AssemblyBoard

On the SWTE BB was a short letter from Bob Smith addressed "A question for the Christian Community"--and since it was authored by Bob I felt it was worth addressing. In the letter the following statement appears:

"In the aftermath of the Assembly, many have refused to let go. Rather than seeing God is fulfilling his purpose, there is a cry for blood. Rather than say "Here am I Lord, send me" there is a vow to ensure this type of thing never happens again. Whose life is it anyway?(2Cor. 6:19,20). It is only in God that we discover our origin, our identity, our meaning, our purpose, our significance, and our destiny. Every other path leads to a dead end".

I appreciate the sentiments that Bob is stating. It truly is in God that we find all of our meaning and purpose, identity, meaining, significance, etc... but there is one thing also that isn't mentioned there---
in him we also find our responsibility. David was a man after God's own heart. He was a shepherd of the sheep and kept a close eye on them. The Bible says he killed a lion with his bare hands. So, let's ask ourselves a question: IF a lion or wolf attacked the flock when he was distracted, what would be his response? Would he sit down again and say "Well, it's your flock Lord, whatever is going to happen is going to happen--it's all in your hands"  or would he vow that this was never going to happen to the flock again?? And become MORE vigilant, and MORE watchful for wolves and lions than ever before? What would be the response of a true shepherd?

The cry for blood that is mentioned above is really a cry for repentance. The vow that is being made that this should not happen again is a call to vigilance, watchfulness, and a bringing to accounting for the wrongs done. When we look at the Assembly and it's fall we don't see God failing, we see the free will of man at work, and God's allowance of that will to exist.

Paul declared that after he left that wolves would arise from among them to deceive many.Is that because God cannot protect the sheep? Can't God keep the deceivers out?  God  can do anything!!But he allows free will---so he expects US to keep a guard over the sheep, over the doctrine. He doesn't want us to sit back and say "It's the Lord's church, he'll take care of it"---no, he expects us to be like David and keep and eye over the flock and LEARN from the times the wolves arise, or lions attack from the outside. He expects a vow that "this will not happen again"--he allowed it so that we may learn and help to prevent it from happening again.

After a wolf attacked the flock and David knelt over that dead sheep what do you think his response was?
Was it "Oh well, I'm not going to be bitter about this, let's just let bygones be bygones, and pray that God prevents this from happening again"? Or did his anger arise that someone would hurt one of the sheep? "This is not going to happen again!! Not while I am the shepherd and have all the strength that God has given me to help prevent this!!"

When someone hurts many,many of the Lord's people is he not as a wolf? What should be our response to a wolf? As long as a wolf acts as a wolf we should be very wary, and angry that he is still around, able to hurt more of the sheep. If George repents and turns from his ways, of course we should all receive and forgive him. But as long as he remains a wolf he is a danger to the flock and needs to be pointed out to others.

One last point: What we have suffered at the hands of George does need to be told. A sheep who has never been attacked by a wolf is careless and can suffer under false confidence. But let the same sheep see the wounds inflicted by a wolf on one of the other innocent sheep and they will become far more careful and wary than to approach a wolf. This Bulletin Board is full of people who have been hurt by a wolf and can testify to it. It serves as a warning light to any that may be traveling in that direction, and as a refuge for those who have passed through it already. It exposed and continues to expose a wolf and his pack and calls for repentance. Some may see this as "bitterness" or "refusing to let go" while they sit back and say that the Lord will take care of everything.

The Lord never fails, and he has never let any of us down in any way. He keeps his promises and is faithful when we are unbelieving. But he does ask us to do something---for us to take responsibility---

"Peter, lovest thou me more than these?"
"Yes Lord, you know that I love you!!"
----
"Then sit back, and realize I am in charge of all, don't worry about the wolves, I'll take care of everything".
-----

No, it's  "Feed my sheep"(be a shepherd, watch over the flock and protect them)

Amen, Joe.

We are not calling for MORE blood to be shed, figuratively speaking.  We are openly exposing those who have ALREADY shed blood under the cover of darkness.  That way we can help prevent MORE blood from being shed in the future.

