mark C.

from mc:

And mine:

Thank you very much. :)



N/A
Go with the original calc.


Don't make God so small.  :)

Tracy,

   Don't twist what I say, refuse to deal with my arguments, and make God into an endorser of evil! >:D

PS--- please answer my original questions as to your name, where you are from, etc.

 PPS--- you are not welcome!                                     

                                                                                        God Bless,  Mark C.

from mc

..Your deceptive, broad-brush smear, not mine.

May all from your churches go everywhere for the Master.

later...take care, m.c.

 :)

  No, not "a deceptive, broad-brush smear", the proper indictment of someone who suggests "The Master" would endorse your views.  You are the "deceptive" one because you are hiding your agenda, and avoiding dealing with the arguments I am making.

  You have little knowledge of what actually went on in this group (all the while refusing to educate yourself) and yet try to defend the indefensible actions of the leaders!  Why would you do such a thing?

  Yes, I smell a rat, not a true servant of The Master!

                                                                           Mark C.

                                                       

   

m.c.

If you were a leader, dump the bad stuff and the baggage, and carry the good to your church and others.

Deal with it and, "go forward".  Be enlarged.

You'll be a blessing.

You don't have much time.

Run it!

 :)

 Tracy,

    Your exhortation assumes that I am not any of the above now (going forward, enlarged).  However, tell me why I should listen to any advice you would give?  Who are you and what agenda do you represent(name, church affiliation, position in that group)?  Should I "run" with the kind of thinking that you have advised in your posts re. a situation you know little of? You said, "I don't have much time?"  Why? Are you threatening me?

  Same goes for you pal---  Be honest in your dealings (don't hide who you are and your real agenda), dump the OJ defense logic garbage, and you will be a blessing to your church and others.

  I have no idea how much time you have.

 Run It!

                                                                    Mark C.

 

m.c.



http://youtube.com/watch?v=VaQRzoJVPTA (http://youtube.com/watch?v=VaQRzoJVPTA)

May the Lord use you!

gotta go...over and out...enjoyed the dialogue.

About a year ago a Canadian television network aired a program about a Hamilton ON cult:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061027/wfive_pied_piper_061027/20061117?hub=WFive (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061027/wfive_pied_piper_061027/20061117?hub=WFive)
It is being re-aired today.  Mary Alice Chrnalogar was involved in an attempt to de-program one devotee.

More info can be found on rickross.com:
http://www.rickross.com/groups/dominioncc.html (http://www.rickross.com/groups/dominioncc.html)
The Dominion Chrisitan Center (DCC) is a hyper Pentecostal version of the assembly.
All very interesting but...

Anyway:
mc  :) I do believe that trac4y(ou)t(ube), whoever he/she is, has a point.

Matt 5:20 "For I say to you, that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Matt 23:23  "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others."

Looks like the Pharisees did do some things right eh??


I used to watch "House" and after about 10 weeks I quit. I did not enjoy the program any more.  Every episode was the same story with different patients.  House himself didn't seem to change and was stuck with the same ole issues week after week.
I check this BB daily, but it does appear that we have a case of House-itis here.

Regards,
Marcia M

Hi Marcia!

  Good to hear from you again!  We need you here to help us figure out what the secret names of posters mean  ;).  I saw the Trac and a Y and figured that the hidden name within the secret code must have been Tracy.  My wife is good with puzzles I should have asked her for help.

  I was off work all last week, and around the house, spending too much time on the computer which involved me in all the tit-for-tat with the You Tube tracker.  The verses you shared perfectly make the point that I was trying to make (another reason you should still be on the BB  :)).

  I'm afraid I let my frustration with him/her show.  You can't argue with the need to learn from the past and use the lessons as a means of blessing others, but when it's put in the context of using abusers as "mentors", and denying all the evil that went on?!

  As to the boring nature of the BB:  It is what people make of it, but good entertainment it probably will never be.  Have you read the "troubled" thread?  I thought that demonstrated the possibilities for the BB in that someone wrote in with a problem and Margaret hit the nail on the head with a good answer that really helped!  It helped me too!  I'll bet you others found some consolation in that short clear wisdom as well. And hey, we got spell check now! ;D   We also have something TV doesn't have and that is Joe Sperling  :rofl:!

                               Good to hear from you and God Bless,   Mark C.

Which is the point of the thread eh??

Despite the "evil" nature of the Geftakys system; God was still involved in our lives and we can talk of useful experiences from our past that might be useful today. (I do not read everything that's posted, and someone may have already made that point.)

And yes, trac4yt was right on.  It has been 4 1/2 years and it is good to connect with a church for worship and teaching.

Marcia

Hi Marcia,

  If what you said in your last post was what Trac4yt was saying then I would say that you have not been following this thread.  He was saying that what went on in the group was "80%-100% following Christ", and he was making excuses for the leaders covering up child abuse and wife beating, etc.

  Of course there are things we learned for good in our own individual lives with God in the group, just as we can learn from a past of being tortured in a communist prison----- I wasn't arguing with him about this.  It was his defense of the bad things the leaders did that raised my hackles.

  If we leave our Assembly experience, and are in denial as to what was really going on there, we will take to our new church experiences the same kind of failed teaching and practices. The only reason anyone has to raise the issue of "how evil the Assembly was" is because there are those that still insist on saying it was just a "wonderful church of dear Christians who got a little off track."

  Some may ask, "why is it so important to understand what was wrong with the group, after all, the group is basically history."  As Dr. Ronald Enroth has documented, within the Christian community there has always been a tendency for some to go these same directions.  Jesus warned the Disciples about abusing brethren, Paul warned the church, and deep within the human heart are the roots of this kind of behavior.

  If we ignore the negative lessons and just try to focus on the positive we really will not have learned a whole lot from out past and we also will not be able to be a blessing where we go from here.

                                                                    God Bless,  Mark C.   

Hi again Mark C,

While it is true that we have learned from our assembly experience re. legalism and Phariseeism, and that we and our leaders furthered the Geftakys agenda, we also learned to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees.  However, using the Lord Jesus as our example, He Himself was not focussed on dealing with the Pharisees, though He did respond to them appropriately when they questioned Him.  In fact they were still around when He left this earth.  His focus was on preaching the good news of the kingdom.

Our assembly experience gives us empathy for those in similar predicaments and we are able to comfort them with what God comforted us with, but not everyone we encounter will need "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees" type counselling.  And we cannot be effective counsellors if we are mono-maniacs and see everything through the lens of our assembly experience.  Hence the encouragement by trac4yt to get on with it.

On another note, has anyone read "The Shack" yet?  I've read rave reviews about it and plan to read it soon.

Marcia M

Thanks Marcia,

  You make very good points and they are well made.  However, that was not what Trac4y. was saying.  Had this anon. poster said what you said I would have said "amen" and moved on.  He/She went into an amazing bit of OJ defense where he/she attempted to fabricate a false Assembly scenario that never existed.  Though this person knew nothing about the group (and refused to access the available info.) he/she offered opinions that attempted to make Assem. leaders "followers of Christ". 

  In reading the Gospels you will find that Jesus spent a great deal of time dealing with the issue of the bad religion of the Pharisee/Sadducee (entire chap. of MT 23). Paul also spends a great deal of time with it. The whole book of Galatians is concerned with a comparison between grace and bad religion like the Assembly.  Legalism is a small part of the whole picture of the malady that these people suffered from.  In it's essence, the problem is an incorrect view of who God really is and this view becomes systematized in a cruel form of oppression that does lots of spiritual and psychological damage.

  Ex-smokers/drinkers are said to be the hardest on those still having these same practices, and no doubt those that suffered the most from these addictions will see these issues as being huge and become preachy as a result.  I possibly fall into that same category, and as such your admonition to me should be considered (and I will :)).  However, if (from my ex-smoker/drinker metaphor) someone came to the now free from addiction person and started to deny the dangers of smoking and alcoholism to them and encouraged spreading this false notion the only right and loving thing to do would be to oppose it.

 Trac.'s posts fits the above scenario of deceitful promotion of evil and the encouragement in the spread of toxic religion.  I do feel a responsibility before God to resist any such notions, and to remain passive in the face of it is to take on the same kind of tolerance of evil that I practiced in the group. Though I do not like to challenge (it ties me up in knots for days) people like this I cannot in good conscience remain silent.

                             Thanks again for your insights.  God Bless,  Mark C.   

 

In regards to “Houseitis”, I think it is because there is a poster who thinks it is so necessary to make sure that we all know that the assembly was evil, that poster thinks that anything that might remotely insinuate that there was something good that came out of the system needs to be quickly and seriously dealt with, because it is against his opinion. Well, be wise, for we know where we learned that attitude as well, even if it is exercised in a good intention.

We know that the assembly was an evil system. But we don’t need someone constantly monitoring, cutting in and always feeling like they have to add their 2 cents. That is, unless you control the board. As you can see, this is not a lone opinion.

Anyone else?

I really have to agree with the comments in the last posts. Just last week I visited the Simon Wiesenthal Center
and said the same thing.

 "Look", I said, "we all know that Nazism was a bad thing, and the Holocaust
was a horrible occurrence, but do you have to keep reminding us all the time about it? Why can't you just take the good things you learned from the experience, however bad, and move on with your lives? I mean, it's been 60 years for Pete's sake! This dude Simon Wiesenthal thinks he has to keep warning us and warning us about the evil. He even erects a center so he can continue to remind us about it! Why does Simon always feel he has to remind us how evil Nazism was? We all know it was evil, but I also know the Nazis caused the trains to run on time. That was a good thing. Why can't we just remember that? Maybe we can make the trains run on time too. You people here at this center have a bad case of what I call "Houseitis". Why can't you just get over it?" I also mentioned that much of the "abuse" in that Nazi system was most likely greatly exaggerated, and the people brought much of the abuse upon themselves.

But unfortunately, they all turned a deaf ear. They didn't want to listen to some good advice from a spiritually knowledgeable and humble person.

