AssemblyBoard

What is the update on "the Ministry"  Are there assemblies besides So Cal that are receiving George?  Are there Assemblies in other places receiving Tim? If so it looks like these guys have made out pretty good for themselves despite the past events.

My sources tell me that Tim  has left the ministry all together to pursue a career as a  go go dancer in Las Vegas.  He apparently likes those cash businesses.

George apparently is dillegently planning for the midwest seminar in Champagne Memorial Day weekend.  Apparently no one in the midwest was able to get the word to him that no one wanted to spend a weekend listening to an adulterer/advocate of wife beating/money laundering individual who makes absolutely no sense when he preaches.

Hi David

I'm a little out of the loop now, but to the best of my knowledge, here is where the groups stand:

The Hardcore bunch, who still receive GG are  San Francisco, Sacramento, Pasadena, Riverside.

The groups that continue to meet, who have renounced GG:

Santa Barbara, West LA, Placentia, Fullerton (Tim G spells trouble here), Seattle, Hastings.

I'm not sure what is happening in Omaha, Annandale or Chicago, but I know that these groups do not fall under what I have labeled the hardcore GG supporters.

I have a huge problem with the "hardcores," but I really don't have a problem with the others, per se.  On the one hand, I don't think they are really being wise in continuing to meet, in light of their history.  On the other, who am I to say that Christians can't get together?

In most cases that I am aware of, they purged the leaven from their midst as best they could.  Do I disagree with them?  Yes I do, however I do think that these groups are in a far better position to hear from God now, after having rid themselves of GG, than they were 2 years ago, when they were serving him.  God broke through my thick skull when I was in the group, surely He can get to them in an Assembly-lite group.

Now, if (notice I said if) some of these groups are clinging to the old teaching and practices, and I have an opportunity to enlighten them, I will certainly do so.  That's what this forum is all about.  However, I will not presume to visit them for the purpose of correction, etc.  Even if they invited me, I would only share about Jesus and His love.  

On the other hand, if they come out of the group, for the purpose of seeking, I would have no qualms about sharing my views about the Assembly system, and the whole idea of a "New Testament Gathering."

For all intents and purposes, the Assembly is gone, except for the hardcore groups mentioned above.  If it does live on, it only does so in our hearts and minds.

Rom 12:12:1  I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the compassions of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, [which is] your intelligent service.  2  And be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of [your] mind, that ye may prove what [is] the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.  3  For I say, through the grace which has been given to me, to every one that is among you, not to have high thoughts above what he should think; but to think so as to be wise, as God has dealt to each a measure of faith.  4  For, as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office;  5  thus we, [being] many, are one body in Christ, and each one members one of the other.  6  But having different gifts, according to the grace which has been given to us, whether [it be] prophecy, [let us prophesy] according to the proportion of faith;  7  or service, [let us occupy ourselves] in service; or he that teaches, in teaching;  8  or he that exhorts, in exhortation; he that gives, in simplicity; he that leads, with diligence; he that shews mercy, with cheerfulness.  9  Let love be unfeigned; abhorring evil; cleaving to good:  10  as to brotherly love, kindly affectioned towards one another: as to honour, each taking the lead in paying it to the other:  11  as to diligent zealousness, not slothful; in spirit fervent; serving the Lord.  12  As regards hope, rejoicing: as regards tribulation, enduring: as regards prayer, persevering:  13  distributing to the necessities of the saints; given to hospitality.

Tuesday nights I hike with Sierra Club in Fullerton. We do a different route every week (there are quite a few trails throughout Sunny Hills. Last week our path took us right behind GG's house. Two club members had to wrestle me down because I kept lobbing rocks over his fence. (Not really but I was tempted!) :D :D :D :D :D

This is my response to Brent's post below.
Thank-you Brent; that clarifies for me where you stand with regards to the 'assembly issue'.
It is sad that some gatherings continue to receive GG.

Lord bless,
M

Uh..thanks.

This almost sounds like you agree with me.  Have I just assumed something again, or do you really agree?

Brent

Yes, I agree. However, at this point I'm not 100% certain of my leanings with regards to what you have stated you disagree with.
I will re-state that it is sad that some groups continue to receive GG in their midst.

M

Good one Brent Re: Assembly-lite


I'm interested in your views on 'the whole idea of a "New Testament Gathering."'

Lord bless,
M

 

Brent, are you preparing an article in response to this?
i, too, am interested in your perspective on N.T. gathering.

al Hartman

I have several papers that I wrote in the past, which I would be happy to send you.  I am going to wait just a little bit before responding here with my views on NT gathering.

Let me just say this:

God is not interested in a corporate pattern.  He is interested in individual people.  Tom Maddux has said some very good things regarding this.  One that stood out in my mind was when he mentioned the Plymouth Brethren Mass.

While there is nothing wrong with the pattern that the PB's use, per se,  when they elevate their style of meeting into something that God sanctions as opposed to "other" ways of meeting, it becomes analogous to a mass.

The Assembly took this and went several steps further.

I'll have more to say later, but if anyone is interested in some unpublished stuff I have on the topic, email me.  Be warned, the stuff I am referring to doesn't make GG look too good, but it does offer help for people who feel guilty about forsaking "God's pattern."

Brent

The ideal would be an 'assembly-like' gathering without the 'assembly system' attitudes.

There is something to be said 'for' open worship/prayer, open ministry, the hospitality of the saints.

Do you agree??

M

My experience with "open prayer" is like the parable the Lord used to illustrate how we are justified completely by faith apart from works (Luke 18).  A Pharisee and tax collector go to the temple to pray.  You remember the story.  The Pharisee was full of himself and the tax collector (standing afar off - he couldn't even bring himself to completely enter in) simply asked for mercy.

The assembly always contended they were "better" at worship because they had "the" pattern.  Those "worldly churches"  didn't worship correctly as they didn't "exalt Christ" through prayer, etc, ad nauseum.  I'll tell you how it made me feel over the course of the 15 years I was in attendance.  The same people prayed constantly (pious, scripture filled prayers).  I felt many times that I couldn't measure up to the prayers of the others and many times I wouldn't pray due to measuring myself against these prayers.  When I was "doing well" in the eyes of the leadership, I could enter in and pray.  But when I was being entreated, being told I didn't measure up, it produced in me an absolute inability and paralysis to pray.

That is not what God intended when he asked us to worship him.  And where in scripture does it ask us to worship in this way?  It has been so liberating to worship in the "worldly church" where there is such joy and a lifting up of the Lord without the pious prayers of other believers.

Open ministry?  What did that lead to?  Heretical teaching.  It allows for anyone who thinks they "have the mind of the Lord" to get up and lead others astray.  I'm not telling anyone else what to do, I know that Chuck Vanasse worships in a similar way and it has worked for his family.  But I will never worhsip in another place that does not have a trained pastor/staff to teach the flock.  I don't ever want to be led astray again by men who think they have been taught something "heavenly" without having gone through the exercise of learning from learned men through the established means of seminary and being accountable to the body of Christ for such ministry.

The Hospitality of the saints?  Does this form of worship have the "market" on hospitality?  I have received wonderful hospitality from the saints where we began attending after we left the assembly.  It is not the pattern of worship that engenders hospitality.  It is peoples hearts moved by our Saviour to reach out to others with His love.  I haven't received much hospitality from the assembly saints since we left (in fact much the opposite - most have shunned us and won't talk with us.)  This is hospitality?  The assembly encouraged hospitality for one thing:  bring men and women into the "work" and thus bondage to the assembly system.  

Thanks but no thanks!

     I must say that I didn't see the way we met for worship as being something to boast of.  That didn't make sense to me.  How can we boast of how we worship God?  There is a contradiction.  We were there as a people gathered together to give glory to God.  To be there to say, "look at me," or "look at my prayer" would obviously be contradicting the actual prayer of praise itself.  
     To be honest, I thought that that was not what was happening.  I thought it was all genuine.  Was that being naive?  But could it be that it was genunine for many?  I think so.  
     Isn't it a matter of what each individual had in his or her heart?  Could it be that some people in the assembly really were thankful to God when they said, for example, "Thank you, Jesus, for saving a wretch like me"?  
     Well, that's what it seemed like to me.  Maybe I was being proud and didn't know it ???  But I know that what was in my heart was thankfulness to God.  I am a sinner and he saved me.  Thank you Lord!  Isn't it right to proclaim that good news from the rooftops--how much more among my dear brethren?!  "Encourage one another with these things!"
     I was glad for how things were set up because it allowed me to concentrate and focus on the Lord and the praises that were being said of him.  It did not enter my mind that we were superior for how we did it.
     On the other hand, I do admit that I did come to be more fond of the way we did it over other ways.  To this day I can't think straight to worship with a loud band playing.  But I was that way before joining the assembly.  Is that pride?  Maybe it is, I dunno.   I don't think so, though.  Maybe it's just preference.  
     Perhaps if I was in the assembly longer, the hypocritical leaven of the ministry would have infected me.  I know that it began to do so for the year that I was down in Fullerton.  That was a trying time.  I didn't enjoy worship anymore after going through that.  The meetings then became to me what many have described them to be.  Interesting, isn't it?  I guess it's a matter of perspective.
     I'll tell you one thing, though.  I wouldn't mind getting together with you all and giving thanks to God for how he has carried us through this tumoltuous experience of being in the assembly.
If that's being proud, then call me hubris.
 
Arthur

Kimberly---

I read your post and knew exactly what you were talking about. I remember it very well indeed. If you had been entreated, or spoken to about some "rebellious attititude",
naturally you would hold back. "He thinks he's holy and righteous enough to lift up a prayer after he's been exhorted for his rebellious behavior?" And it's true--it was always the same people---the extroverted usually--who could lift up the loudest, most eloquent prayers.

Extroverted people had a distinct advantage in the Assembly---because "outward form" was very important. "Giving a Word" and giving it well was a sign of Spiritual growth. I remember once as introverted and fearful as I was to get up in front of people, forcing myself to get up and "give a word" one Sunday. Afterwards several people said "You're really growing in the Lord".

Is "giving a word" a sign of Spritiual growth? Some people have a "natural" gift of communication, have no fear of getting up in front of people, and are very dynamic when they are the center of everyone's vision. I agree with Kimberly that giving "everyone" the opportunity to preach the word is actually not correct Biblically. The Bible clearly states that a "novice" should not be a teacher or he could be lifted up in pride---and I think many brothers were lifted up in pride.