Jack

Quite right Jack.

The problem is not that people think God has failed them.  Only a very few think that.  The problem is that The Assembly was an idol to many of us, and we associated it with "what God is doing," and referred to it as "The Work of The Lord," and called the builder of The Assembly,  "The Lord's Servant."

When "what God was doing," turned out to be what George was doing, and then to our horror, WHO George was doing, it shook many people to the core, when they realized their faith had been hijacked.

Yes, God never failed.  The vast majority of people have found new places to fellowship, but it will take years to "get over it."  

People like "Bob Smith,"  (don't you all remember this brother?) who have their faith planted firmly in Christ, who say,  "Lead on O King Eternal,"  aren't the ones who are having trouble.  Bob, and those like him, are the called, chosen and faithful.  The rest of you are vengeful bitter and devastated.  At least that's the way he puts it in his post.  

(This next part simply draws logical conclusions to "bob's" post, with a good deal of moderation thrown in, and not a little courtesy)

I am glad that I am much better than you all are,  as I am definitely called, chosen and faithful, due to the fact that I didn't let bitterness in my life.  The rest of you, who want to warn people, help people, and find answers are just losers I guess.  Thank God I didn't choose to be like you!  George wasn't a wolf,  he was a man who had some struggles.  We should have gone out to him in love, not vengeance.  (the women he abused are not really that important and only distract us and cause needless anger, leave them out of this)

The real wolves are people like Brent, Tom, Steve, Mark, and especially Verne, who uses big words.  Verne, how many times have you cheated on your wife?  Zero? Me too.  However, just because you didn't do what George did doesn't mean you aren't worse than him.  Your attitude is sinful, and your words spew "moderation" and "courtesy."   The fact that you actually live a righteous life, without duplicity isn't important.  Your perceived attitude is what is important, and therefore, like our Dear Brother George, you need a website to expose your attitudinal sins.  You are a wolf, even a snake.

I am glad I'm not like you!

So, let's get this straight.  George is OK, and needs to repent.  The rest of us are not called, chosen and faithful, because we are pointing out how a man who called himself,  The Lord's Servant, lied, stole, and committed immoral acts for decades.  

Makes perfect sense to me.

quote from "bob smith"
Brent
BTW, I got this in email,  I am not checking the seagulls website, unless someone can show me that there is something resembling reality there.  I do take their imitation as a compliment, however.

Also, with regard to "bob"  (remember him?  Medum height, medium build, brown hair, brown eyes, quiet, carried a bible to meetings,  wore a tie on Sunday, went on outreach...remember "bob?")

Rick Warren is a good author, in "Purpose Driven Life," he also wrote this:

The Purpose Driven Life, by Rick Warren  http://geftakysassembly.com/rickwarren.htm (http://geftakysassembly.com/rickwarren.htm)

 

Day 19 Cultivating Community
Italics added by editor

“Cultivating community takes honesty.  You will have to care enough to lovingly speak the truth, even when you would rather gloss over a problem or ignore an issue.  While it is much easier to remain silent when others around us are harming themselves or others with a sinful pattern, it is not the loving thing to do.  Most people have no one in their lives who loves them enough to tell them the truth  (even when it’s painful), so they continue in self-destructive ways.  Often we know what needs to be said to someone, but our fears prevent us from saying anything.  Many fellowships have been sabotaged by fear: No one had the courage to speak up in the group while a member’s life fell apart.