They didn't listen to me. They said the center was erected to remind us not to repeat the past. Yeah--sure--like this BB here was put into place to help us not repeat the past!! Yeah sure, right! They said sure, some good HAD to have come out of all of the past evil, because God always does that, but it didn't mean we should forget, or stop talking about how it all happened, and try to prevent it from ever happening again. If we forget, we might fall into complacency, begin to think what happened really wasn't all that bad, and possibly let it all happen again. What hogwash! I hate people that feel they always have to warn us about the bad stuff that happened. Why can't they just talk about good, nice and fluffy stuff--and center on the "good things" we all learned, and stop bringing up abuse and wife-beating and other negative things like that? Besides, maybe none of that ever happened anyway. Maybe it was just all a big exaggeration.  I wish all the Simon Wiesenthal whiners of the world, including the people on this BB who feel they have to talk about the bad that happened, would just go crawl into a cave somewhere and die.

Joe,

Do you really think that is what people are saying?

Well...maybe we should take a break from this controversy. I would sincerely like to hear some discussion of my original question--In spite of the evil system, were there any things you did in the Assembly that that were good and contributed to the kingdom of God? This question arises out of a consideration of the last Teen Conference material that was posted briefly on ga.com. Are there any teen counselors out here who can remember an important conversation with a teen, or a lesson that was Biblical and not just Assembly mind control, or a relationship built with a teen that helped them later, or a prayer that was answered about one of the teens.....etc., etc.? It's related to the question, what aspects of  your Assembly experience assure you that God was still working in your life? Or do we have to consider the years we spent there as exclusively a negative education?

As you might expect, I am personally wrestling with this question. So far I haven't found anything I did that wasn't tainted in some way, and yet in some cases God seemed to bring some good out of something. There was a brother who lived with us and was subject to all the pressure of our home, but I spent some time weekly with him listening to a huge personal pain he carried, praying with him, and sharing the Word. I heard several years after we left he told people that living in our home had been like a greenhouse to him. So far so good, I suppose. But the fact that we left and were "revealed" to be in darkness turned everything on it's head for him and was terribly confusing and added a new level of pain.

I am wondering how you all have evaluated your heartfelt "service for the Lord" in the Assembly.  I honestly don't know at this point. I am hoping that a discussion about this might shed some light for all of us.

Or maybe I am approaching this from an Assembly mindset and you all can set me straight!!??

Explorer----

Yes---if you read some of the posts, they are saying that----in a much milder way of course.
There are those (and generally it is those who were not exposed to very much abuse) who want
to say the abuse was "exaggerated" or didn't happen at all. Or, they will try to make what happened
to the victim the victim's own fault (such as wife-beating).

It would be similar to the guards and prisoners at Auschwitz both recalling the same events of the past. The guards could speak of the "good things they learned there", if asked, such as public speaking and organization, and would be very willing to downplay the abuse--especially because they didn't suffer much.  The prisoners on the other hand may remember "good things they learned" also, such as sharing their soup, learning to sleep through other people's snoring :), and learning far more patience, etc., etc.  but they would never let you forget that it was a bad system, a bad place, and something that should never happen again. This is because they suffered a lot.

The guards would be willing to admit in one breath that "bad things happened there", and then in the same breath they would attempt to defend the very same place, as they kind of liked it there.  I am in no means trying to equate these posters with guards at Auschwitz, but I am saying they are showing a similar trait of someone who did not suffer abuse themselves, trying to tell others who know far better what they went through, that they are "exaggerating" or somehow "brought this upon themselves". These ones think of those who knew the abuse as "whiners" and complain that these cannot "leave the past behind". They do not know the wisdom of the words "Don't judge another man until you have walked a mile in his moccasins". They are too spiritually enlightened and elevated to try to understand this.

I believe we all DID good things in the Assembly, and things the Lord accepts towards his Kingdom. Unfortunately, we were also part of a system that espoused heresy, and hurt many people. We could work for a company that is guilty of producing faulty equipment. We may have done many individually good things towards others during the time we worked there, but if we somehow "knew" something was wrong with the company, and didn't say anything or do anything, we are partly responsible for the hurt and pain the company caused towards others. Many of us have stated we "knew" something was wrong with the Assembly and yet stayed. Different than being a "prisoner", we were "willing participants", though the case can be argued that though we were there willingly, we were "prisoners" just the same, in a psychological sense. Thank the Lord he is willing to forgive all that were involved if they sincerely repent. But I sincerely do not believe that the Lord is saying one should forget, or downplay, a situation as serious and hurtful as the one that existed there. It is something we can have learned from, but something we should never minimize, or forget.

But, perhaps the best thing I ever "did" in the Assembly was to leave it.

Hi Joe,

I agree with what you are saying (have for a few years... although I think you would agree that your comparisons are a little extreme). But in your previous post, you put me as saying something different. However, your response here is what I am talking about. And that is what I am referring to as what people are saying. I am not refering to the intentions at all. But it seems that the tendency is that if there is a little bit of difference of opinion or perspective on some of these issues, the individuals are corrected or demeaned. The result of that has been the few posters that there are. People get tired of being beat down or having someone continue to come back with the truly correct perspective and then they just quit. I know I do.

Do you agree with this, or am I in left field?

No you are not in left field.  I think though, it is important to view the "tactics" of the posters that I referred to. For several months the boards were virtually free of any Assembly argument. There were references to the Assembly of course, perhaps because this is called the "assemblyboard" (LOL). But most of the posting had to do with Scripture, or topics regarding the Bible. But occasionally a discussion comes up regarding the Assembly itself. This time it was "what good things did you learn" in the Assembly? There was a little banter and good humor, and then one of these "posters" showed up.  It's amazing how quickly they show up for an "Assembly" discussion.  They always state how people on the BB just can't let the Assembly go, yet they are right there the minute there is any discussion about it---and usually to defend the Assembly in their roundabout way. They normally use other screen names (many times various names), and sometimes to the hilarity of all they will make one post under one name, and then make a second post praising the first post under another name! It's obvious the same person has made both posts! They think they're fooling everyone, but it is obvious and also very humorous! It is a  completely bungled deception, but kind of fun to watch as they put it into action! I have gotten many laughs out of it, and enjoy watching it all take place. It's kind of "old hat" now--same comments, same sentiments, same defense. Then, when the argument is over, and the cutting remarks are in, they are gone until the next "assembly argument" takes place.

Explorer--You are correct--my comparisons are extreme. But the traits in the people I am talking about are the same in my opinion. As far as I remember you haven't been beaten down when posting here, have you? If you have, I want to apologize for everyone for that. I don't detect an "agenda" in your posts at all. Sometimes there can be heated disagreements on the board, and in my opinion that's a good thing. No one should feel they have to leave because someone is trying to "set them straight". That's what an argument is really all about in many ways. I often have to set myself straight. That's because I am a schizophrenic. But I would be very interested in hearing what good thing you DID in the Assembly. Hope you don't feel you have to quit before you get a chance to share your ideas. I would be interested in hearing what you have to share.

Hi Margaret,

Some things come to mind. we had an outreach to a retirement home. We went there and regularly  visited one elderly woman. that was one good thing that I did. It wasnt a waste.

Thanks for starting this thread.

 

godwined!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

i do think you guys are being too hard on people here. the rest of the bb lays out the negatives in no uncertain terms. this space is for us to talk about the positives. so lets not use it to debate whether or not there were positives, or qualify all the positives, etc. rather, if you have something positive that comes to mind from your time in the assembly, feel free to drop it in here.

having said that, does anyone want me to try and chop all the other discussions into a new thread?

brian

Brian----

Never heard that law before. But I think it is true  :) Probably because it is the one of the
world's worst examples of deterioration into man's inhumanity to man.

My apologies for having a negative attitude---I remove myself from the conversation,
and admit I was wrong in my approach.

--Joe

On October 15th, Margaret asked: “What aspects of  your Assembly experience assure you that God was still working in your life? Or do we have to consider the years we spent there as exclusively a negative education? … I am wondering how you all have evaluated your heartfelt "service for the Lord" in the Assembly.  I honestly don't know at this point. I am hoping that a discussion about this might shed some light for all of us.”

In response, I want to list a few of the many things that I learned, implemented, and took away with me when I left.

1) Some advice I got from both George and Betty on separate occasions was this: “As Christians that want to please our Saviour, we need to learn to respond to an ungodly thing (word, behaviour, situation, etc,) in a godly way”.

In the midst of oppression, and emotional abuse, I learned to pray, “Lord, help me keep my emotions under Your control; and teach me how to respond to this situation in a way that honours You.” This is still my prayer, today, when I find myself faced with an ungodly situation.

2) During one of the times of intense oppression, I really had to fight hate. I knew God’s way was love, so I poured out my soul to Him. As I spent time in prayer, God opened my eyes of understanding to His love at Calvary. As they were crucifying our Saviour, we never read that they had to pry His fingers open, so that they could put the nails in His hands. In love, He willingly opened His hands to receive the nails of Calvary. In the face of hate, He showed love – both His hands and His heart were open in love to those who hated Him. I prayed: “Lord, teach me to keep my heart open in love, no matter how I’m treated. Help me to never harden my heart against others.” In John, we are reminded that they will know we are Christians by our love. In other words, the world will identify us as Christians, because we love those that we would not naturally be able to love.

It is 22 years since God taught me that lesson. Experience has taught me that this kind of love is only cultivated each time we are confronted with callousness and we make an active choice to demonstrate God’s love. Today, I still find myself facing these same challenges and choices, because we live in a sin-sick world.

3) In the Assembly, under oppression, I learned to find God as my refuge. I learned to anchor my soul in what God said to my heart, rather than in what the leadership and those in authority said to me. As a result, I went from being a timid, shy individual, to a person who was confident and out spoken. This has had a lasting effect on my personality.

4) Under oppression, I learned to stand firm and not let them bully or intimidate me. When counsel or direction was given that contradicted Sunday ministry or Chapter Summary ministry, I learned to repeat the ministry back to the leading brothers and ask them to explain the contradiction. I’m sure they breathed a sigh of relief when I left.

5) In the assembly, I overcame my fear of going witnessing. I developed a variety of angles from which to share the gospel, learning to use many different passages of scripture to launch the gospel story. I learned and put into practice different methods of sharing the gospel, including implementing the one-minute gospel.