Actual growth in the Lord does not necessarily consist in being able to "give a word" well, but in charity, brotherly love, kindness, longsuffering, etc---the fruits of the Holy Spirit. Therefore in the Assembly, the vocal, most visible, were the esteemed ones--considered "mature"--while someone who was shy and introverted was considered less spiritual, and "immature".

As in virtually all false teaching, there is a two-tier system set up--whether deliberately, or just the result of the teaching. There are the "spiritual ones" and "the failing ones". I see what Arthur is saying too--I went to worship wanting to be as sincere as I possibly could---but I was severely limited as ones would ask "Why don't you ever worship the Lord?"(meaning verbally in front of everyone) why don't you contribute?" When inside I was contributing with all of my heart.

I have to disagree with Arthur--I always disliked the Assembly form of worship--I much prefer worshiping silently even if it is to blaring music!! No one has to hear what I have to say in front of the Lord--in fact, I'd prefer only the Lord hears what I have to say to him from my heart. But, to each his own--what's important is that we do worship the Lord.

--Joe

Mgov, I would like to take a little liberty with your question above, and assume that what you mean by "assembly-like, without assembly-system attitudes," means that you appreciate the freedom of being able to vocally pray, and have truly open ministry, while losing all of the politics, corruption, elitism, etc.  This assumption is based on what many people have expressed over the years, but if it is not what you meant, please clarify.

Many people see Assembly liturgy as unique, because we were "free" to worship.  I contend that this isn't necessarily the case.  Catholic Mass is rigid, and well regulated.  The priest says what he is going to say, and the people say their part.  The priest must perform, the people must spectate.  The parishoners are free from having to speak, teach of comment.  The priest is free from any checks or balances.  

In the Assembly system, we were not free with regard to when the meeting started or stopped.  We were also under constraint to participate.  This was true more for men, than women, but both were expected to have a contribution proportional to the years spent in the group.  Many a brother got up and "gave a word," out of contraint, and not freedom.  Many others abused their freedom by getting up and wasting time, without God's leading.  There were also plenty of times when encouraging ministry was shared, and God did minister to his lambs.  Nevertheless, this freedom was more along the lines of regulated spontenaity.  We all knew the unwritten rules about who could speak when.

However, if we assume that the freedom to worship was the strength of the Assembly-system, I think we need to re-examine that.  For example, we were not free to have music.  We were not free to hear outside speakers.  The leading brothers defined who was free to speak, and on what topic.  They were free to censor, we were constrained to submit, etc.  In spite of all the freedom that we imagined, the meetings all started and stopped with the precision of a German railway.

The idea of Assembly church government, minus Assembly-attitude is merely to say that the Assembly was presbyterian.  Plenty of other groups are governed by elders.  This has both good and bad aspects, as does congregational and episcopal church government.  In fact, while George claimed that the gathering was run by the elders, no one who spent any amount of time in an Assembly can be fooled into thinking that George wasn't head over all.  In spite of the claims to be prebyterian, the Assembly was actually quite episcopal.

The idea of congregational led worship is both good and bad.  How many times did you cringe when some zealous brother would insist we belt out a hymn, when quiet reflection would have been more in order?  Also, did you ever observe that when people were exercising their freedom to worship, a leader would step in and re-direct everyone, even exhort them to pray, etc?  That is hardly free.

A truly free church pattern would include music, acapella, muliplicity of ministry, and stated ministry, worship team, and congregational led singing, starting and stopping at different times, etc.  Even with all this, it is no guarantee that it would be better than another system.  In fact, it could very well be confusing.

I have come to the conclusion that the whole pursuit of church pattern, is at best unnecessary.  All too often it results in a huge, multi-media entertainment based production, or a sick, cultic group like the Assembly.  The church meeting should be designed in such a way that people are able to worship, pray, study and fellowship in a meaningful way.  This is largely dependent on culture, and is certainly not to be found in the New Testament, in the form of a blueprint.

The groups that seem to having the most beneficial impact today are not at all like the Assembly in form, neither are they all like one another.  Obviously, God is less concerned about the NT pattern than we are!

Brent

Ahh...Principles, not Pattern.   That could be a wonderful title for something. :)

I couldn't agree more.

Brent

Please permit some questions and further exploration on this, as I wonder aloud.  

Wouldn't you agree that everyone has something to share?  Every believer can encourage one another.  

Now, I assume we are referring specifically to a time when we are gathered together.  I would say that if someone has something worthwhile to share he should be able to share it, in an orderly manner of course.  I don't think it just be one guy every time.  Wouldn't you agree?

Let's say it's just two or three gathered together.  Could'nt we each take turns telling each other some nifty tid-bit we learned from reading the Bible the other day?  
Well, how bout 4 or 5, could we then still take turns?  But if we get 20, 30, 50, 100 or more 1000+, do we then need to designate one man to do the preaching?
(Personally, I think a gathering over 100 is kinda large and does not lend itself to personal relationships.  Small groups meeting separately from the larger group are a really good idea that I've seen in practise.)

Explain I Cor 14:26, Eph 5:19, Heb 3:13, Heb 10:25 and I Thes 5:11.

And on a similar note, isn't it God's intention for everyone to be a prophet, priest and king?  One of the things fought for in the Reformation--the priesthood of all believers.
Exo 19:3-6, I Pet 2:9, Matt 12:1-8, I Sam 19:23-24, Mark 12:36, Acts 2:16-20, and many Psalms record King David's prophesies.

Hey, I just thought of something after thinking about principles vs pattern.

What principles do we hold for a time of worship?
I'm thinking:

1.  We're there to worship God and Christ. i.e. He gets the glory (thoughts, adoration, focus, heart's desire love and affection) and not man.
2.  We love, respect and encourage one another.
3.  There is some order to the meeting.

Anything else?


Oh, and by "order to the meeting" (it shouldn't have to be said, but given the assembly twist), I don't mean that the order is the focus (obviously, for that would violate principle number 1) or that any particular way of ordering the meeting is divinely inspired.  Order is a necessary behind-the-scenes kinda thing that allows for what we really want to have happen, happen. i.e. God being worshipped. You shouldn't even notice that it's there.  Really, it seems almost awkward for me to write this because it's such a "gimme", a "no duh", a "of course, silly".  In other words, DO YOU THINK THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE SOOOOO THANKFUL TO GOD FOR SAVING THEIR LIVES FROM ETERNAL DAMNATION WOULD GIVE A HOOT ABOUT THE PARTICULARS OF HOW THEY SAY THANK YOU?!?  The man cleansed and healed from the deadly, flesh-eatin' disease of leprousy threw himself at Jesus feet.  I think that about sums it up.  

"And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks."

Arthur---

That's very true!! Good thoughts.


---Joe

Thanx bro :)

Well e.g. there are Brethren gatherings  that are assembly-like (except that the sisters don't pray out).  I have friends who were involved with the assemblies in India (B.Singh's ministry); those gatherings are also assembly-like.
How do they meet without the 'assembly-system' attitudes?

I am curious about the groups that seem to be having the most beneficial impact today.  Which groups are they?

M

P.S. This discussion is useful for those seeking a new place of fellowship.

Verne,

I have lived in Fullerton since 1984 and I have never heard of any Church of the Open Door of Fullerton.  I just checked the local phone book...no listing.

So, there might be some mistake in the information you recieved.

Thomas Maddux

Yep, that's how it should be, even if the church is like Jerusalem in the book of Acts, with thousands of members, and growing strong.

Also, there should be a time when ONLY one person speaks, and isn't interupted.  There should also be a few recognized teachers, and others who are gifted in specific ways.  We are not all the same, and shouldn't attempt to function the same way.

Each meeting need not be equally divided up to prayer, worship, fellowship, teaching.  Each meeting need not be open to public testimony either, and in the same way, every meeting should not be a one man show.  The Assembly/PB/Sparks pattern is but one way to express this, but it is far from the best way.  

I definitely don't have the gift of mercy!  However, I hear frequently from many people who have never set foot on this BB that I have the gifts of discernment and teaching.  I get a chance to exercise these gifts at various times, but I am NOT the "go-to" guy when someone needs comfort.  I might be of assistance in a private discussion regarding a controversy, but I would be a lousy person to comfort a grieving family.  In the same way, different meetings can have different purposes, and some churches emphasize different things.  There is a spiritual smorgashboard out there so that everyone can find a place where they are able to minister and receive ministry.

Anyhow, I can think of how this kind of freedom can be realized in any number of "patterns," each of them different than the other.

Brent

I think that would be hard to manage, i.e. everyone have a chance to speak among so many.  


Yes, when one speaker is given the floor is when I learn things most efficiently, and that only when the speaker does a good job and doesn't bore me.  


     Yes, that's how I see it also--a smorgashboard of various ways of meeting together, each with merit.  God loves variety, doesn't he?  Giraffe's, elephants, dogs, cats, etc.  
     Would you say that men decide how to govern themselves, not only in civil government but also in church government--there being no difference, or would you say that the Holy Spirit has some role in setting it up, or some combination of the two?

     Did you catch the same thing that I did from the assembly--that what was spoken was, "We are doing what the Lord showed us.  We know it is not the perfect way, but it's the best way we know, so that's what we do.  If you have a suggestion as to how we can do it better, let us know."  
What was unspoken most of the time and sometimes verbaly hinted at, at least what by my observations I think was implied, was, "This is the best way; this is the most holy way--anything else is inferior both spiritually and in regards to common sense."  
Of course, such a notion is childish and immature, and out of place for people claiming to be humble seekers and worshipers of Jesus.

OK, but what of Moses?  Obviously what God told him was a God-given pattern by which he wanted to be worshipped.  What--15 chapters in Exodus plus almost all of Leviticus. Ah, but that's the point, isn't it.  That was an earthly type of the heavenly reality.  That was for temporary purposes only.  Now that Jesus has come, we worship in spirit and in truth, no longer by animal sacrifices, no longer by any earthly pattern(such as priest garments and tabernacle curtain rods being just so, etc.)  
     There are some basic guidelines given--most importantly to eat the bread and drink the cup to shew the Lord's death 'till he comes, and also to sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs making melody in your heart to the Lord (and maybe others?).   But that leaves it wide open as far as how to apply those two things, and indeed it is not limited.  Whatever is lovely, noble, etc. will please him--the point is that in our hearts we love him and give him thanks.  And even both of those things I mentioned obviously are not "rules" but loving responses from our grateful hearts.

This is fun thinking about these things and getting it straight.  Thanks :)

Arthur

That's why large churches really push small group meetings.  However, my experience is that getting more than 5 NORMAL people to speak in public, one after the other is like pulling teeth.  In a group of 3000, I doubt if more than 10 or 12 would feel comfortable getting up in front of the whole congregation.