6) In the assembly, I learned the value of worship. In the midst of trials, the burden is lifted or made much lighter by focusing on the characteristics and nature of our God. Now, when my health suffers a set back or we are struggling with some other kind of trial, my husband and I will spend time singing hymns, or listening to a CD of hymns of worship. We derive great benefit from this exercise.

Well, the list goes on. Let’s take up Margaret’s question and focus on the things we learned and the things we did that were good. Remember that in spite of the way this organization oppressed, controlled and abused, God’s Word was still preached. When God’s Word goes forth, it does not return void without accomplishing God’s purpose.

Lord bless,
Flora

Flora,

Thank you for your contribution to this thread.  This is the kind of thing I had in mind when I started the "Good things you learned" thread.

I was, I must confess, shocked at the vehemence of the objections to the idea.

Blessings,

Tom Maddux

Hi Flora  :)

You the first to mentor me when I got saved, and a good friend.

Your faith is an inpsiration to me.

All good eh??

In the GA system the gospel was preached, and most had a zeal for God which often got mistaken for zeal for GA.

Regards,
Marcia M

Flora,

Thank You for your contribution.
I read your story on Margaret's site and also your post here. I can say that my perspective has changed.

Thanks

Joe,

Ai Chihuahua!!

I am not allowed to talk about anything good that I learned or did during my assembly years unless I tell the whole story of all the slights, hurts, abuses, insults, embarrassments, illnesses, sacrifices and whatever else that happened to me??????????

I don't have enough time to write it, and you don't have enough time, and probably not enough interest either, to read it.

During my assembly years I learned a whole lot about preaching the gospel to people.  I am GLAD I did.  I am not saying I couldn't have learned it anywhere else, but I have never had such opportunities since leaving.

One night I was asked to preach at the tent campaign at the Huntington Beach pier.  The tent was packed and the sides were rolled up.  People were standing several deep all the way around the three open sides.  There were probably over 100 curious onlookers who stayed and listened all the way through the meeting.

I considered it a privilege to preach the gospel that night, and I did it with a heartfelt desire to preach the saving message of Christ to needy men and women.  I wanted to serve my Lord with all my heart, and I endeavored to do so.  I did not do it for GG or because he wanted it done. I wanted to do it for Christ!

On another night I was asked to preach at the Union Rescue Mission.  I had never seen such a large group of sin-sick, sin-ruined people.  I had a powerful sense of a burden of grief and sorrow for those men and women. I asked Don Evans to go over in a corner to pray with me. I broke down and wept before God, beseeching him to enable me to preach the gospel clearly and powerfully. I had never had that experience before. I am not inclined to public weeping.

I believe that that burden came from God.  I also believe that God powerfully answered that prayer.  The whole team spoke of a sense of God's presence at that meeting.  I had great liberty for that 10 minute gospel message, and some young men came forward to recieve Christ.  The director told me that the meeting was "wonderful".

Those experiences happened because George Geftakys taught young people to overcome  their fears and boldly preach the gospel.  Since those years I have had conversations with missionaries and college pastors that don't believe that young people can do things like that!!!

Yes, the bad stuff is true too.  There were always problems, and they got worse as time went along.  I just don't feel that I have to recount all the bad stuff just because I want to say something good about my assembly experience.

Blessings,
Tom Maddux

Joe,

The interesting thing is, I agree with what Tom was saying and didn't have a problem with his original post. All he seemed to be saying to me was, state what the reality was of what happened there. Seemed like a very objective question to me. Not, what is your opinion of the assembly, but putting that aside, take an objective look. I don't think you have to worry about Tom sending out advertisements trying to start a new assembly somewhere. At least not from what I have read from him in the past.

I wasn't threatened by any emotional response either. In fact his response didn't strike me that way. It seemed rather objective. But you seem to be reacting a little on the intense side to me. I trust it is not an emotional reaction.

In regard to "what gospel?", come on Joe. What gospel did you preach when you went door to door? No one got saved? Are you comparing that to the JW message, or were you taking a shot?

Now, once again, to you and Mark, there have been a number of light entreaties that you may be reacting a little harshly, but I don't really see any response to that. Of course, you don't have to, but once again I would ask, is that maybe part of the reason why people aren't posting here? I can say that it is not very inviting.

Explorer---

Of course not. I'm not saying the basic gospel message cannot lead to someone's
salvation. But it is interesting to note how few the Lord allowed to be saved under
that ministry though. Tom said that "George Geftakys taught young people to overcome
their fear and preach the Gospel". If you're fine with that Explorer, great. I just happen
to believe (my opinion) that the "Gospel" that George was ultimately preaching was "another
gospel"--take that for what it's worth. If you don't agree, that's fine.

It's funny---every time one tries to "argue their point" the threat of "driving away posters" always appears:

but once again I would ask, is that maybe part of the reason why people aren't posting here? I can say that it is not very inviting. (from your post below)     

Are you posting here? It appears to be the case. Check some other boards--with all the "hunky-dory--everything is great" posts going on there they should be "packed with posters" right?  Yeah--sure they are, right. ;D  But I get the message.  I officially back off for good on this-- I replied because Tom addressed me at the start of his post---but I have to disagree with you---I don't think Tom's last post was "objective" at all. Better not say much more----it's not very "inviting", and might drive more posters away. ;D

I did learn to make Swedish Meatballs in the Assembly preparing the nightly dinners for the next evening though. That was a good thing. I prepared some the other evening for my girlfriend, from an old "Assembly recipe". After eating them she said "I'm not sure why, but I have the strangest desire to go attend a meeting somewhere for a few hours". ;D

I have withdrawn my response to Tom. I have decided to speak on other subjects. Please see "COAT LINT" on the General Mayhem thread.

Tom, I remember a similar experience at the Union Rescue Mission.  I had a rare opportunity to preach and I chose the man by the pool in John as my text.  I wasn't comfortable with the alter call because we generally didn't do that but it was sort of a requirement.  At the end of my preaching I gave an invitation and was agast to find a growing group of men in front of me.  This old black pastor was off to the side saying ,"keep bring'n 'im in.  keep bring'n 'im in".  We all went back and the counseling room was over crowded.

To my surprise, I have several speaking engagements this next two weeks - teach at Celebrate Recovery, devotional at men's Bible study, testimony/break-out seminar at the C&MA South-Atlantic district men's retreat, devotional at Samaritan's Purse.  It's not that I am an especially good speaker or a competent Bible teacher.  It's just that I learned in the Assembly how to get up in front of a group of people and give a word that is meant to encourage others.

Joe,

You said:

The gospel I preached during my assembly days was the same gospel that brought me to Christ 46 years ago.  Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures. He was buried and rose again on the third day according to the scriptures.  Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.

That is what I preached then, its also what I preach now.

Joe, when I met GG I was so introverted and shy that I almost never spoke of Christ to strangers.  Before the beginning of the assembly George urged me to begin sharing the gospel.  My first attempt was to pass out tracts on the streets of Canoga Park back in 1970.  It was so hard for me that I built up enough tension in my body to cause my very first migrain headache!

Later on, urged by George, I had many experiences of sharing the gospel and publicly proclaiming Christ.  Some were positive.  Some were not. Some were ridiculous.  I never reached a point where it was easy for me.  But I did get to the place where I could present the gospel clearly in a number of circumstances to a wide variety of people.

In addition, Joe, I was able to help many others overcome their shyness and share Christ.

You and Mark seem to feel that if anything positive is said about the assembly or GG it will encourage those who have not repented of their legalism and still carry many assembly beliefs in their hearts to persist.  I doubt if I am that persuasive.  If all the things that have been said on Assembly Reflections and this board haven't changed their minds, nothing I have to say will make any difference.

BTW, George taught me many things about preaching that I still believe and practice.  More on that later.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

Tom---

Please see my "allegory" on the "Tell the whole story" thread. I am attempting to show what I
have been trying to say all along. Certain questions can be asked that may have a far different affect on some people than others. What I experienced in the Assy, combined with the many "testimonies" I have heard concerning the abuse suffered by others, make it extremely difficult to deal with the posts you received in response to your original question. As I mentioned before, these had the effect of "white-washing the past" by using your question as a springboard to do so. Again, If you read the allegory, and disagree, I fully understand, as it is based on your posting of the question originally. I
hope maybe it shows what I have been trying to convey. Hope there are no hard feelings.

--Joe

It's interesting to note that the few good things people have mentioned were all in circumstances not under the direct control of Assembly leadership--retirement home outreach (GG could care less about that, and even Betty didn't attempt to make it a "training" thing), Gospel preaching, witnessing, mentoring, learning spiritual lessons. These all had eternal implications, either for others or oneself. It seems to me that a closer analogy to abusive marriages would be the precious and wonderful children that came out of them, rather than skills learned.

Margaret

It seems to me that a closer analogy to abusive marriages would be the precious and wonderful children that came out of them, rather than skills learned.

Margaret----

Not sure if you are referring to the allegory I posted when you refer to an "analogy". I went back and redefined it on another post to the same thread, to show exactly what the allegory is supposed to represent. If that's not the case, please ignore this. :)

--Joe

Thanks to you all, I see the answer to my original question about the value of things we did, at least as it pertains to myself. This is what I wrote Joe in a private email:

"I need to apologize to you for posing my question on the bb about "good things we DID". Having been a believer for years before meeting George, the doctrinal stuff didn't affect me the same as it has many others. And I was sheltered from being on the receiving end of most of the abuse, brow-beating and intimadation. The result is that I was grossly lacking in sensitivity in posting that question. I am sorry from the bottom of my heart. You and Mark and others have opened my eyes. Some Assembly folks were effectively used by God for the benefit of others, mainly outside the Assembly, like Juvenile Hall, the Rescue Mission, retirement homes, etc. But for myself, my involvement was entirely within the framework of the Assembly and therefore was completely tainted, not necessariy by my motives, but by the framework we were operating in. I see now that if any good will ever be shown to have come of any of it, it will be because of what happens now, not then. I think of this every Sunday in the public confession of sin in our church--'Where we thought we were well, we are sick in soul...' "

Marg,

"taint"?
Is this something "poured" out in the "taint" department?  An 80/20 mix?
Does it come in a spray?
Is it, "Living Water" based?
Is there a 30 year warranty?
Can one get this with an "untaintable" life-time guarantee?