Brent

Do you think that extrovertism is a gift of the spirit?  Maybe there are far more capable preachers in the group than are apparent for the mere fact that people are too cowardly or lazy to find out.  Maybe that could be seen as being disobedient to the command to preach the Word?  I think of Moses at the burning bush.  

I'm thinking that most people could do a good job at preaching or teaching if they would only try and if they could get some good training.  Kinda like most people could do at least algebra, but I'm thinking everyone could do Calculus too if it was an expectation and requirement at an earlier age in school.

James 3:1  My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.

I don't think a push to develop many teachers or prophets in a church is a good idea.  I am reminded by some of the "prophecy" conferences that were popular not long ago.  I spoke with people who thought they were a good place to develop the gift of prophecy.   The more prophets the better.

Elders and Deacons should not be the majority of the church membership, in my opinion.  However, Elders and Deacons should be able to teach.

Brent

Agreed, but that wasn't what I was referring to.  At least not to teachers as the ones designated by the Holy Spirit in him giving them that gift.  Rather, I was referring to the fact that everyone should know what they believe and be able to share their faith adequately.

For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.  

Who's pushing?  In the marines, every man is first a rifleman,  i.e. everyone knows how to do the basics, and then specializes from there.  So what does every disciple of Jesus have in common?  Aren't some of the basics of Christianity to 1. Know the Word  2. Preach the Word  3. Live according to the Word?

Let me put it another way.  I would expect that a good disciple of Islam would be well-versed in the Koran and be able to share with me what exactly it is that he believes.  It doesn't have to be fancy, but I would hope that he knows what he believes and why he believes it.  I would also expect that he lives like what he believes--he bows five times towards Mecca, tries to make a pilgrimage to Mecca, etc.  Then what would you expect from a disciple of Jesus?

In regards to knowing the Word, isn't it the "glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."  Weren't the Bereans more noble because they did so.  

In regards to preaching the Word, when Paul charges Timothy, "before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;  Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine."  Is it only to Timothy that he speaks?  Is it only to elders, deacons or teachers?  Or is something that every believer should do?  And what of the Great Commission?  Couldn't we all echo with Paul, "Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!"

In regards to living the Word--there are three statements in John by which Jesus indicated what it means to be a disciple of his:
1.  "Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed."  John 8:31
2.  "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."  John 13:35
3.  "Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples."  John 15:8

And the inverse of the implication is stated in Luke14:27-33,
"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.  And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple...So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple."

Arthur

Good points, all.

1320 didaskalos {did-as'-kal-os}
from 1321; TDNT - 2:148,161; n m
AV - Master (Jesus) 40, teacher 10, master 7, doctor 1; 58
1) a teacher
2) in the NT one who teaches concerning the things of God, and the
duties of man
1a) one who is fitted to teach, or thinks himself so
1b) the teachers of the Jewish religion
1c) of those who by their great power as teachers draw crowds
around them i.e. John the Baptist, Jesus
1d) by preeminence used of Jesus by himself, as one who showed
men the way of salvation
1e) of the apostles, and of Paul
1f) of those who in the religious assemblies of the Christians,
undertook the work of teaching, with the special assistance of
the Holy Spirit
1g) of false teachers among Christians

Being able to share one's faith, or lead a small group Bible study is not quite the same as being a "master."  I totally agree with you regarding the need for spiritual literacy among God's people.  How I wish I had some about 20 years ago!

However, one danger we must avoid at all costs, is to look out on what we perceive the state of Christians to be, weigh it and find it wanting, and then take it upon ourselves to lay down a law in order that the situation can be remedied.

I think this happens far too often, in far too many churches.  It is simply a form of legalism.

I am somewhat hesitant to share more on this, because I am beginning to sound like a Calvary Chapel promoter...but at risk of the same, let me share a short version of a story that Chuck Smith relates in his book, "Harvest."

---

This is the short, paraphrased version, but I do recommend getting the book.  There is no question that the Calvary Chapel movement has been used mightily by God.

When Chuck was pastoring one of his first churches, the church was not doing well.  It wasn't growing, and the members were not at all, "fired-up."  This is not a good sign for a Four-Square pastor!

He began to stir up revival in their midst, and asked them to invite people to the meeting, in order to hear the gospel and get saved.  He would preach the gospel, week after week to already saved people.  The members in his congregation were not acting responsibly, and were not doing enough to win lost souls.  He correctly pointed this out, using the scriptures, month after month, and prayed vigorously, in order to stir them up.  It wasn't working.

Broken before God, in the face of real failure, he learned something.  He had been using God's sheep as if they were beasts of burden, and their work was responsible for the increase of the flock.  True, they were not functioning as evangelists, or showing hospitality, etc.  But the reason is that they were tired and hungry.

Chuck stopped beating and goading the sheep to perform, and began to feed them.  His messages stopped focusing on what they should be doing, and started to focus on what Christ had done.  He built them up with grace, and the love of God.

Then things began to happen.  Visitors started showing up, and the church grew.  Healthy, fat sheep reproduce.  Thin, harrassed sheep don't.

At his next church, he began having "sharing" times for Bible study, instead of being up front and doing all the teaching.  This was also successfull, because people who normally never said a word began to pray publicly, and speak and teach.

The next church after this one, was a little place in Costa Mesa, California, that had about 35 members....

Healthy, well fed sheep reproduce.

The key to growth is to feed God's people, and give them an opportunity to step out in faith.  

Brent

Good points.  Reminds me of the old adage, "You can attract more flies with honey than vinegar."  
And really that is kin to one of the themes of the Bible.  Law is a heavy burden that no one can handle; a reminder of sin and the result is death.  Love sets free and gives life.  

So you're saying that Christians will not become more literate or able by blows but by encouragement?  I agree.   But there is something to be said for discipline or chastisement.  Or should we all have the attitude of amorphous free love like the hippies?   ;D
"reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine."
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." The shepherd has the rod and the staff.  

I think the point of the story you related above is that Chuck's attitude changed from using the flock to caring for the flock.  Caring involves some correction and discipline at times of course, but the focus and goal is the well-being of the flock.  

Interesting to note that Love (i.e. THE love of Christ) worked within the confines and constraints of the Law, in that Christ was "born under the law", and was offered up as a sacrifice to bear the wrath of the law which we deserved.  Christ's demonstration of the love of God was not aimless or arbitrary.  It was narrowing and humbling.  It was an act of obedience.  The freedom that Love gives was not without great cost.  

We know that some things in life, particularly valuable things, have costs associated with them.  But in terms of our eternal spiritual condition, there was no price we could pay to buy our freedom.  Jesus paid it all, all to him I owe.  And he is building his church.  He is the one who gave gifts to men.  He is the one who gave some to be pastors, teachers, etc. for the building up of the church that he paid for.  The emphasis on "the building up".  
So, as far as expecting to see believers being compentent disciples--I guess my take on it is that first, I should be one myself (only by the grace of God), and second I should, only out of love, encourage it in others, trusting that God will accomplish his purpose in building his church.  

Arthur

I am enjoying the present climate on the BB.
I find the discussion very edifying, and am learning from it, though I do not have much to contribute myself.

That was my two cents worth.
M

Yep!  Naturally, we tend to go to one extreme, and then the other.  Christianity, in the 1950's was largely dead and legalistic in the US. (No, I didn't say TOTALLY DEAD :)  )

The backlash against this was the hippie movement.  The demominations that were big at one time, are graying and dying now, with the exception of some of the Baptists.

The backlash against the hippie movement came in the form of the shepherding movement, which emphasized discipleship and accountability.  It was an absolute disaster!  the centerpiece of the shepherding movement would be the International Church of Christ.

Paul anticipates these extremes in his epistles.  Some say, "We should sin, so that grace may abound."  Others teach that we should be more holy, because God deserves it, and that we need to not touch, taste or handle.

There seems to be a generation in between extremes that gets it right, for a time.

Early Church,  Roman Church, Reformation, Puritans, Wesleyans, Brethren, Baptists, Calvary Chapel...and the others I am forgetting.  They all were a necessary correction, annointed by God, with the exception of the Roman Church.

Discipline is best dished out by God, and He often uses men to accomplish it.  However, it is my belief that He is far more wanting to speak tenderly to His people, than to use the rod.  Sheep need to eat more than get smacked!

The rod and staff were also quite useful on wolves.  We don't want them to have even one bite....I really enjoy smacking a wolf on the nose.  ;)

Brent

Me too!  That makes $0.04  :)

Ain't that the truth.  Like the waves of the sea....Praise God there will one day be no more sea!  (unless you count the crystal one :)

(side note, funny thing is...I learned that one (the fact that the sea symbolizes human mutability and wanderings) from George.  I learned a lot from that guy, isn't it weird.  Arg, the dichotomy is disconcerting!)


Heh, good point.  


I have often wanted to give them a swift kick them in the...rear.  Do you think that is carnal?   :D ;) :P  8)

Look at the order in this religious meeting

(http://msnbc.com/c/0/150/912/10x7/030423iraq_01.jpg)

The caption reads:  "An Iraqi Shiite pilgrim who collapsed from exhaustion is carried out of the Imam Hussein holy shrine in the southern Iraqi city of Karbala on Wednesday. For the first time in decades, Shiite Muslims in Iraq are able to gather in the Shiite holy city of Karbala to mark the end of the 40-day mourning of the death of one of the most important figures in their religion, Imam Hussein, in the year 680. During the rule of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, such rituals were banned."

Those who pass out are passed along in an orderly manner.  lol


And how about doing this for worship, oh my.

 http://msnbc.com/c/0/150/912/ssMain.asp?fmt=child&sld=6&res=10x7&0ss=N277150912
 (http://msnbc.com/c/0/150/912/ssMain.asp?fmt=child&sld=6&res=10x7&0ss=N277150912)

What a wonderful expression of....er....ahh......

It reminds me of what some Phillipinos do at Easter, where they crucify themselves.  Muslims are not the only ones who do this.  

However, it does cause one to pause, in order to think that these people are supposed to be trusted to "make peace."  Thank God they are a sect, and not totally representative of all of Islam.  (Not that the rest are much better)

Brent

Is has been interesting to my husband and myself how our parenting styles have changed since leaving the assembly.  We have been reading a book entitled, "Shepherding a Child's Heart" by Tedd Tripp (excellent book by the way).  One key ingredient they discuss is dealing with issues of the heart, rather than simply dealing with behavior.  If all you are doing is dealing with behavior, than you are simply going to discipline for external obedience.  I believe discipline for external obedience was the main emphasis practically applied in the assembly.  As parents you are constantly entreated for your child's "behavior".  It is the issues of the heart that must be dealt with, not external obedience.  You must ask yourself, why (what's going on in your child's heart) did the child do (behavior) what he did?  That is the deeper issue that was sorely lacking in the assembly system.  

For example, whining was not to be tolerated by a child.  But why is the child whining?  Is it because you just had a new born baby and the older child is not getting as much attention as they were used to prior to the baby being born?  This will direct your parenting style tremendously, if you parent addressing your child's heart as opposed to his behavior.

What is wonderful is the fruit of this style of parenting.  You build a relationship with your child of love.  They trust you, not fear you.

One more thing we have learned with this regards.  Due to the works based theology (always performing to be accepted, constantly being entreated by others and entreating others) we found when we failed, made a mistake, it was difficult to extend grace.  We are seeing God work in wonderful ways in our family relationships as we extend grace to one another (remember grace is unmerited favor - the person doesn't deserve it - you extend it anyway.)  Grace wins people.  Try it!  It works wonders in your family.  

That is not to say you throw out all discipline.  God is the only one who has the perfect balance.  But as parents, my husband and I are seeking Him for that balance in our relationship with one another and our children and He is changing us almost on a daily basis.

What liberty we have found in HIM and HIS GRACE!!!!!! Better felt than telt, but I had to share...........

We have such JOY in HIM now!!!!!!!!

Thank you for sharing Kim :)  It warms the heart to hear it.  

It's

Kimberley!  She chewed me out months ago for calling her Kim.

It's like if you call me Bre,  or Arthur,  Art.

 ;D

Oh thank you Brent.

Everyone has begun calling me Kim here......and I didn't want to make a big deal out of it, but thank you thank you thank you. ;D ;D ;D ;D  

Oh, my bad. Sorry Kimberley.   :-[

All forgiven Arthur, I knew it wasn't intentional.   :D

2 Kings 4:38-41
38 Elisha now returned to Gilgal, but there was a famine in the land. One day as the group of prophets was seated before him, he said to his servant, "Put on a large kettle and make some stew for these men." 39 One of the young men went out into the field to gather vegetables and came back with a pocketful of wild gourds. He shredded them and put them into the kettle without realizing they were poisonous. 40 But after the men had eaten a bite or two they cried out, "Man of God, there's poison in this stew!" So they would not eat it. 41 Elisha said, "Bring me some flour." Then he threw it into the kettle and said, "Now it's all right; go ahead and eat." And then it did not harm them!

Some of the prophets found out after they had eaten the stew that it was poisonous; they realized poison had gone into them. After realizing it, they cried out and God had a solution. Then they ate the same stew without harm.

An existing assemblyite said that the Lord had thus spoken to them from 2 Kings 4:38-41 i.e. the Lord was going to remove the poison from the ministry since they have cut themselves off from GG. This same individual continues to say to me that they believe that since they are seeking God then God will show them if they are wrong. My response has always been, "But God has already shown you...."

Someone gave me a good response to the above which I might post later. I invite your comments.

Lord bless,
Marcia

Hi Marcia:

Here are my comments.  The fact that your "existing assemblyite," friend claims that "God spoke to them from 2 Kings 4:38-41," is a powerful argument.....proving that GG's ministry lives on in their midst, at least as far as their methods of discernment and hermaneutics.

Let's see if I get this right:

Elisha is a type of Christ

Gilgal is a type of the ministry, which has had a famine recently

Famine is a type of people leaving and discouraging the "saints."

The young man is a type of the leading brothers who served George, but who were really serving Elisha/Christ all along.

The poisonous gourds signify GG's influence

The flour signifies....uhhhh.....ummmm......Yes!  The Cross!  The flour signifies the cross.

The group of prophets are a type of the Assembly, which is now perfectly safe.  In fact, instead of dying from poison, they are now healthy and well fed.

All of this proves that God is leading the Assemblies because they can get clear leading from a passage like this?

---

The passage is taken horribly out of context, and a spiritual communication from God is derived from it in the most capricious manner, at least in the way I have outlined it above....which is not far off from how they are doing it, if they are going to claim that God gave them this message for the ministry's continuance.

Furthermore, to continue a behavior in the face of grave warning, with the attitude of "God will show me if I am wrong,"  borders on tempting God.   I much prefer the attitude of the Bereans who searched the scriptures to see if things were true.  They did not assume that the things were true, plunge headlong into them wearing a safety harness of "God will show us if we are wrong."  No, they remained neutral to the message until they could indeed see that it conincided with the very Word of God.

That is what existing assemblyites must do, but I fear that most of them lack the tools to do so on their own.  (I certainly did.) Have they read any of the articles on the website, or did God show them that it was evil?

Brent

Tom Maddux has great insight into stuff like this.  I would love to hear his take on how this passage is a type of the "Work."

Marcia,

Yesterday on the Wounded Pilgrims thread I said,

"This teaching did not originally come from GG at all.  It has its origins in a movement known as Lutheran Pietism.  This movement, was a reaction to the deadness of Lutheran theology in Germany and Scandinavia in the 1600's.

But the basic idea is always the same.  God is known directly by an INNER experience rather than through His self-revelation in scripture and nature.  The goal, and proof, of spirituality or right standing with God is found in the emotions, not by faith in the truth.

GG taught the English Evangelical version.  You read the word and God "speaks" to you through the word....by giving you a feeling.  This is known as Keswick Teaching, and Brent has described it in an article on the Iron's website."

The example of biblical "exposition" you have posted is related to this.  It comes from an ancient method of allegorizing or "spiritualizing" the scriptures.  It has been around since at least the second century.

GG got it from the Plymouth Bretheren, and the assemblies "caught" it from him.  The idea is that if you can think of some analogy that seems to corresopond to a passage, that is a legitimate interpretation of the passage.  Here is an example:

"Then Moses lifted up his hand and struck the rock twice with his rod; and water came forth abundantly, and the congregation and their beasts drank"  Numbers 20:11

"Praise the Lord dear saints, isn't it wonderful how God graciously disciplines us. Moses, in this verse, stands for God's government.  God has a government in the earth you know, (praise the lord), and his soveriegn rule is known as the leaders pass on the instructions of our exalted Head, the Lord Jesus Christ. (amen)

The rod is God's loving discipline.  Isn't it wonderful that He loves us enough to discipline us?  (amen)

The rock is the church.  In those days foundations were made of rock, and the church is founded on the rock.  (amen)  We are all living stones....stones are made of rock you know. (laughter)

Sometimes God needs to discipline us with the rod.  Now no discipline seems profitable at the time, but afterward it yields the wonderful living water...the water of life springing up in our lives.  Everyone turn to John 4:13-14...(sound of heavenly breezes blowing throught the leaves)..."  

Anyone getting cold chills?

You get the idea.  Moses represents the leading brothers, so all the saints should be grateful when they get blasted by them.

This is the kind of "exposition" we heard weekly in the assemblies.  The problem is that the rule used by sane expositors is that the way you know something from the OT is a type is that it explicitly says so in the NT.

Plymouth Brethren "church truth" is largely based on this type of allegory, and is therefore not all it is cracked up to be.


These folks in Ottowa are not seeing the death removed from the pot, they are still feasting on the corrupt stew.  This is why I have repeatedly told assembly people that they need to open the windows and get some ministry from a healthy church.

Even better, they should stop playing church and get involved in a real one.

God bless,

Thomas Maddux

Yes, Tom, I recognize your ministry below as standard assembly fare and misinterpretation/application of scripture. I'm so glad I'm not any longer in a metal chair week after week trying to live off of it.
That's really all that many were equipped to preach, once you set the boundaries of "everything had to be 'to the testimony' ".
Perhaps it's time existing assemblies really applied "It's what you learn after you know it all that really counts".  As in, admit we really didn't know that much at all about true, sound, biblical preaching and teaching of the word.  Then get some (or lots of) outside help to remedy that.
One message preached in the local assembly here not too long ago had to do with Paul's shipwreck in Acts.  The message was, the boat will crash but we'll all be saved.  Translation?  I guess it was "be encouraged and stay here, no matter how bad it looks."

Disclaimer: This post is only my personal opinion.

Becky

...The men were hungry, AMEN?? And they said Let's make us a stew uh. So they went to find some vegetables uh. But they weren't watchin' what they picked, uh. NO, no, no, They WEREN't watchin' what they picked, uh. You don't just pick anything when you make a stew, uh!!! But they weren't watchin' what they picked, uh. So, they grabbed them some gourdzah. They grabbed them some gourdzah, and they chopped them up real nice, uh. And they made themselves a stewah. But then one of them said "I'm not feelin' very goodah. I'm feelin' really sickah". And they began to shout!! YES, they began to shout real loudah!!!  They is poison in this here stewah!! YES!!! they is poisin in the stewah!! And they'd 'bout all died, but Elisha was there ah. YES!! Elisha was there ah. And he said "Get me some flour ah!!"" Hallelujah!! Elisha was there and said get me some flour ah!!! But this weren't just any old flour ah!! This flour was touched by a prophet ah!!  Touched by a prophet of GAWD ah!! And when he touched the flour and put it in the stew the poison was GONE ah!! Yes it was GONE ah!! Have you eaten some bad stew ah?? I said have you eaten some bad stew ah?? Then put your hand on the TV now ah!! Put your hand on the TV now ah and watch the poison go ah!! I have the flour ah!! And I'm puttin' it in your stew right now ah!!
You been eatin' gourdzah!! I said you been eatin' gourdzah!!! You need to eat some flour ah!! Put your hands on the TV and receive the flour now ah!! Yes, receive the flour and watch the poisin go ah!! This flour is from GAWD ah!! YES!!! it's from GAWD ah!! And I am his spokesman ah!!And I have the Miracle Flour ah!!!

"Thank you dear friends for listening to the Reverend Ben Loomis today, with his message "Gourds, or the Lord ah". For a taped transcript of today's message send a check for $40.00 or more plus your tithe and offering to this ministry today, or simply call 1-800-MIRACLE to make your donation. For an additional $50.00 or more receive a 1 oz. bag of Miracle flour blessed by the Reverend Ben himself. Don't be denied this blessing my friends!!! Call today!!!

Interesting enough, this was not a message that was preached from the pulpit. A sister wrote to me on how the Lord has spoken to her. But it typical of the general attitude of twisting the Scriptures in order to make it fit. Another person (who is out) put it this way:
quote--
In my opinion it is called spin the bible.
Lets see if we can find a bible verse to support what we already want to do.