Most importantly, does it wash off?
Have you found this to be so?

 :)

P.S.  Can a "tainting" war be averted?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYCOyaIUCSo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYCOyaIUCSo)
 ;)

 Margaret, (and other readers)

  Thank you so much for your gracious post that reflects a willingness to consider what Joe explained in his own Assembly experience (and many others as well).  It has been a difficult subject to discuss, especially when there have been those that have taken the question and attempted to unjustly suggest that the group had a lot that God approved of--- and that can be used in our lives with God now as a result.  I know that you never intended such an implication in the asking of your question.

  As Paul said to the Galatians, "who hath bewitched you?" when these believers wanted to mix (80/20?) into the Gospel the kind of teaching that the Assm. promoted.  The worse kind of tainting, though, came when that bad teaching was combined with abusive control over the lives of the members; this made for a very toxic mix! >:D

  In the search for "good things", (in trying to make sense of our lives with God now) we can look back, within ourselves, or for that church out there somewhere where God will meet us, and thus discover a life without any taint at all.  However, I have not had much success with that, as there is very little to be found that doesn't bear sin's stain.

  This fact seems to support the oft repeated adage of "all churches have problems" (are tainted), and "Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven", and this has been misused to support the notion that we should just give up and accept a certain percentage of tainting and move on "(ignore the negative and accentuate the positive").  While we will always have failings, and should be forgiving of others who sin against us, these truths must be accompanied with the practice of honest agreement of what those problems are and a willingness to find reconciliation with those offended ("leave your gift at the altar, etc.").

  The Assm., and many of it's current supporters, have a strong resistance to taking responsibility for their actions and don't see any need for reconciliation.  You have in the sweet spirit of Christ, via your post Margaret, demonstrated exactly what that confession and reconciliation looks like.  The story of Joseph and his brethren (something I wrote about in the past) demonstrates the same process of taking those that wronged their brother and how God brought this family to recovery.  The strange harshness of Joseph was necessary to awaken the conscience of the abusers and take them from denial to joyful reconciliation! :)

  The above means of recovery is sidestepped if we deny, minimize, excuse, or otherwise refuse to consider the facts of what kind of group we were in, and what our failings were while there.  Those encouraging us to avoid these needed steps (while quoting different proof texts) are hindering God's purposes as his grace can only heal where there is honest evaluation and confession re. that "tainting."

  God is very good and the riches of his goodness are without any taint at all, but we must see our own need before we will ask, "Sir, give me that water---"  An evil conscience that denies the truth will not feel the joy of that living water.

                                                           God Bless,  Mark C.     

 

     

 

Assume a 100 of your churches..100 in each...10,000 members.
Assume (approx.) 30 years..10,000 days.
Assume "mind was chock-full of Scripture (Lee per Marg)"..7000 meetings...10,000 verses of 31,102

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit..





On an average day of the 10,000, ALL were predestined, chosen, rapturable, saved, born-again, sealed, "in Christ", adopted, children of God, eternally secure, possessors of everlasting life, members of the body of Christ, etc...

...and...

..sainted and "tainted"?  ;)

--> Where was God?? :o

Surely He wasn't lifeless, plasticized and magnetized, propped up on the dashboard of a '57 Chevy in the parking lot.

If no one got any good from anything, did God get any good from 10,000 days of prayers, etc.?

Perhaps 10,000 angels would have helped...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbTucSguJ6w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbTucSguJ6w)

 :)

bring back joe...bring back joe...bring back joe.... :)

Maybe a piece on ga.com will show what I meant by "tainted"--http://www.geftakysassembly.com/Articles/Perspectives/MalignantNarcissismDrama.htm (http://www.geftakysassembly.com/Articles/Perspectives/MalignantNarcissismDrama.htm). Everything was affected and determined by the context we were in, especially what we DID when we thought we were serving God.

Margaret
Thank You for your sincerity in posting here and also for ga.com.

Hi mark,

Thank you for your clear and concise posts. I dont  usually have much to post but can appreciate you posts.

Assume 10,000 "DIDs" for you per month, while seeking to serve God...
Surely, God would reward a high percentage.

Likewise,

Assume 10,000 "DOs" NOW for you per month, while seeking to serve God...
Surely, God will reward a high percentage.

 :)

May He reward you richly for ALL the years.

Margaret,

In your linked article, are you saying that GG and BG planned the whole thing from the beginning as a means of displaying GG's vision of his glory?

Tom Maddux

Tom, I'm not saying they consciously and coldly planned it. What I'm learning from life experiences with other narcissists is they don't understand their own motives but they are driven by their need for a superior image, narissistic strokes, and control over others. I am proposing that the Brethren format was the avenue at hand for G & B to feed his narcissism.

The wife is complicit in these things because the burden of providing narcissistic supply for the husband is too great to be borne by one individual; she has to find others who will help her. The malignancy of them both is demonstrated by their willingness to injure others for it. My take is that George's narcissism made it imperative that he be blameless (pefect image), so they lied to themselves , as well as us, about the mixed motives and the damages.

There is a fascinating website run by a self-confessed narcissist, http://samvak.tripod.com/ (http://samvak.tripod.com/), that is very insightful (bearing in mind, of course, that narcissists are liars, so what he says has to taken with a large dash of salt). This guy feeds his narcissism by being the expert on narcissism!

What do you all think?

Very informative link Margaret, and worthy of careful consideration.

Trac4., My opinion of you, though you still remain a shadowy entity with very flawed thinking re. our former group, has improved greatly due to your posting of the Loretta Lynn performance, "10,000 angels".  Anyone who can appreciate "The Queen of Country Music" must be more than just a spector who is hiding his/her/it's agenda, and probably does have a real soul after all! ;)

  As to your question to Margaret: "Where was God?"  He was outside of the Assembly knocking on it's door (Laodicea), because the frequency of religious activity (bible reading, prayer, and other "doings"") is not proof that God is active in ones life.

  Please consider the parable of the "Publican and the Pharisee" (LK. 18:9-14), where God heard and "justified" the Publican, while the Pharisee "prayed with himself."  The Pharisee prayed longer, but with a self righteous attitude, while the Publican's prayer was very short indeed, yet his attitude produced a spiritual accomplishment ("did's").  

  There will be some that make the argument that the above parable describes only initial salvation because the phrase "justified before God" appears in the last verse of the pericope.  However, the principle of being righteous before God, through a gift of God's mercy, is always how true spirituality will visit our hearts'---- initially and continually.  

  So, true Christian faith, that God can approve of, must have a righteous expression that is willing to "come to the light that their deeds may be approved by God."  The Assembly refused this, preferring to accept your notion that frequency of "did's" was worth more than honest confession and repentance.  

  "Didn't many former members cry to God like the Publican while members of the group?", some will protest. Yes, and I did daily!  "Doesn't that then mean God heard us and was still working in our lives individually despite all of the evil machinations of our group life?"   This, of course, will be answered differently by each individual member, however, the problem with Assm. members who were like the Publican was that we didn't hear God say, "Go down to your house justified--".  We heard that mercy starts us in our life with God, but self righteousness is the means to bring us to a "victorious end."  Thus, molding us into the exact opposite of what grace is intended to make of us.

 Assm. teaching and practices performed the Galatian curse on members that kept us forever in the state of awareness of our sin without the benefit of full and free forgiveness.  As long as we heard the bible, prayed, and "did" with the twisted "overcomer" teaching we received it had the effect of building a wall between the individual and God (not that God wanted this, it was the result of our "tainted" belief system).

  Those involved in leadership roles added to the above problem another where they were actively (or passively) supportive of those that abused God's people.  Loyalty to GG and his vision were more important than loyalty to God and this brings the condemnation of idolatry.  God is in opposition to this, and as long as I am committed to it, (though I read millions of verses and pray always) I will not experience the activity of God's Spirit in my life.

  Having said all this, this does not mean that God doesn't want me to hear him, be set free, and enjoy his joyful presence.  The only resolution is to humbly and honestly accept the truth, confess my sins, and pursue true reconciliation with those that I've wronged.  Denial of the facts, minimizing the realities, or attacking those pointing them out are for sure not the answer.  

  All this talk of attempting to add-up all the "good things I did" is equivalent to the Pharisee recounting to God in the parable above "God, I thank you that I am not like other men--robbers, evildoers, adulterers, or even like this tax collector."  (here comes his list) "I fast twice a week, and give a tenth of all I get."  Just think if this guy, was say, 50 years old and started his "did's" when he was 10--- see, 40 years times twice a week for his fasting + all his tithing etc.--- well, I let you make the calc. ;)  Anyway, we know what Jesus thought of the quantity of his efforts--- all done in the name of God, btw.--- he did not think they were worth counting at all!

  The Pharisee was trying to "justify" himself before God by searching for "good things" in his past.  Former members trying to compare themselves to others may be involved in the same kind of self vindication efforts in an attempt to "make sense" of their past and rescue some personal equity from the ashes.  We don't have to do this----- all of our "equity" of goodness is provided for richly in God's gift of grace.  This frees us to be honest, find mercy, and reconcile with those we wronged while in the group.

                                                                             God Bless,  Mark C.

                                                          

 

Margaret,

So for 10,000 members (assumed) over 10,000 days (30 yr. approx.), regardless of each member's location at a given second, the maximum expectation for each person would be that God would be knocking from the outside, but would always refuse to enter? 

Being lukewarm was guaranteed for each moment of 10,000 days, unknown by each member?

This was due to the G. and B. people blockage?  Also, unknown by each member?

Thus, all abiding, comfort in trial, filling of the Spirit, joy, peace, etc. was simply imagination of God's presence and promises and oath and "power in the Blood" for 10,000 days..at work, at school, driving, etc.?

God refused it all?  Though, members imagined it so?

If, during an Attitudinal Oscillation Process (AOP) of 40,000 seconds (12 hr. awake approx.) in a given day, members imagined justification or sanctification, this would always be "trumped" by the blockage in place by the G. and B. people, regardless of their location?

Margaret, is the AOP solidly in place now?
 
Is there an insurance against further 30 year "black-outs" by God?

Are there any people in existence that could be blocking this entry by God?

Are attitudinal-conditionalities sufficient to prevent God from the Knocking Oscillatory Process (KOP) in a given day?

Does Jesus still save?

 :) ;)


P.S.

m.c.

 

Glad you enjoyed it.  ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHNM80vUmGo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHNM80vUmGo)

Yes! I survived!  ;D

http://amfilms.hash.com/search/entry.php?entry=539

Moonflower,

So you survived!  Or did you?   ;)

That is hilarious....funny too.  ::)

Tom Maddux

No, Margaret, I don't think you should be "set straight."  I really appreciate your probing of this question, and I believe there are more than a few of us ex-assemblyites who continue to harbor bitterness toward our past.  This bitterness is not a fruit of the spirit, and it will eventually corrode our souls, should it go unchecked.  And I think your question is a good first step for many toward the road to full recovery.

I must confess that I have at times held the "get over it and move on" attitude toward those whom I felt were just complaining.  But the truth is that many were much more damaged than myself and mine, and God has called me to a higher level of compassion.  I have particularly found it interesting that, upon even recent retrospection, I now realize that Sheila and I, in fact, suffered more damage than I had thought.  These things take time to work themselves out, don't they?  And it apparently doesn't happen on our own time table.  Saying, "Get over it and move on," is like telling one who is clinically depressed that he just needs to "get happy," or "think good thoughts."  Anyone who has dealt with depression knows how futile that kind of advise is!

Many times over the past several years, I have had to temper my response to those who were saying things like, "It was all a big farce!"  No, it was not all a big farce.  But when someone is crying out in anguish, it is generally not expedient to address their immediate statements as though they reflect the individuals' deepest convictions.  Beating someone back down with a statement of incontrovertible truth is an effective means of suppression and control, as the assembly leadership taught us so well, but isn't healing through true reconciliation the real goal?  This is precisely the mark that assembly wife-training and assembly child-training missed.

About fifteen years ago, the Lord impressed upon me the fact that He has not dealt with us according to our transgressions.  In other words, I have, in fact, not received a consequence for every misdeed - because of God's mercy and compassion.  Shall I then be sure to issue consequences to my wife?  Shall I make sure my children never get away with any misdeed without suffering a consequence (as if that's even possible)?  What would this teach them about God's character?  I had numerous discussions with the leading brothers on this issue, but, alas, in most cases their brains were not engaged - or if they were, they were already subservient to another's line of reasoning.

So in answer to your question of how I evaluated my heartfelt "service for the Lord" in the Assembly, I have far too much to say to put it down now.  Was there any good?  Yes, there were many, many, many good things that we did.  There were innumerable good things we learned.  We can say these things and rejoice in them without being complicit with any of the evil, can we not?

Please, friends, I need these good things.  They are the largest part of who I am.  I will not tell you, "Just get over it."  We can talk about it all.  Only don't tell me, "Just throw it all away."

Hi Tom!
Glad you enjoyed it.  ;D
Moonflower

Eric,

You said:

I agree with you, Eric. The assembly had some very dark and twisted aspects.  It also had some very good aspects.  For example, I have never seen any church with a congregational participation in evangelistic outreach that equalled what the assembly did.  Some of what we did was, unquestionably, silly.  But I know that the gospel was shared thousands of times in all sincerity.  That is not typical of evangelical churches.

Some might say that all that evangelistic outreach is not valuable because it was an attempt to draw people into the assembly.  However, in Philippians 1:12-20 Paul clearly said that he rejoiced that the gospel was shared, even when there were improper motives involved.  If Paul could rejoice about work done through "envy, strife, and selfish ambition", why can't we?  Even more, what about all the times the gospel was shared just out of a burdened heart and in God's service?

I do not agree with the idea that if one says anything good about their assembly experience they are of bad spiritual character and are justifying evil.  None of us has ever been completely without sin in anything we have done.  It does not follow from that fact that we never did anything good or praisworthy.

Blessings,

Tom Maddux

Mark,


This statement, "All this talk of attempting to add-up all the "good things I did" is equivalent to the Pharisee recounting to God in the parable above "God, I thank you that I am not like other men--robbers, evildoers, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.", is quite incorrect. 

The Pharisees were a non-Christian sect of the Jews who believed that the way to a right relationship with God was through a meticulous keeping of the Law as well as following a long list of further customs and regulations based on rabinnical interpretations.  Basically, they believed in salvation by works. No one on this board believes that, Mark.  Legalism is a problem, no doubt about it.  But no true believer could ever become a Pharisee.  Only the 'poor in spirit" come to Christ at all.

When you refer to "all this talk of attempting to add up all the "good things I did", I must say I don't know who you are referring to.  Who advocated that?  Margaret just asked what good things were done. 

In another post you likened the assembly to the Church of Laodicea, with Christ standing on the outside knocking on the door.  Don't you think that might be a little extreme?  The problem at Laodicea was complacency due to a feeling that they were fully adequate in themselves, (Rev. 3:15-17).  It seems to me one of the biggest problems in the assembly was that so many people were led to despair because they felt so inadequate!  Do you really believe that the Good Shepherd was deaf to their cries?  Do you think he just abandoned them because their church had some bad beliefs and practices?

Mark, I know you have a heart for those harmed by the assembly.  That would be just about all of us, I believe.  I see real compassion for the "wounded pilgrims".  But I do not believe it will help anyone to blast everyone's past life with such powerful condemnation and scorn.  What we did that was wrong, was wrong.  But that is not the whole story.

Blessings,

Tom Maddux

Hi Tom,

  I do believe that my references to "The Pharisee and the Publican", and "the Church of Laodicea" very much apply to our "Assembly experience."  Jesus, Paul, etc. often mentioned the practices of the Pharisee as an example not to follow as an exhortation to believers (and it is attitudes/behavior we are talking about here, not ones eternal security).  Jesus warned his disciples to "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, etc."  Why would he do so if there was no danger of falling into this same subtle trap?  Why warn the "foolish Galatians" re. getting caught in the trap of prideful Phariseeism, as clearly they were regenerated?

   While still a member the two above referenced passages spoke strongly to my heart, and along with other events, led to my waking up to the true nature of the group. Back then Dave S. sent me his "Sable News" which included the above parable of the "Phar. and Pub."  I got the message right away that the Assembly was the former and that we lacked the "poor in spirit" attitude of the Publican in the latter.

   Re. "Laodicea":  Bakht Singh made several visits to us, and each of these last times he came and preached on this passage in Rev.  I recall Mark Miller telling me, "he always preaches the same message, but I wonder why he does because it doesn't apply to us---- we're not like that."  Yet, we believed that this man was "God's prophet" and spoke at God's direction?  I kept these things in my heart and pondered them and came to the realization that Laodicea perfectly hit the mark re. the nature of the Assm.

  I absolutely do not believe that God "abandoned" those of us who were trapped in the group (nor have I ever suggested such a thing)!  On the contrary, God constantly was working to reach us (knocking at the door) because of his great concern for us!  As a matter of fact, this is the one most beneficial lesson to learn from our whole experience--- God's true attitude of love that seeks to find that one lost sheep that has wandered away.     God's speaking was never the issue--- it was our inability to hear what he was saying!

  Those trapped in bitterness over any past disappointments will remain in this condition unless they come to believe in the great goodness of this Good Shepherd!  However, it is not "bitter" to identify that past wandering as being in opposition to what God calls "good experiences."  Also, searching for redemption from that past via looking for goodness in our false religious wandering ultimately only involves evaluating  how "good" I was through the whole experience.  This self introspection can only lead to self justification if not accompanied with complete honesty re. my many moral failures that included supporting an abusive group (either actively or passively).

 The "blasting of former members lives in the group", that you suggest I am engaged in, is not at all what I'm intending.  Each individual life is very precious to God and great blessing for these is my desire.  However, God's intention for us to admit to our moral failures is not meant to destroy us---- rather, as the Publican, it will lead to great relief.  As believers we still need to experience the grace that comes to the humble.

  Many of us were engaged in abusive behavior toward one another and it is very hard for us to accept the facts that we were involved in doing just that.  Denial of my failures in this area can be attempts to defend my own view of self, but such a course will not bring healing.  The only thing we can lose by seeing that I was involved with this false cult is my wrong sense of pride as I compare how well I performed vs. other members.

  God's intention for us as individuals, and as churches, is to glory in his grace alone!  In my recollections of an Assembly past it is those times where God's message (contra the Assm's.) came through of God's gracious nature toward me.  This was the voice outside knocking to come into my life and set me free from a very wrong view of who God is and what my relationship to him should be.  Yes, Jesus does still save! :) 

                                                                       God Bless, Mark C.     

     

   
 

 

If you punched a fellow believer in the nose on on day 3,214 of the 10,000, for squeezing in on your parking lot space for the morning service, apologize and create a win-win for the next Sunday.

And don't fight over who gets the aisle seat.
 :rofl:


(The knocking will stop.)

The following is a story.

My father was a mechanic. He was a good mechanic. I currently am a mechanic because my father taught me to be a mechanic. Most of the things that I know about being a mechanic are from what he taught me.

My father was also an abusive alcoholic. He came home drunk and yelled a lot, sometimes beat us and was verbally abusive towards us. This was the cause for our home to not be a very secure place to be. Because of this, I don’t have a lot of nice things to say about my father. I would surely not be the first one to defend him in a conversation. Because of his irrational behavior, I left home as soon as I was old enough and I don’t have any plans to return. I also will not pattern my own home in this way.

However, he was not a completely wicked person. He did have some good qualities. He always worked to bring home the groceries. He did take us out to ball games and things like that so that we could have some fun. I do remember him hugging us, telling us that he loved us and even holding my mom’s hand and kissing her. He also taught me to be a mechanic and I still make a good living that way today.

When people ask me how I learned to be a mechanic, I tell them from my father. Is this defending him and his abusive system at home? Should I stop being a mechanic since it is something that he taught me how to do?

Should I never mention any good thing that he did or that I did while living in his home? Am I defending his alcoholism and abusive behavior if I do? If I foster any fond memories, then does this become a danger to me that I might pattern my life after his abuse. Or is there a danger in mentioning any thing good that someone might think that I am defending my father’s behavior and that possibly that person would become an alcoholic because of my truthfulness?