I don't think it applies because:
1. the person they talked to is Elisha a proven servant of God.
2. the poison came from what an inexperienced lad who accidentally put the gourds in and not from Elisha's ministry.
3. On the contrary it was Elisha's advice with the fine ground wheat of the word (flour) that made the poison go away.
--end-quote

I cannot say that they have not read any of the articles on the website. However, I do know that the website is downplayed as a source of helpful information. I often send posts and website links to my husband and three others who are out and they often appreciate it.

Tom, just reading your post gave me goosebumps upon goosebumps. Good thing I was sitting in my comfortable office chair at my computer. :)

Becky, I am so enjoying your new-found 'critical thinking'. ;)

Joe ah! I was shocked to discover that the TV thing actually works. I tried calling, but I kept getting the busy signal. :)

Lord bless,
Marcia

I wasn't around when the Lord Jesus called the leaders 'you brood of vipers' or when Paul said 'you foolish Galatians'.  Was the Lord &/or Paul angry at the time? Were they angry and bitter? Were they bitter and not angry?  etc.

Marcia

As we all know, God gets angry.  It is referred to as wrath.  Paul also got angry.

Be angry, and sin not.

The Judaizers were probably not too happy with Paul's criticism of them.  They accused him of all sorts of things, probably bitterness was one of them.  Paul called people like them "Super Apostles."  In this Paul was sarcastic.

Really, it's amazing God used a guy like Paul.  So many were far more qualified.  Paul was just there.

Brent

Others have stated that those who 'criticize' existing assemblies and their leaders (ex or present) are bitter and angry. Some have even said that I do not love the saints that are "in".

Thanks Brent.

Marcia

I view it like this:

If I have been "following The Lord Jesus Christ," for twenty years, while paying no attention to George Geftakys or his servants during that time, then no one has a right to criticise me.  

Watching seminars on video tape, listening to seminars on audio tape, going to seminars live, none of that has any effect on a person---just because they are listening to George and saying "amen," doesn't mean they are influenced by him.  Right?  I mean, if a person watched that many porn films, over that many years, they wouldn't have a problem with pornography, right?  Think of how many movies that would be!  Interesting way to look at it, eh?

Anyways, back to the topic.  People get upset when they are criticized.  We all do, it is human nature.  However, when the critcism has a ring of truth to it, and the implications are large, there are many people who can't stand the pressure and in order to cope with reality, they must alter their perception of it somewhat.  Shooting the messenger is nothing new, and it is certainly not unique to the Assembly.

It is all so obvious and plain, except to the one who doesn't want to see.

Brent

ROM 14:1 Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions.
ROM 14:2 One man has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only.
ROM 14:3 Let not him who eats regard with contempt him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats, for God has accepted him.
ROM 14:4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and stand he will, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

MM's version of Rom 14:1-4:
Now accept the one who twists the Scriptures and believes that God is going to remove the poison from the stew..  ahh ministry.
Let not him who sees clearly that this is wrong, address(judge) another who believes that it is God speaking.
The only time one is to judge another is if the other believes that the assembly is a false religious system.

Marcia

Ahh....the sarcasm and absurdity to illustrate your point.  Well done!

On a serious note, I have actually heard someone use this verse as a tool to squelch valid criticism of the Assembly.  The key is "The Faith."  If a person is in The Faith, no matter how weak, we are to receive such a one.  It is a different matter when the difference of opinion is between one who is in The Faith, and another who is bringing another gospel, or teaching sin, etc.

The Judaizers of Galatia had a different opinion than Paul, did they not?

Brent

This is exactly the way a LB used those verses TODAY! He used it to squelch valid criticism of the way the Scriptures are still being twisted in the assembly (as in the case of Elisha's stew below).

As Paul said "You foolish Galatians...".

Marcia

Yes, Paul received the foolish Galatians, and fought for them, tooth and nail.  However, he utterly rejected and condemned the Judaizers.  My purpose here is to say something that will help those weak, precious sheep trapped in The Assembly get out.  Some of these are leaders, but most are not.

Paul called his Galatian brethren foolish, and so they were.  However, he called the Judaizers accursed false apostles, and wished they would castrate themselves!  I like Paul, and share many of the same sentiments with regard to backyard surgeries on those who would bring God's people into bondage.

Brent

Brent,

You make an important point here about Paul's stance with the Judaizers. At this point in time, after almost a year, I find it difficult to distinguish between those who are Judaizers and those who aren't. There are only a very few that I make exceptions for.

I do not believe that many of those in existing assemblies have admitted their need to repent from their involvement in promoting Geftakysism. They have made certain changes, and lightened the load, but that is only behavioural change. The real test of repentance comes when a problem arises and how they 'react' and continue to control and manipulate the others to 'do it their way' and to 'preserve the testimony'.

Another question I have is "Why condemn and judge those who are convicted and believe that the assembly is a false religion, but support and justify those who use the Scriptures to support the assembly's continuance?" if they are not to judge those who believe that God has spoken to them from the Scriptures in a particular fashion. This is a double standard.

Lord bless,
Marcia

Twisted Scriptures

If you don't know the scriptures in their historical context and keep honest to the original meaning of the text when it was given you can be a victim of any brother or sister with a holy voice who misquotes a scripture out of context with the rest or scripture and out of context with its meaning at the time.

Allegorical meanings like the Narnia Chronicles are neat sometimes but beware of those who use this method exclusively. Once they embark down this road then all manner of subjectivity can be introduced.

If they are humble. That’s a big if. Then you can point out problems when they happen but some Assembly leaders have a reputation for being “all mouth and no ears” a CB term I use to describe them. They only broadcast long-winded speeches but are not willing to let anyone reply. They are not interested in what “you’re opinion is” for it is incorrect because they have the mind of the Lord.

Beware of the leaven. A little of GGs leaven has leavened all the Workers and leaders worldwide from Europe and China to North America. Every Assembly has been and STILL IS practicing GGs Priest craft.  Clergy is the leaders, and laity the ordinary brothers and sisters.

You can’t fight city hall. That’s what it is like talking to those in the Assembly who are displaying obvious signs of Georges leaven in their life. You will know them by their fruit. If they were under George’s ministry for any length of time then they are like George. You may as well “Save your breath to cool your porridge”. They talk a good talk but don’t walk the talk. If Jesus spoke to the Pharisees about their indifference to the people why do you think He would accept what the leaders in every Assembly ARE STILL DOING TO THIS VERY DAY. I have a scripture for you. Listen listen. Pay close attention for God is speaking to you.

Isaiah 5: 20 Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! 21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes And clever in their own sight!

Recovering Saint you throw a hard punch. Man even I feel a ltittle convicted reading what you state about the sad priest-craft of George Geftakys. I sometimes feel that like Peter I need a thorough cleansing from the defilement of that era. It is particularly remarkable that any and everyone associated with that fiasco has not girded up their loins and literally ran for their very lives. There is something startling and deeply menacing about the fact that there are still those embracing this darkness. I know that there is in each of us a certain amount of resistance to God's ways that He gently, and sometimes forcefully deals with all our spiritual lives as He comforms us to the image of His dear Son. Some of the things I see in people considering themselves religious confirms in my thinking the Biblical teaching of vessels fitted for destruction...no other model provides satisfactory account. Such people ought to be left alone...
Verne

I think there are many who are "out" who still haven't done this.  This is especially true in places where the assemblies stopped meeting.  They may be going to other churches, but they still hold the assembly mindset.  Possibly they are trying, or even just wish the new church was more like the assembly.

We had this article on the website a year ago.  I think it is still apropo for today.  

http://www.geftakysassembly.com/persecution.html (http://www.geftakysassembly.com/persecution.html)

Brent

I agree now that I am out I see a stark difference in the way things are in other Christian circles.

The secrecy coverup and manipulation mostly emotional but just as real as any other abuse is very sad.

We are sincere they say. Look what we did for you. You lived with us ate our food.

The Lord says some will say to Him "we ate with you and had fellowship with you" and He will say to them "Depart from Me I never knew you".

All this to say it is not enough to say we lived together etc. But rather when we tried to point out your involvement in a closed secretive system you threw it back on us and caused us to be looked upon as the problem.

Prove it they say. Then you point it out and they say look get over it you have bitterness. What they want is to silence the victims so they can go on abusing people and no one will stop them doing what they want.

I'm sorry that they are crying but even an alcoholic has remorse but goes on to repeat it again. Some will be sorry only because they are caught. Some will be sorry as in 2 Cor 7 to repent.

8 I am no longer sorry that I sent that letter to you, though I was sorry for a time, for I know that it was painful to you for a little while. 9 Now I am glad I sent it, not because it hurt you, but because the pain caused you to have remorse and change your ways. It was the kind of sorrow God wants his people to have, so you were not harmed by us in any way. 10 For God can use sorrow in our lives to help us turn away from sin and seek salvation. We will never regret that kind of sorrow. But sorrow without repentance is the kind that results in death. 11 Just see what this godly sorrow produced in you! Such earnestness, such concern to clear yourselves, such indignation, such alarm, such longing to see me, such zeal, and such a readiness to punish the wrongdoer. You showed that you have done everything you could to make things right.

In the words of another:

This is self-perpetuating: we are right, criticism is therefore wrong, the enemy has sent this criticism, we must resist the enemy - we must not listen to them and we must carry on. It is a trap.

Yes:

The Assembly is God's work, therefore it is God.  It is right.  Anything that is negative towards God's work is wrong and from the Enemy.

The website, therefore is from the devil.

Don't listen to anything that criticises the Assembly.

Contrast this with "My sheep hear My voice."  His sheep hear the voice of the stranger, but they won't follow a stranger.  However, George's sheep hear the voice of the stranger, but won't hear the voice of The Shepherd.  Everything is upside down and backwards.

Brent

Brent,

You have a bad attitude (BA). You need joy and peace and a soft heart. Please phone your nearest local assembly and request that they pray for you. Of course, the website is from the devil. Simple logic dictates it. You have been persecuting those poor innocent LBs and workers and their wives, and all of us mindless individuals just followed you blindly.

All joking aside, I doubt that anyone who gave themselves to the "work" is innocent. This is not to point the finger at those who have truly repented.

How is it possible that the sheep hear the voice of a stranger, but won't hear the voice of the Shepherd? I suggest that these ones are those who Paul speaks of in 2Tim 4:3 "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires;". Though the leaders bear the greater responsibility, the sheep like the brand of Christianity that is being promoted and therefore, also bear a great responsibility for their condition.

Marcia

Anyone that criticizes the assembly is like a diseased limb that needs to be amputated so that the rest of the body can survive. Or like the branch that needs to be pruned from the plant and thrown into the fire.

Marcia

In the early 80's a few people out of Champaign "left fellowship." I heard my parents talking during the week that someone in the Assembly, a single mom, called these people and asked them some questions about why they left.

That Sunday morning, it was announced that those who left were "wolves, circling the flock, looking for weak lambs to devour."

The "Saints" were warned to avoid these people lest they be stumbled. ::)

I wish the "wolves" had done more stumbling back then!

Scott McCumber

Example of leaven

Throughout GG's teaching there are references to Work out your salvation. Strive to enter in. These are of course found in scripture but the way it is slipped into the conversation is interesting to note.

To one who is Grace based these statements mean to keep focusing on the Lord and let Him work things and cooperate with Him in His workings.

To one who is works based which is putting salvation in your control not Christ's it means activity of some kind. Usually it is something that appears good like praying more, reading the word more and keeping checklists or flags to keep from sin.

The Assembly was full of many sure-fire methods.
·   Line and Wheel
·   Handbook to Happiness
·   The other side of the garden
·   Tender Warrior
·   Selfer’s Prayer
These are just a few examples of the leaven that spoils the simple faith of one who sincerely wants to serve the Lord. They appear good and seem to promise results but they are not according to faith. It undermines that simplicity of which the Lord says is so important to enter in.

If we understand that we begin by faith continue by faith are accepted by faith and are glorified by faith and need not work out our salvation as something "we achieve" then we are free to follow after the Spirit.

Someone who "does" becomes weary; someone who "is 'in Christ' by faith" is renewed.

To "believe" assures me I am in Christ.
To "do" focuses on my failures to overcome.

To "believe" assures growth.
To "do" encourages spiritual pride and ultimately failure.

Leaven is like the mustard seed it is small but makes a big difference in the results. Works disguised as spiritual additions always causes death.

Hugh----

Thanks for your post. What you say is right on the money for sure. It's interesting when you really look at all we "did" when we were in Assembly at how George and his teachings attempted to take "the work of God" and make it OUR WORK. Even the "Brother's houses" were an attempt to take the forming work of the Holy Spirit and put it into our own hands. Somehow, through all of the stewardships, meetings, and close associations, not to mention the disciplining hand of leading brothers, Christ was to be "formed in us", when that can only be accomplished by the gracious hand of God himself. Thank God it is "not of him who willeth, nor of him who runneth, but OF GOD who shows mercy".

--Joe

About 1 1/2 year ago, I was told by an Ottawa "worker" that a certain individual could not be sent out to start a 'testimony' in another city that we were praying for because he did not have the vision for George's ministry. These are the same individuals who claim that GG's influence was not strong in Ottawa, but yet the qualification for involvement in the work was a knowledge of his ministry (reading his books etc.).

GG's influence was so far-reaching that we have even picked up 'expressions' that were peculiar to him. Someone reminded me that those 'expressions' are still being used. They are not harmful in and of themselves, but they do indicate GG's influence upon the Ottawa assembly. GG had a particular pronunciation for Haggai which bugged some people, but others adopted it as their own.

Marcia

Ironically, the Hagg-ee-eye pronunciation is fairly common in some seminaries.  It did make me cringe every time he said it.  That and El-Shadd-ee-eye.

It worked.  I'm amazed.  I got on the bb!
Analyze analyze.  That's what people do.  Read my analyzing to follow.  Not sure yet how to get my mail on this cite so send it to my homail address.
delila
   
Rising from Total Zero

   My mother was born in a refugee camp in Munich, Germany.  She came to
this country a child, floating on a boat, without a single English word in her mouth,
her mother holding her hand, and vomiting into the sea.  They traveled by train from
Halifax to Estevan, Saskatchewan.  “When I came [to] this country,” Grandma tells
me.  “I was total zero.”  Her children taught her English when they came home from
school.  Even now she considers herself a dummy.
   As far back as I can remember I’ve wanted to be something too.  Very young,
I knew what I wasn’t.  I was, maybe ten years old when everyone else bragged about
what they’d be when they grew up. A visiting uncle turned finally to me asking, ‘And
you, Delila, what are you going to be?’ and I whispered: something.
   I am nearly forty - actually half way between thirty and forty but I’ve acquired
my mother’s habit of rounding numbers up or down to point to a fact: ‘You’re five
years old and you still can’t....’ (when I was really four and so on, through the years,
measuring me both against my older sister and my younger brother,  finding me
lacking either way). She stepped on me to raise herself. Now I’m thirty-five, to be
exact but let’s face it - I may as well be forty, right?  When I turn forty then, and still
haven’t ‘made my way’ in the world, my mother’s voice will be rounding things up
still further in my head, whether she’s alive or not, whether she suffered a mental
illness or not.  .  
   The facts are presently thus: my sister, isn’t yet that lawyer Dad predicted.  My
little brother isn’t the rock star either, though he played the straw broom with such
conviction.  So, am I something?
   Early on it was clear I needed something, to do something to get something if I
was ever going to be something.  So I joined the first cult that came along.  
   I’d been sent to school dirty, bullied, pegged as a slow learner and put in the
‘stupid row’. When I read To Kill a Mockingbird in high school and  Lawrence’s The
Diviners my first year of university, I knew I was white trash.  But by then I’d already
found God, right?  So what did it matter, how I was raised?  And I’d found God, in
whose eyes all flesh was grass, in front of whom all would burn with fervent heat,
before God, who could stand?  I had found my purpose: God’s service.
   Did I feel accepted?  Did I have friends?  Did I measure up?  Was I good
enough?  Of course not. And so what?  The world was going to hell.  There were
souls to save, what did my pathetic little ego matter when we were in the great war
for souls?  This war, fought on your knees in prayer, submission, death to self.  
    For seven years I clung to this conviction, reading the Bible everyday,
praying, going to meetings, keeping no secrets, watching no television (the devil’s
tool - the idiot box), seeing no men.
   Men.  By this time I was nearly twenty-four and in 1992, that’s a feat.  Twenty
four and still a virgin?  Wow.  And yet part of my evolving fantasy of myself was to
be the faithful wife of a godly man too.  To submit to him - a romantic notion.  Sadly,
my celibacy came to a horrible end.
   But now I’m telling too much of a story, not reflecting enough on the facts,
essaying as I should.  And up until that point in my life I was always concerned about
what I should do.  I kept my nose clean, sang with the faithful: “The world behind me,
the cross before me.  No turning back.  No turning back.”
   So keeping to that point - I wanted to be something.  I remember now.  I was
ten, licking my cold sore, listening to my brother and sister and then wondering how
I’d justify my existence.
   I bought a black leather jacket when I left the Lord.  Funny to define it that
way now, like I left my husband. I left the Lord.  My parents never phoned, had
changed their lifestyle little when we left the nest - except now they could afford to
eat out more often; otherwise, they didn’t notice.  What was there to say to them,
though my life had suddenly changed forever, that tree falling in the forest and no one
to hear me dying under it.  Except the faithful.
   I set a second hand answering machine to pick up on the first ring and listened
to the calls of the faithful as they phoned one by one to plead with a recorded voice
who sounded like she were under water.  I saw the sea of Moses, parted.  I rubbed my
toe into orange shag carpet and talked back to the leading brother’s voice as it
recorded on a little tape.  I locked my door on Sundays and took the C-Train to the
mall downtown so that if they came to admonish,  I wouldn’t be home to crumble,
open the door, cry and repent.  What would I be now if I wasn’t God’s?  God was the
only one who ever died for me, though I was nothing really. He died so at least I owed
him my life, right?  I mean, how ungrateful can you get?  Who did I think I was?  Was
I something?
   My black leather jacket marched down street after street in south-west
Calgary, looking for an apartment I could afford to rent, alone.  I made my plan to
disappear.  All I needed was for someone to come along and move a great big stone
and I was free to go.  No, that was Jesus. What was I thinking?  Comparing myself to
God?  That was heresy, my life.  If you turn away, they’d told me, it’s better that you
hadn’t been born - (less than zero).
   I have two children, now that I’m thirty-five.  My daughter is eight years old,
my son, eighteen months.  I’ve lived in my grandmother’s basement for the past four
months, since someone burned our house down.  I’m separated from my husband.
“God works in mysterious ways.” someone told me recently, referring to the house
fire, the dissolution of my unhealthy marriage.  “God?” I spit back.  You think God
did this?  It hadn’t occurred to me.  
   God had plenty of opportunities with me running through thunderstorms and
hail, driving in blizzard conditions, walking home alone, late at night in the big city.
And now with nothing to do with Him in so many years, He’s making some kind of
point now?  I hadn’t considered.  Will not consider.  Refuse to consider.  In my
dreams, the faithful still scold me. “You know the Lord and you’re still...” In my
dreams, sometimes I’m still looking for a place to live as they shake their fingers,
shake their heads at me.
   I can’t imagine my daughter or my son ever standing up one day and asking
me about the meaning of life.  From what I can see, they’ve got that figured out
already.  
   About a month ago my daughter asked, “Mom, what are you going to be when
you grow up?” I’d just come home from work, tired (I teach).  I don’t know what I
answered.  But I remember that she asked again: “And what do you think I should
be?” and I told her: something, you’ll be something.  Because you are something.  I
held her.  
   She is.  I knew she was something the moment she was born, crying the
saddest song I’ve ever heard, the day she turned to me, a first grader asking: “The - I
mean, what does it mean, Mom?  The dog, the house.  The - what does it really
mean?”  And my son who plays the cold air register like a guitar and sings.  I knew he
was something the day he burst into the world without a sound, his first serious study,
my face, my husband’s and back again, my son.  We, his first subjects.   He knew he
was something too, the day he learned to run, pulled toilet paper over his shoulder and
took off down the hallway, into the living room, the roll unraveling behind him.
   My grandmother, sick, on that boat, held my mother’s hand.  I wonder how it
must have killed her to travel so far to reunite with her abusive husband, to try and
shield her children from him, lose them anyway, to their own addictions.  For years
I’ve been tracing the etymology of being zero.  
   But how can a child be zero?  My children put the lie to that notion, and yet,
we all were children; and I could string a list so long of moments, brutal moments
when I knew my existence unjustifiable.  Moments, past moments.  Now, my children
teach me, otherwise.   

Delila:

I sit here crying........reading your story.  I weep for you.  I hope you haven't lost hope.  There is hope.  God didn't reject you, he doesn't see you as a zero (or less than a zero.)  Just as you know your children will be something........that's the way he sees you.  He was the one that was always standing by you, even when the assembly tried to tell you differently.  You always "measure up" in his eyes.  Because.......when he looks at you.......he sees his son.