I wonder, does this story relate to our assembly experience, or is the logic off base?

Explorer,

You said:

I think your story is an excellent analogy to our assembly experience.  Earlier, I used the analogy of a small town with a corrupt government.  In such a place the corruption has some effect on everyone.  But the total effect varies from person to person depending on their degree of involvement with the source of the corruption.  Some would be very powerfully affected.  Others less so. 

Mark seems to feel that everything was so evil, wrong, and twisted that nothing of value can be salvaged from those experiences.  He also seems to feel that it is a moral and/or spiritual failure to look at any of our experiences there as valuable.  I simply disagree.

I spent much of my adult years involved with George Geftakys and then in the assembly, from 29 to 48.  I had some very positive experiences during those years.  I also had quite a few absolutely horrible experiences.  I learned many valuable things, but at a very high cost.  Nevertheless, I do not believe that GG's corruption should be allowed to take the value from everything.

Blessings,

Tom Maddux

In response to "Explorer's" scenario, I would observe that the child in such a home is in the victim position, whereas in the Assembly everyone was a victim of the deception, but many of us were also perpetrators in some way or other. In regard to my own Assembly experience I have to distingish between the effects on me, and my effect on others. The effects on me were a mixed bag. But the effect I had on others is different, because everything I did and said was perceived by the other person to be witihin in the context of the Assembly system. I failed to see this at the time. Many times there was, regretably, a congruence, i.e. what I said or did was an expression of the Assembly mindset/rules etc. But there were occasions, especially toward the end, where I was bucking the system and trying to offer real care and help to people. For example, when the Solomon teaching came in, I emphasized the line diagram about our position in Christ. But that was contradicted by GG's preaching and Betty's emphasis on red flags and the selfer's prayer. Here's another one--and you all will laugh that I could have been so naive--one of the younger brothers living with us had a very difficult time making decisions, was always asking for advice, and I was trying to help him gain confidence in his own judgment and ability to discern God's will. Hah! So I think basically, whatever good I thought I was trying to do was ineffectual. (And doubly so, in my case, because after we left I was revealed to have been evil.)

I realize I am an extreme case, but the principle seems to me to be true for any of us. For instance, if you shared the 4 Anchors with someone, they may have been beneficially discipled at first, but by the end you were attempting to recruit them into the group. That's why I said in an previous post that probably the only "untainted" service for God in the Assembly was witnessing,  preaching outside the Assembly, and non-recruiting and non-training outreachines like the retirement homes.

There seems to be three lines of arguments as to why one cannot or should not answer the question "Were there any good things you did" or "were there any good things in the Assembly".

1.  To answer the question will somehow justify or soft-peddle the evil that was done in the Assembly.
2.  Considering the question provides emotional duress to those still struggling with the issue.
3.  No matter what is considered good, it was tainted by the Assembly system so it really wasn't good after all.

These replies and arguments simply do not take hold of me simply because I and others have answered the question quite straight-forwardly, and found profit in considering good things that we did and that I find profitable to this day.

To #1 I don't see that to be honest about the evil I have to be dishonest about what I found to be good.  To #2 I truly understand the sense of anger.  It was years before I stopped having the feeling where I had to "explain this wierd church I was in".
To #3 Every good we do is tainted by sin whether in the Assembly or out.  My ministry in Celebrate Recovery is motivated in part of my desire to be a part of a successful ministry and find something worth while.  But I still feel that the times I sat down for lunch with someone who is struggle with an issue is still "good" even though my sinful motivations and dysfunctional thinking may get mixed in at times.

A few weeks ago, I met with a brother who was abandoned by his father and found Christ in the Assembly.  He stopped attending meetings few years before the collapse due to health reasons (not Assembly related).  He said "I was never a George fan" but saw modeled "how to be a man" by some of the brothers in his satallite assembly.  He is thankful to God, a radient Christian and has a servant's heart.  He spoke of the earlier years where there was a sense of mission, genuine fellowship, and care for one another.  And there was because I was there and saw it with my own eyes.  He admits that as George's influenced this outreach, this loving community diminished to non-existance in the last decade.  I am just not ready to say to him, "no, none of the good in the early years is real.  Since it came from the Assembly, all of that is bad and you really have to go back to square one."

I learned in my recovery, that I have to be honest about the evil in the Assembly and not soft-soap what was generally wrong.  But, I have to be honest about the good things I took away and have a sense of gratitude towards God's gift even though I really didn't like the vessel through which it was delivered.  I took away tangible good things that are real (learning how to show hospitality in the Iron's House, learning how to prepare a devotional for an audience, leaning how to consistantly read my Bible, learning how to have ownership of the church I am in, learning how to read good Christian books outside of the popular fare, learning how to conduct an outreach, learning how to break down a passage of scripture, learning how to worship without techno-lights and a rock band, having my appetite whetted for church history, learning how to use community opportunities for outreach, learning how to have relationship that are closer and more intimate than any other church I have been to since, learning how to make Jesus Christ the most important thing in my life, etc.) 

No amount of argumentation is going to convince me these good things are not real and that the question of "good in the Assembly" is illegitimate and taboo.

Margaret,

I entered the assembly with a number of issues in my emotional life.  The first of these was a strong tendency towards depression caused by, (as I learned many years later), unresolved grief and anger over the untimely deaths of my birth family. By the time I was 27 years old I was the only survivor of the family I grew up in. 

The other issue was a very strong case of what is known nowdays as "low self-esteem".  I usually masked this behind an attitude of "I know the answers", and I worked very hard to actually know them.  I had not yet learned that the more you know the more you know you don't know.   ;)

In the first years of the work and the assembly GG needed and wanted my help.  For whatever reason, he constantly encouraged me, taught me, and fellowshipped with me.  I admired him, wished I was more like him, and looked to him as sort of  combination of spiritual father and older brother in Christ. 

By the late 1970's and early 1980's several capable brothers, younger than I,  had come into the work and leading brothers.  GG grew increasingly critical of me and intolerant of my tendency to question his ideas and teachings.  This also affected the attitude of the other brothers towards me, and they became increasingly critical and began to withdraw from associating with me. 

I now realize that I had formed a strong emotional bond with GG and the assembly people as a sort of substitute family.  I found myself trying to walk a mental/emotional line between speaking out about what I thought was right or wrong, and longing for that sense of belonging to a caring, supporting company of people.  As the criticism and isolation grew, my emotional anguish and depression problems resurfaced, causing me all sorts of trouble in various areas of my life.

Then one day, one of the other leading brothers called me and said they he and his wife wished to visit me.  It was, I believe, the only time I received a visit from Fullerton during my entire time in the San Fernando Valley.  I asked what this was about, and was told that, "We'll let you know when we get there."

Based on what I had been experiencing, I worried some that I was about to get another emotional hammering about something I had said or done.

When the brother and his wife arrived, they asked to talk to me alone.  We went out in the back yard and sat down in the shade.  The wife gave me a letter she had written.  I opened it and read it.  It told me that this sister valued me, respected me, and appreciated the teaching I had given in the assembly over the years. 

Believe me, it was a cup of cold water in the midst of a desert land.  I have never forgotten that letter, or the kindness and concern that motivated its writing.  Just remembering that experience has brought some tears to my eyes.

I have always been profoundly grateful to you for that letter, Margaret.  I don't know if I thanked you then.  But let me take the opportunity to give you my profound thanks for that gracious act.  I will never forget it.

Your brother in Christ,

Tom Maddux
Matthew 10:42

Wow, Tom! I didn't realize. Writing that letter was an unusual experience at the time, and a little strange, because here I was, a sister, writing to a brother. I never had any siblings, but I thought it probably felt exactly like that, sister to brother. I am so glad it helped a little. It is a warm and poignant memory for me, too.

Margaret

I don't want to make light of any goodness or kindness that was shown in the assemblies, but I was just thinking that unless we are in eternal hell, we can find good in anything. And even in hell, people will have been judged by God as to their works here, so that even there, apart from God, there is a justice for each individual, which I would consider to be a goodness, since it will have been tailored for each individual by God, just as heaven will be.

Achtung! Have a great Thanksgiving, all!
 ;D
Moonflower

The logic is okay; it's just not the end of the story.

Thank you for this topic, Margaret.

Good things I remember:

• Singing with the group in the Huntington Beach Fourth of July parade.
• Beach volleyball and cookouts.
• Coming back to visit about 10 years later and having one of the guys look at me in awe and say, "You SAVED me!"  (I guess I was the one who prayed with him to receive Jesus.)  As jaded as I was by then, that really made an impression on me.
• Going to Carl's Jr. and blowing straw wrappers at each other because we were silly.
• The relationships that outlasted the destruction, and the people who actually cared while I was there.

And...post-Assembly...being told by Wendy Hinman that the reason I had been such a "failure" in the Assembly was because I was too much of a critical thinker.  Okay, I know that's post-Assembly, but that was one of the best compliments I ever received!   :)

Were these things I DID, per se, that were good?  Well, except for that brother, not really.  But they're the things that WERE good, so I'm listing them anyway.  :)

I think this is a wonderful way to put it (late to the party, as usual!)

Oh, and hasn't "outer darkness" turned out to be rather a nice place after all?  ;)

Tracy:

What is your purpose in being here?

Trac4yt:

Thank you for the good wishes, but who is your Master?  :)

What a tremendously inspiring list, Flora!  Thank you for sharing that -- it helped me.[/list]

Oh, and so many people here knock themselves for what they did wrong.  I'm going to praise a former leading sister, Wendy Hinman, to the skies for what she did right.

Towards the end of my Assembly experience, I was under discipline for inconsistent attendance.  In reality, this was leadership's last-ditch attempt to control me.  I was in really, really bad shape at the time.  I wasn't working and was completely self-destructing at home.  My Calvary Chapel roommates (I had not been allowed to live in a sisters' home because they were afraid I'd rock the boat!) put me on a plane to my parents.  I had a choice:  I could get on that plane or move out of their house and stay in the Assembly.  The person I reached was Wendy, and Wendy helped me get out.  And took whatever that cost her.

I'm not sure I would have survived -- physically survived -- had I stayed.  Wendy saved my life.

a.c.