I hope reading here will help.  We are here for one another.

I am far from hopless, sir.  The bible is like a vortex.  It sucks me in.  But it's too hard to untangle george from anything else.  "What did the Lord speak to you" was always the most horrible question anyone could ask me.  I gave what I thought I understood and as time went on, felt a sham myself since, unless I 'shared' like everybody else what was 'correct' then of course... well you know the rest don't you?  I have found great comfort in self esteem programs actually - as secular and reprobate as that would sound to gg. Today's lesson defined him as having a narsisstic personality disorder.  NOw, rather than using biblical name calling - does that not hit the mark.  Anyway, the big questions for me have been: how do I judge myself and by what standard am I a worthwhile person?  And the answer I arrived at today is quite apart from the bible.  It is the same conclusion I come to when I look at my kids: I am.  I loved them because they were.  Even when I knew I was first pregnant with my first child I spoke to her so honoured, even though I was a single parent at the time (god forbid!) I was so honored that she would take up residence with me.  And I've loved her because she is.  And if I am still God's child, he loves me because I am.  And no, I'm not seeking to steal Jesus' words or twist them in any way or make myself equal to him, though he did make himself equal to me didn't he?  He came, or so the bible says right?  And as time goes on, despite how I've questioned him, God doesn't seem to be offended with me either.  I am and he knows what I am.  And what peace it is that I don't have to make myself better to be acceptable to him.  Hopeless?  Not at all
delila

Delila:

I am a "mam". ;)  I enjoy reading what you have to say.  I am so glad you are not "hopeless".  I too was a single mother, so I know how you feel.

Delila,

     You are a gifted writer.  From what you have written, it is easy to believe you are much more as well.

     What you say about your children indicates that you not only have great hope for them, but that you will never give up on their behalf.  That is (as Kimberly has indicated) exactly how God looks at you.  Whether or not we give up on Him is incidental to the truth that He does not abandon us.

     It's good to have you here with us.  Please keep posting.

May 2004 be your best year yet,
al Hartman

A not-so-dumb-blonde sister emailed me these comments:

I really don't think a lot of people - especially those that were still 'in' when the GG structure collapsed - have turned their brains on yet.  The auto pilot still flies their little engines.  So feel sorry for them, I think I do.  They're not bad people, just basically brain dead.

Do you remember, speaking from your high brow position of one of the assembly 'saints' - I know I remember saying (speaking of those outside in other gatherings) "They're walking in the light that they have" (sigh)
Now, given all the hypocricy and serious deception that was going on, tell me, what does that mean, 'they're walking in the light they have'?  And what light did we have?  Now that, that makes me want to scream like a blonde joke never did.  How about you?

Marcia

The platitude, "They're just walking in the light they have," is one of the most self condemning things we used to say.  This is precisely the type of speech, and the pharisaical thinking behind it that God speaks about when He says that every idle word will be judged.  This is the measure that will be used to judge the very one who spoke it.  God have mercy!

First of all, the "They," were indeed walking in light.  The utterance of this phrase illustrates two things:

1.) We assumed that we had brighter light than our "kid" brothers.
2.) That "they" indeed had light.

Well, it turns out that we were in the dark.  We were walking away from the light we had, and into bondage and deception!  God, in His mercy, pulled some of us out kicking and screaming.   Greater light indeed!  These "kid" brothers saw right through it and rightfully thought we were whacky.

Now, as the fog has lifted, most of us are finding out that the "light" and blessing is far greater in the churches we once thought were barely saved, worldly believers who "had no vision for the house of God."

What utter nonsense.

I will cite two recent, deliciously ironic examples of how ludicrous our old way of looking at things was.

A former Geftakys member, who used to cook and clean for George and Betty, when they had to show hospitality to the African brethren, had a talent for singing.  Of course, she could never sing in "fellowship," to anywhere near the level of her talent.  Now that she attends a church where she can "walk in the light she has," she is the vocal mainstay of the worship band.  Let me tell you, when I heard her sing recently she blew the roof off the place!  She stole the show, so to speak.  I had no idea she could sing like that.

Well, this band is going to.....Kenya!  Eldoret Kenya, to be precise.  Does that name ring any bells???  They will be leading worship for 10 to 15 thousand people.  George always bragged about his missionary endeavors in Kenya, which were always greatly exagerated, if not entirely fabricated.  Now this sister, who used to cook for George's guests, in order to make him look good, is going to go to George's old missionary haunts and minister to ten's of thousands of people!  Who knows, maybe she'll even run into someone who can tell the truth about why George was rejected by most of the brethren in Kenya?  Her talent, and humility has taken her way, way beyond "The Lord's Servant," in less than a year's time!  Light indeed!

Another interesting thing.  Those of you who know Kirk Cesaretti will really appreciate this.  I spoke with him last night, and he told me this.  Kirk now has about 7 acres of land in Fortuna Ca.  On his land he has orchards, berries, a creek, goats, etc.  Well a few weeks ago, he shot a buck in his orchard, on his own property.   Those who know Kirk can rejoice in this.  For years, he was like a caged lion.  He always should have been out in nature, hunting and fishing, living on land, but he never could.  His health suffered, it was hard on his family, etc.  Now,  after a couple years of Geftakys-free living, he gets to hunt on his own property!  Clearly, God has given him the desires of his heart.  The blessing he has known in the past year is far above and beyond anything he realized in the twenty years of geftakysservice he endured.

Get out and breathe the free air!

Brent

I am an above average fly-fisherman.  I tie my own flies, and only fish for native trout.  I don't get to go that often anymore, only once a year, but I still love it.  I have never wanted to hunt large mammals.

While I have no problem with the idea of shooting and eating game, the idea of field dressing a fresh kill and dragging it who knows how far, through poison oak, so far outweighs the benefit of venison in my mind that I promise I'll never do it.  Fishing is so much cleaner, and lighter.

Now, if I was hungy, and had to kill to eat....no problem.  Although, I'd probably feed myself better with a fishing pole than a rifle.  I haven't been skunked on a fishing trip in almost 20 years.

Brent

This message is for an ex-elder in Fullerton who I ran into a few weeks ago.  Our encounter was quite displeasing to me - especially your behavior.  I tried calling you to talk to you about it, but you hung up on me.  So I am posting this on the web, so that perhaps you'll hear it through the grapevine.  In fact, perhaps one or more roots from that grapevine may print this and give you a copy.

You have to understand something.  I am still quite angry about some things.  I am angry first that I was involved in a life-stealing cult for 23 years.  I am also angry about the treatment I received from the leaders of that cult, including you.  The last time we had any kind of conversation, you kept mentioning things that Steve Irons supposedly believes, as if to imply that I am no longer in the Assembly because of some newfangled teaching I received.  Let me set the record straight.  I am no longer in the Assembly because I see now that it was an abusive place, with messed-up leaders.  And I now correctly see that much of the treatment I received from the  leaders - including you -  was abusive.

In our last encounter, I had gone to the house of someone that you and I know, in order to pick up one of his kids.  You started loudly calling me while I was talking to this other person, continually interrupting us with things like, "How's it going, Clarence?"  "Keep rejoicing, Clarence!"  You could clearly see that I did not want to talk to you.  Let me tell you that the best way to start a dialogue with me is to truly repent and apologize to me for the wrongs you did to me when I was still in the Assembly.  And if you should see me in a chance encounter in the future, know this - the boorish, coarse humor and bullying tactics with which you used to relate to people when they were under your authority will no longer work with me.  Don't act that way with me - I won't put up with it.

Clarence Thompson

Clarence,


The ex-elder loves the "loud" greeting in the public place, and behind the scenes he is full of hypocrisy and hanging up the phone on ex-assemblyites. :P

OR

The ex-elder was just training you to go the way of the cross. Did the "selfer's prayer" pop into your mind? He still loves you and is attempting to bring you back into the fold. He does not want you to believe Steve Irons and lose sight of the 'heavenly vision'. ::)

About 10 months ago someone told me that the ex-leaders are soooo broken and humble. Some of them are, but when I read about things like TimG telling MarkM that they do not owe Steve and apology, I am inclined to believe otherwise about the rest of them.

Lord bless,
Marcia

If they were broken and humble, they would say so.  They always did before.

"Oh saints, the Lord is showing me what a wretch I am!  Pray that the Lord break me, will you dear saints?"----typical LB prayer.

Now: "We weren't following a man.  We were following Christ!  EVeryone who left was following a man!"  

Yep, I see the humility and brokeness allright.

Brent

Clarence,
I agree with your statements  of "life stealing cult"and "it was a abusive place, with messed up leaders". Thank God we can call it for what it really was. Could you imagine being a parent, with the truth of the assembly exposed, now leading your children to a life of abuse by embracing and participating in the false teachings of the assembly.
Yes the assembly was "life stealing", why ? because it's leadership interfered with with the personal leading of God in the lives of individuals by limiting God to the confines of the assembly.
Were the leaders "messed up" ? absolutely, because they limited God in their own personal lives to the confines of the assembly.
How did they get away with it ? I agree with Verne, by "convincing you to extend them the grace and trust due a genuine brother in Christ"
George groomed his leadership to be a bunch of 'Charlie the tunas'

Just a thought, Clarence- the boorish, coarse humor and bullying tactics exhibited by this brother seem to be evidence of the impact and imprint left on his life by his main spiritual influence.  Was he a disciple of George's, or one of George's main men?  Was he taught by word,  deed & example that this sort of rude behavior is good and godly?  It sounds like common assembly condescension to me.  I think I used to see this as 'bold'.  ::)
I'm glad you don't have to suffer it in silence.  The intimidation factor is gone.  