Happy Thanksgiving!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8welVgKX8Qo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8welVgKX8Qo)

Please pass the rolls.
 :)

 The above quote demonstrates just how emotional this discussion has become for both sides of the issue.  I have already admitted that this topic is very difficult and that it invokes a strong reaction from me.  It is apparent that emotion is on the other side of the argument as well, because I have many times indicated that Tom's impression of what I'm saying here (his quote above) is not what I'm saying at all.

  I will try and state it again (briefly  ;)):  I am not saying everyone and everything done while members is a result of "evil" intentions, nor that there was no "good" done while in the group.  What I am saying is that the group operated on the basis of cultic principles and that these controlling dynamics were indeed evil and need to be admitted to and repented of.  To the degree any individual rejected those bad principles and heard God's voice and responded good things could and did happen.

  I apologize to those offended by my strong emotional reaction, but please understand it is not against individual persons, but against a system that did much harm (love the Pharisee while hating the Phariseeism ;))  Each side of the argument can trot out personal testimonies that give evidence to "good and evil".  The faces of those whose lives were very badly damaged (spiritually and emotionally) come to view in my thoughts constantly and they far outweigh in my mind any positive events.  The "good" things I see as operating separately from the group and coming from God.  

  To understand the "emotional" context from which both sides of this argument are possibly coming from, and a remedy for reconciliation consider, "The Stanford Experiment" that Brian first posted, and Tom also brought up again, where two groups were formed: one group were prisoners and one were designated as guards.  I trust that most readers are familiar with what went on with the experiment, but imagine now a meeting with "guards and prisoners" at the end of the whole psychological experiment.

  Both groups come together and discuss the situation---- can you picture the emotional tension as these two face each other?!  The prisoners are seeking vindication of their abused status by the guards and the guards would be amazed at the "vehemence" of these prisoners reaction.  The prisoners accuse the guards of the most vile actions, accusing them of great "evil" in an effort to find some justice and peace for their tormented souls, while the guards accuse the prisoners of making a bigger deal out of the whole thing than is justified by their actual treatment.

  Not all prisoners or guards are equal here and the "sides" become blurred because some guards had pangs of conscience and were not as abusive and some prisoners also violated their conscience by making deals with the guards during the experiment to earn favor, and so to speak, joined with the guards.  This is similar to many Assm. leader/members who walked both sides of the division, but still saw themselves locked into their roles in the system.

   All of these emotional issues above are rooted in trying to deal with matters of conscience, and each side has a dog in the fight: the guards trying to feel better about their abusive past actions and the abused trying to get the guards to admit their culpability in an attempt to relieve their own feeling of violation.  Remember, like the Assembly, there is a blurring between the lines between "prisoner and guard" and some will be worse/better than others.  In the book "The Subtle Power Of Spiritual Abuse" the authors note that most abusive leaders are not aware that they are doing anything wrong at all-- and as such, are victims as well of the abusive system.

  It is a mistake for former Assm. "prisoners" to think that "the guards" will ever admit that they were abusive, or that they were even passively involved in abuses.  Most certainly abused members cannot seek relief in the expectation that the abuser will ever admit their evil---- this, again, will make us dependent for our peace on those incapable/unwilling of providing it.  I will admit that I have struggled with this "prisoner" vindication emotion, and that, like Joe, have felt like discussing this issue was too difficult for me to handle.

  For both groups we must find our personal vindication and resolution in another source other than trying to "find the good" when a member, or on the other side, getting leaders to "admit how evil it was" while in the Assm.  God understands both roles (in all their complexity) and seeks to bless both groups.  For those seeking to justify their involvement and make their consciences feel better, and for those trying to gain a feeling of resolution by gaining an admission of culpability by the leaders the only escape is to humbly approach our loving Father for the balm of Gilead that brings healing.  Both sides, however, must be honest with our strong prejudices/denials/feelings or there can never be recovery from our Assm. past.

                                                                     Thankfully we have a Good God!  Mark C.    

You and Tom may not be so far apart on this as it would seem.
Clearly our faith in God leads us to conclude that since he makes all things work together for good for those who love him, that conviction can be applied to our assembly experience.
That truth notwithstanding, I think Mark's larger point is that this perspective should in no way diminish or mitigate our recognition of the serious harm that was done to so many by Geftakys and his enablers, of whom I once was, albeit in ignorance.                   .
George Geftakys was a wicked person.
The assemblies were in the main corrupt and corrupting.
One simply has to ask to arrive at a correct assessment of that era:

If I had to do it all over again, would I?

Even more essentially, would I want anyone else to have that experience?
Verne

v.

Is this George person a saved man?

Verne,

An interesting question.  (BTW great to hear from you)

Back in my assembly years I used to shake my head in wonder when GG would attempt to claim that we were the cutting edge of what God was doing in the world.  I would reason that If we really are the ne plus ultra of 'what God wants", then God would have to be grossly incompetent.  He was using all the churches that were NOT "what God wants" to bring huge numbers of his children to new birth.  Then he would leave them in those churches where they were taught all the wrong things.  Hmmmmmmm.

So, I just figured that GG didn't have a clue what God was doing in and through the church.  Although I did believe the "New Testament pattern" stuff in the early years, I never could accept GG's disdain for everyone else.  It didn't look to me as if God placed nearly as high a value on the "pattern" as GG and the Plymouth Brethren did. 

Now, I sometimes think about the assembly in the opposite way.  God certainly has the ability to prevent people from getting into such messes, and the ability to quickly get them out if he wished to do so.  But he did neither.  So, it does not appear to me that God thinks about the assembly as we are prone to do.  He allows the "assemblies" of the world  to exist, along with lots of worse places. ( I recall reading in "Churches that Abuse" about a woman forced to clean a bathroom floor with her tongue!)  :P 

I figure that given the beliefs I held in 1970, the level of emotional maturity and life experience I had at the time, I would be very likely to fall under GG's or some other similar leader's influence.

That is why I pointed out Psalm 66:8-15 in an earlier post.  All I know is that God knows what he is doing in the life of every one of his children.  He does as seems best to him.  So, did God SEND me into the assembly?  I don't know.  But sometimes I wonder.

Blessings,

Tom Maddux

This has been debated pro and con on this board several times.  My association with GG in the early years leads me to believe that he is definitely a Christian. 

Folks of the Reformed persuasion tend to believe he is not a Christian.  Their teaching that there is no such thing as a carnal Christian sort of forces them into this position.

My own take is that he is genuinely saved, but that a combination of sin, psychological problems, and false teaching has caused him to become delusional. 

Blessings,

Tom Maddux

Perhaps there was another man somewhere forcing a 30 year "black out" by God on G., that created another 30 year "black out" on 10,000, etc.

Could there be others?  :o

 ;)

:)

Let your ponderings begin.. :rofl:

Ge 24:9-10,12,14,27,35-37,39,42,44,48-49,51,54,56,65; 39:2-3,7-8,19-20; Ex 21:4-6,8,32; 22:8; De 23:15; Jg 19:11-12,22-23; 1Sa 20:38; 24:6; 25:10,14,17; 26:16; 29:4,10; 30:13,15; 2Sa 2:7; 9:9-10; 12:8; 16:3; 1Ki 22:17; 2Ki 2:3,5,16; 5:1,18,20,22,25; 6:5,15,22-23,32; 8:14; 9:7,31; 10:2-3,6,9; 18:24,27; 19:4,6; 1Ch 12:19; 15:27; 2Ch 18:16; Job 3:19; Pr 27:18; 30:10; Isa 1:3; 24:2; 36:8-9,12; 37:4,6; Da 1:3; 4:9; 5:11; Mal 1:6; 2:12; Mt 8:19; 9:11; 10:24-25; 12:38; 17:24; 19:16; 22:16,24,36; 23:8,10; 26:18,25,49; Mr 4:38; 5:35; 9:5,17,38; 10:17,20,35; 11:21; 12:14,19,32; 13:1,35; 14:14,45; Lu 3:12; 5:5; 6:40; 7:40; 8:24,45,49; 9:33,38,49; 10:25; 11:45; 12:13; 13:25; 14:21; 17:13; 18:18; 19:39; 20:21,28,39; 21:7; 22:11; Joh 1:38; 3:10; 4:31; 8:4; 9:2; 11:8,28; 13:13-14; 20:16; Ac 27:11; Ro 14:4; Eph 6:9; Col 4:1; 2Ti 2:21

Supplemental hint..


You win a 2nd piece of pumpkin pie!  Enjoy.
 :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1hhqrgoZag (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1hhqrgoZag)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWwNwphuvbw&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWwNwphuvbw&feature=related)

You are laughing? My ponderings.... hm....you think you are God.
You have my attention....When you translate all the verses below into German, you'll have my rapt attention. I enjoy reading German. Just be original and refrain from using LEO or copying from another site. Do your own work.

Trac,


1. Selection of hymns-A.

2. Skill of perfomers-A.

3. Quality of arrangement-D.

Regarding your coded message, if you wish to just say it...I will read it.  If you don't wish to, not interested.

Tom Maddux

You'll notice that yakomoto via a.c. wanted insight on the term, "Master".

Trac.

I somehow doubt that was the point.

I for one have very little interest in visiting the youtube links and find that your posts provide no contribution to this thread or any others

As another poster requested maybe you could start your own thread of you tube links.




moon. wrote
"You are laughing? My ponderings.... hm....you think you are God.
You have my attention....When you translate all the verses below into German, you'll have my rapt attention. I enjoy reading German. Just be original and refrain from using LEO or copying from another site. Do your own work"

Good points

want our attention? post something of substance that doesnt come across as mocking others without the useless links to you tube.

If so, everyone else was spiritual throughout your churches except for the few perhaps, unsaved?

And if so, case closed.  Leverage 100% of everything of the saved.

P.S.

Perhaps the Reformed would say no one stays carnal.
Thus, none of the truly regenerate die carnal.

trac4yt = "trac for youtube" = someone with a lot of time on their hands and/or retired.

Someone else can take it from here, if interested......

 Dear Mr./Ms./? Trac4.,

  The "ponderings" re. the issue of the word "Master" was not an academic question, rather you are being asked personally "who is your Master?"  I suspect that you know this, but for some reason enjoy keeping us guessing as to your true identity.