Becky

     Clarence's original description made me think at once of GG himself.  No question as to the source of inspiration toward such behavior... :'(

Dear Clarence,
   I have been sitting here trying to figure out what I could possibly say to help you, and others who are feeling this same way, but all my thoughts sound so inadequate.  What can one say to someone who has been in "a life stealing cult for 23 years"?
   I can say I know how you feel: the deep sense of loss and the anger as a result, but I know that is small comfort.  Or maybe I could say that in time you will feel better, but that doesn't help with the angry feelings you have right now.
   Lectures on "forgiveness" or avoiding "bitterness" are like rubbing salt into a wound and are worse than no good in such a situation.  We have talked about this before on the BB and understand that God is angry when those who claim to represent Him presume to control our lives to meet their own needs.  No, lectures to those abused is not what is necessary; what is needed is for these former leaders to confess their part in the GG organization and to repent.
   One thing the Lord told the persecuted Saints in Rev.(and this is a fearful thing if former leaders are indeed reading here) and that is he does hear the cries of his abused children!  He does say that vengeance belongs to Him.
   It has taken me a long time to write this, as I wish that I could find the words to comfort you, and I know there are no easy answers.   I weep with you brother, and I want you to know that I am your friend.  I also believe that Jesus weeps for you and wants to be a comfort to you as well.
   I think the Lord might say something to you like, "I understand your feelings and I am able to take your great loss and turn it into something of great beauty and blessing for others."  God wrote such things in His word long before there was any Assembly and though the Assembly twisted these things they never had the power to corrupt the truth of God's love for His children.  Nor, is there a wound so bad that Jesus can not heal it and I am praying that all who are so hurt put their trust in that truth.
   I have heard that some of these leaders are broken men now and have forsaken the ways of GG.  Why are they broken?  Is it because they no longer have "a place" of power and are just plain old people again?  Those truly broken will have God's heart for those who were damaged in the Assembly and will do everthing in their power to make things right.  The same God who judged the Assembly last year is not now turning a blind eye to those who are avoiding an honest confession and a clear repentance.
                               God bless, Mark C.

Regarding the former leaders of the assembly,

Some of us, who are former leaders of the very long gone class, have done a lot more thinking about what is wrong with the assembly's teachings and ways than these guys have.

A few months back I spent an evening talking to a former LB/worker.  He was still concerned about "open ministry", head coverings, pastors and so on.

In other words, the boy has been taken out of the assembly, but not the assembly out of the boy.

We of the "very long gone" class left because WE had changed.   These guys are out because their CIRCUMSTANCES had changed.

We don't know what they think these days since we don't hear from them.  Clarence's recent experience seems to show that in some cases at least, not much has changed.

Thomas Maddux

Recent conversations that I have had have led me to believe, for many, it is very much as you say.  People have been taken out of the assembly, but not the assembly out of them.

I think this is "easier" for those who left before the collapse.  In order to leave, you had to, at least in some way, convince yourself of things wrong with the assembly.  For many, what I read indicates that the collapse has just helped reinforce this possibly small realization.

For those that had the assembly taken away from them, the thoughts are still very muddled.  When we were "in", these ideas and concepts were burned in so deeply.  And, they were emphasized, by much repitition, and vague support of the scriptures.  Most of the preaching was supposed to be about the heavenly vision.  That is, after all, when a brother could move up to preaching for longer periods of time--a deeper understanding of the heavenly vision.

I wish I had a better answer, although, I think prayer is a good one.  I'm kind of torn between just wanting to get on with life, my new church; and trying to maintain contacts with those from before.  There is just that feeling that somehow, something I say or do will help someone.

There are others that are encouraging, though.  I was at some kind of even with someone who was involved here before.  Someone asked how we knew each other, and she replied, "We were in that same cult together."  It is how she had previously answered questions about her past "church".

Dave Brown

Most insightful!

A man convinced against his will
Is of the same opinion still


My thinking about this is somewhat different Tom. I am of the opinion that their silence speaks volumes...





Contrary to what some foolish and confused individuals would try to tell us regarding such nonsense as "unconditional forgiveness", and ascribe feelings of "bitterness" to the justifiable moral outrage so many of us feel over what happened in the assemblies, the Bible presents for our consideration and meditation the imprecatory Psalms. Why do you think these Psalms are in the Bible?
Did not Almighty God envision that in the life of His loved ones, there would be such times when the oppressed and dispairing soul would cry out to Him that He would requite the doings of wicked men? yes wicked!
It is perfectly legitimate for Christians to apply the imprecatory Psalms as a spiritual salve for the wounds inflicted by the ungodly. This is why they were included in the Canon!
Is He not also a God of justice? Appreciation of this simple truth was seriously damaged by the false teaching with whcih many were inculcated duirng their assembly sojourn. They would have you believe that it was never apporpriate to take umbrage at the conduct of anyone in leadership, no matter how reprehensible! Think about it!!
I would recommend that Clarence spend some time reflectively reading these amazing works and he will find sweet fellowship with godly men of old who also suffered...



Remember this, that the enemy has reproached, O Lord, and that the foolish people have blashphemed Thy Name.
O deliver not the soul of the turtledove unto the multitude of the wicked: forget not the congregation of Thy poor forever.
Have respect unto the convenant, for the dark places if the earth are full of the habitations of cruelty.
O let not the oppressed return ashamed: let the poor and needy praise Thy Name.
Arise O God, plead Thine own cause: remember how the  foolish man reproacheth Thee daily.
Forget not the voice of Thine enemies: the tumult of those that rise up against Thee continually.
Psalm 74: 19-24

Verne

Clarence,  Consider the Source....that always helps!!! I heard a message about the Body of Crist while some are Loud and Showy some are hidden away ..These are the Vital Organs that sustain the Body..I think in the Assembly they were so into the Fair Show in the Flesh and what could be seen..That they crushed and amputated their VITAL ORGANS the very things that gave them Life...Sad but true ....Remember God SO LOVES Us He Gave His Son to be with US...I would definetly CAST this one on HIM....and Look at HIS GRACE AND TRUTH!!!!I know easier said then done...with all the Clanging Gongs and NOisy Cymbels sounding around you....Peace-Out!!!!!

About George and the Seventh day creation.

You need to see this episode of Star Trek GENERATIONS called “Chosen Realm”. It is about a cult leader who is fighting all the so called heretics. Remember what we were told about the Catholic Church and the big box denomination on the corner was worldly. Now the tables are turned we see the truth. The big churches were often more orthodox than the Assembly and as many are finding out were often more zealous for the truth and more Godly than our leaders.

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/ENT/episode/3394.html

Hugh

Yesterday we watched the movie 'Not Without My Daughter'
Summary:  American Betty Mahmoody goes with her daughter and her Iranian-born husband to his native Iran for a vacation. Soon Betty discovers her husband doesn't intend to ever return to America. He will let her go, but her daughter must stay. As a stranger in a foreign police state, Betty has no money, no friends, no rights, and makes a desperate, heroic bid to escape with her child. Based on a true story.

I wonder if the Irani muslim community say: "Don't watch that movie. It is all lies recounted by a disgruntled wife. Everyone who watches that movie falls away from Islam." ???  ::)

Marcia

Marcia:

Don't forget "That movie is a tool of the devil." - as they also consider this bb.  

drj

Have you seen these three star trek episodes (two from DS9 and one from Voyager) that touch on the cult theme?

http://www.st-hypertext.com/ds9-2/ds9-2rev.html#paradise
http://www.st-hypertext.com/ds9-7/covenant.html
http://www.st-hypertext.com/voy-6/collective.html

The one (covenant) where Dukat leads a paghwraith cult was too much.  One of the married cult members has a child that is half-Cardassian (Dukat's race, which is very different from the Bajoran mother and father).  He claims that it's a miraculous sign.  lol, too funny

I have seen Covenant and Collective but I don't know or I can't remember seeing Paradise.  I think Star Trek especially Voyager has some very excellent moral messages in them. The DS9 "Covenant" episode was an excellent one for exposing how leaders will use a spritual twist to get their way and stop critical thinking on the part of the followers. I highly recommend everyone who says Sci-Fi is not profitable to watch a few episodes and see the moral plots. Some of them are excellent. And I repeat I get more out of Star Trek than I did out of the Assembly ministry.

Hugh  :o

When I left the assembly and went 'underground' seeking to flee those trying to reconvert me, I spent many an evening with my landlady, and our Suzanne Summers exercise gear, watching star trek.  I was particularly struck by the borg and their likeness to the assembly, speak, dress, think the same.  Goal: to assimilate.  Resistance is futile.

delila

Maybe that is why I like the Star Trek episodes, because of all the spiritual, social, and assembly parallels that I can see in them.  Voyageur is especially good for this.  E.g. Borg drones get delivered from the collective and become individual thinkers.

http://www.st-hypertext.com/voy-6/collective.html
Star Trek: Voyager
"Collective"

"Negotiation is irrelevant. You will be assimilated."
"Not today and not by you."

-- The Borg and Janeway


If only we had had more leaders like Janeway Eh Delila??

Marcia

I can't say I've ever watched Trek in Suzanne Summers exercise gear, sounds intriguing.  
Star Trek is chalk full of interesting ideas isn't it.  There's a book out called All I needed to know about life I learned by watching Star Trek
I really like it when the episode contains a solid sci-fi story that makes you think.
But some episodes of the most recent years of Trek have liberal messages that are just plain crap.  For instance the one in DS9 where they show two women kissing.  Another is a Voyager one in which Chakotay tells Neelix there is no after-life.  I'm glad there are reviews so I don't have to find out I don't want to see them until it's too late.

Trek isn't still being made is it?  I thought... oh that new one... yeah.  With the hot lookin' dead pan faced Vulcan.  Haven't seen many episodes. I'm with Marcia on the Janeway leadership.  But when it comes to disagreeing with what's being shown, like two women kissing etc.... well, I'll say this much:  I don't look to a TV show to rewrite what I believe, just to challenge it.  Now that I'm out of the assembly, I have the ability to establish a difference between eating an apple and being eaten by an apple, or the TV for that matter.  Art and culture should inform and challenge us.  What's my personal ideology worth if it can't be challenged?

delila

Yeah it's called Enterprise and I heard most of the episodes are mediocre.  Alas, seems like Star Trek is puttering off into the sunset.  Doubtful there'll be another movie.  
Good point about the tube not having to dictate your opinions. I don't have to watch it if I don't want to.  All the Original Series, Next Generation and DS9 are out on DVD now.  Voyager is just now coming out.  All 24 episodes of Battlestar Galactica is out, and most of the Mystery Science Theatre 3000 episodes are also out.  DVD's are so cool.  Who even needs cable when there's Netflix?

Hi everyone

Now is the time to act before more poor souls are affected.

For those who can't remember the good old days <sarcasm intended> Check the new article out. This will remind any of you who have grown complacent what all the fuss is about. I am out and happy but what about those who are not aware in the general public. They are ripe for the picking just like we were. I don't want them going through what I went through. My story of 19 plus wasted years is bad enough some of you have been through even worse. Let's not forget and keep going forward to inform and help people safely avoid the same pitfalls we had.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/assembly/assembly38.html

Hugh

There are new episodes of the original trek coming out, well sort of.  You can download them here.

http://www.5yearmission.com/STNV_WEB_files/episode.htm

Brent, you are wrong.  They are right.

1. C.S.Lewis is right.  It just does not apply to them because they weren't really affected by GG.

2. Though they are lite, they have dropped the G-word and have become e-lite.

Marcia ;)