  You have provided some hints, which I assume are meant to involve us in a kind of on-line guessing game, but you, having started this 'hide-and-seek', will have to play along and tell us if we are getting close or not. 

 First I will list some of the known clues---others can follow with more and with their own guesses.

CLUES:

1.) Likes to offer authoritative Christian advice to former members of a group he knows nothing about.

2.) Assumes that the quantity of religious activity (bible reading, praying, etc.) equals involvement in God's will.

3.) Believes that what a church preaches from the pulpit (within an orthodox accuracy of between 80-100%) is all that counts.  How church leaders/members behave is meaningless and won't block God's blessings to that group.

4.) Really enjoys making math calc's and seems to be good with computer technology.

5.) Is very good at avoiding questions asked and in turning the whole issue around so that the questioner becomes the object of an exhortation such as his scolding toward me to "be a blessing."

6.) Posted a video clip of Loretta Lynn the Queen of country music! (this is a huge positive in my view) ;)

7.) Defends leaders of religious groups without knowing anything about who they are or what they've done; nor is he interested in learning the truth re. them.  Leans strongly toward making excuses for them-- even when it comes to covering-up child abuse, wife beating, etc.

   Okay, I'm sure we can come up with more, but there are enough here for us to make some pretty good guesses.

   Trac4. is a math professor, who also holds a minor degree in computer science.  He was a leader in the now mostly defunct Witness Lee movement known as the Local Church (this would explain his rather odd spiritualized view where hearing and speaking God's word alone accounts for God's working in a church.  It would also explain his desire to defend evil religious leaders). 

   Only God truly knows "who his Master is", but the Master did say that those who operate in the darkness (hiding their true identity and motives) are not involved in the Master's business.  I know there are a few who post here under a pseudonym, and there may be good reasons for this, but these other posters engage in honest conversation vs. the occasional drive-by shot from the dark that Mr. Trac. does. 

  He is old enough to know who Loretta Lynn is and his appreciation of her talent probably means that during the summer (when he wasn't teaching) he drove cross country as a truck driver.  This would also seem to fit with his style of anon. poster, as he probably talked on the CB radio using a handle such as, "Trac4yusmoky", which in this role he would warn other drivers on the location of speed traps! ;)

  In my opinion, if this last paragraph is true, he is a worthy person of great value and has earned my great respect as a result! ;D :rofl:

                                                God Bless,  Mark C. 

The abuse and smear and misrepresentation I am enduring is crushing..

http://youtube.com/watch?v=YNtTU0_X3c0 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=YNtTU0_X3c0)

..but I'll survive...barely. ;)


From m.c...

Thanks m.c. for the appreciation.  :)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sqh3FR1CuKw (http://youtube.com/watch?v=sqh3FR1CuKw)

Why then don't you represent yourself in the appropriate way of introduction, rather than game-playing?

ALL: Do a goooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooogle on trac4yt......................

moonf,

Join in the battle within the google realms....more Christians needed!  :)

(Even the Gospel in German)

May the Lord use you.

Okay... But really... Who has time for all that?

Either someone has something of substance to contribute to a debate or argument, or they don't.  Those who could, but don't - either due to laziness or pride or some such factor - often resort to semi-random interjections of intellectual development, with the intention of drawing attention to themselves and their cause, or simply to derail the current discussion for their own entertainment.

As I read through this thread, it is obvious to me that, for instance, both Tom M. and Mark C. have deep ideas and thoughts which will be brought to light through healthy discourse, and the goal for them both is an arrival to true truth, and an arrival to unity.  They may never agree on everything, but the purpose and goal of the discussion is resolution.  This, hopefully, is true of every discussion on this BB.

But Trac4 appears to be here for a different purpose.  Friends, have you argued with an atheist lately?  They are often very skilled at debate, often well read in philosophy.  But their arguments are from the mind, not the heart.  They are thus limited in their ability to grasp transcendent concepts, raw logic being their only resource.  Discussions quickly degenerate into rapid quips of sarcasm.  It is a trap I have fallen into in the past, and I can't escape the impression that Trac4 is stuck in this trap as well.

Good humor and playful intrigue are fine amongst friends, so it is now time for Trac4 to establish him/herself as a friend.  Until he or she voluntarily opens his or her heart to us, we should not waste our time.  Let us instead leave our time and thought energy available for our higher purpose and calling in Christ Jesus.

If I sound like a stodgy old geezer, well, all I can say is, "Experience can sometimes take the fun out of the frivolous."

Since I do not have high-speed internet, the you-tube videos are inaccessible to me.  So, I have made some observations regarding trac4yt based on the words of his postings. 

1)  About a month ago, I observed that much of his postings were mockings and ridicules of the claims made on this bb.  In all of his postings it is hard to find anything that is an actual contribution to any thread on which he is posting. 

2)  On November 24th he gave an extremely large number of references to illustrate one point. 

3)  The references do not adequately illustrate the point; but in his mind they do.

4)  The extremely large number of references to illustrate this point come from many different sections of the Bible.

5)  He uses a number of other translations to back up the point he is making and to give credibility to his point.  However, he still does not succeed in making his point.

6)  The verses he gives insinuate a specific direction of thought, without him actually stating it.

7)  In this recent large number of references, almost all the verses speak of a servant/master relationship used in a wide range of contexts.  Some examples of the master are Abraham, Potipher, Saul, Nabal, an Amalekite, King of Assyria, God and Jesus.  Some verses do not mention the name of a particular master but exhort the servant to honour and respect their master.

    However, in the middle of his list are a couple of verses that do not seem to belong.  They are Daniel 1:3; 4:9; and 5:11. 

Daniel 4:9 reads: "O Belteshazzar, chief of the magicians, since I know that a spirit of the holy gods is in you and no mystery baffles you, tell me the visions of my dream which I have seen, along with its interpretation."

Daniel 5:11 reads: "There is a man in your kingdom in whom is a spirit of the holy gods; and in the days of your father, illumination, insight, and wisdom like the wisdom of the gods were found in him. ..."

In summary, all of these obsevations seem very familiar to me.  I feel as if I was back sitting under George's "ministry".  What about the rest of you?

Flora

Flora,

The references on "Master" is a quick and simple reference list of the term in the Bible.  Don't read into it.  Software tools can handle this with ease. 

See if you can get high speed and join us, in "google-land" preaching Jesus Christ.

Eric, you too!  :)

..And Mark and Tom.

The Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris and co. folks, etc. ("militant" atheists) are out there and pushing hard with their philosophies all over youtube.

Their intent is nothing less than the elimination of Christianity...
(ex: many of their co. would consider teaching the Bible to young children, "child abuse".)

..and they're fierce about their intents.

Any comments you can provide on these sites will surely be a blessing.

I don't recommend jumping into this particular fray for all believers, especially young ones, because it can get very hot at times.  But for you seasoned ones, and gifted accordingly, you'll learn a lot and make a great addition.

And yes, I'm born-again.  Yes, I'm a trinitarian.
My statement of faith would be found in common with many of you.



Thank you for permitting my posting at times.
The Lord is good. :)

Please continue your interchange concerning your churches.
May God give you wisdom.  :)

Thanks, trac, for your very clear and friendly response.  I no longer consider interaction with you to be a waste of time.  ;)

I'm glad there are souls like yourself willing to be a force for the gospel in cyberspace.  As long as your purpose is to glorify Christ, may you prosper in all your efforts!

Folks,

I googled "Trac4yt".  I got pages and pages of links.  Apparently Trac spends a lot of time on discussion boards relating to videos. 

A question for whoever...why do most of the links lead one to pages where several videos are linked, but the name Trac4yt is not shown?

Trac,

Just how does one go about following this advice:

Tom Maddux

It's all free..

1) Go to youtube.com

2) Create an account.  Pick a username.

3) Once logged in to your new account, you can upload videos or add favorites.
    You can change settings for comment permissions, etc.

4) Search in youtube, in the search box,  for your favorite people, topics (evolution, creation, etc.) or for particular "outreach" potential sites.

5) Note comment sections on videos.

6) Comment for Jesus Christ all the way to the second coming.  ;)
    Welcome to the global mission field!   :)

Bonus..

Also, create a free email account in via google....gmail.com

..and there's always blogging.

..later.
 ;)

On November 25 trac4yt stated:
“The references on "Master" is a quick and simple reference list of the term in the Bible.  Don't read into it.  Software tools can handle this with ease.”

It is obvious that you used a reference tool and just wrote down references. That wasn’t my point. This was just another diversion tactic of yours to avoid answering the very personal question, “Who is your Master?” Although a number of people on this BB have asked you to answer it, so far you have not done so.

You state that you are born again, that you are Trinitarian and that your statement of faith is similar to ours. Also, you indicate you are actively witnessing for Christ. None of this proves that your Master is our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Some born again Christians don’t live daily for their Saviour; and when these ones preach the gospel, their life contradicts their words. To own Him as both Lord and Saviour is to daily live for Him, in such a way that there is oneness between the message and the life of the messenger.

In your postings on this BB, you have consistently mocked and ridiculed the statements of other Christians made here. This is NOT Christian behaviour! It does not reflect the nature and character of our God, and it is not something He would have endorsed.

The Bible says: “By their fruits you shall know them.” What postings have you made on this BB, that reflects the fruit of the Spirit? If our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is your Master, then I challenge you to prove it by your life, which includes your posting on this BB.

You owe everyone you mocked and ridiculed on this BB an apology. Will you humble yourself and sincerely apologize to them?

Flora

Hi Flora,

Looks like everyone's left and converted to you-tube :).

when MarkC first started calling trac4yt Tracy, I googled trac4yt and learned that the yt stood for you-tube.  I do not know who he is but it does look like he has been influenced by Geftakys' ministry.  Nevertheless, you have an interesting perspective.  BBs are always difficult to evaluate motives and tone, since one cannot actually see facial expression.  Hence it is not a good forum to provide extensive counselling either.  It ought to be more a discussion board but has become more of a blog site for MarkC and his supporters.

For me, this BB was good for figuring things out, and for re-connecting with people, but there is a season for everything and the times have changed.

Anyway, I'll talk to you later.
Marcia