The Bible tells us to “speak the truth in love” (Eph 4:15) because we can’t have community without candor.  Solomon said, “An honest answer is a sign of true friendship.” (Prov 24:26)  Sometimes this means caring enough to lovingly confront one who is sinning or is being tempted to sin.  Paul says, “Brothers and sisters, if someone in your group does something wrong, you who are spiritual should go to that person and gently help make him right again.” (Gal 6:1-2)

Many church fellowships and small groups remain superficial because they are afraid of conflict.  Whenever an issue pops up that might cause tension or discomfort, it is immediately glossed over in order to preserve a false sense of peace.  Mr. “Don’t Rock the Boat” jumps in and tries to smooth everyone’s ruffled feathers, the issue is never resolved, and everyone lives with an underlying frustration.  Everyone knows about the problem, but no one talks about it openly.  This creates a sick environment of secrets where gossip thrives.  Paul’s solution was straightforward: “No more lies, no more pretense.  Tell your neighbor the truth.  In Christ’s body we’re all connected to each other, after all.  When you lie to others, you end up lying to yourself.” (Eph 4:25)

Real fellowship, whether in a marriage, a friendship, or your church, depends on frankness.  In fact, the tunnel of conflict is the passageway to intimacy in any relationship.  Until you care enough to confront and resolve the underlying barriers, you will never grow close to each other.  When conflict is handled correctly, we grow closer to each other by facing and resolving our differences.  The Bible says, “In the end, people appreciate frankness more than flattery.”(Prov 28:23) …

Sadly, thousands of fellowships have been destroyed by a lack of honestly.  Paul had to rebuke the Corinthian church for their passive code of silence in allowing immorality in their fellowship.  Since no one had the courage to confront it, he said, “You must not simply look the other way and hope it goes away on its own.  Bring it out in the open and deal with it…Better devastation and embarrassment than damnation…You pass it off as a small thing, but its anything but that…you shouldn’t act as if everything is just fine when one of your Christian companions is promiscuous or crooked, is flip with God or rude to friends, gets drunk or becomes greedy and predatory.  You can’t just go along with this, treating it as acceptable behavior.  I’m not responsible for what the outsiders do, but don’t we have some responsibility for those within our community of believers?” (1Cor 5:3-12)

Cultivating community takes humility.  Self-importance, smugness, and stubborn pride destroy fellowship faster than anything else.  Pride builds walls between people; humility builds bridges.  Humility is the oil that smoothes and soothes relationships.  That’s why the Bible says, “clothe yourselves with humility toward one another.” (1Pet 5:5b)  The proper dress for fellowship is a humble attitude.

The rest of that verse says, “…because, God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” (1Pet 5:5c)  This is the other reason we need to be humble: Pride blocks Gods grace in our lives, which we must have in order to grow, change, heal, and help others.

Editor’s note:  This quote is both beautiful and true.  Had this been done 29 years ago, much of the pain and sorrow that defines the Assembly today would not exist. However, fear and darkness have been reigning for the last 3 decades, and the problems and denials have deep, well-fed roots. The prayer for this website is that God would give us the courage to honestly, truthfully, tell the church. Many may cry, "but you should go to the person first!"  Yes, this is true, however, this has been done many times by many people, and the Assembly leadership refuses to be entreated. They put out of the church those few who have the courage to say something.  They simply won't allow the truth to be told. Yet still, repentance is possible, and God still extends His Grace to those who will hear.  I believe that the door to repentance was wide open 2 years ago, more than halfway shut in the summer of 2001, and that it is now shut, with a sliver of light coming in under the door.  I entreat my brethren, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock…”

I do not know who Bob Smith is, but he does have potential to be a LB. I wonder if some ex-LBs and present-LBs want us to "get on with our lives" and leave off this discussion with assembly matters, because they are avoiding facing up to their involvement in promoting the Geftakys system.

I want to add my Amen to the other posts on this thread.

Lord bless,
Marcia

I don't think he is an LB.  LB's are courageous folk,  bold in the faith.  If they were here, they would use their real names.   Bob is from Canada, I do know that.  However, past that I don't know who he is, but he can't be an LB.  LB's wouldn't post anonymously, they are bold as lions.

Bob, please tell us who you are.  I mean, shoot!  I have my phone number on my signature line.  Can't you at least give us a name?

John doe

   Dear Joe,

   I add an Amen to your post!    I especially appreciate your approach to addressing Bob's  inquiry.st


Joe said:
"The cry for blood that is mentioned above is really a cry for repentance. The vow that is being made that this should not happen again is a call to vigilance, watchfulness, and a bringing to accounting for the wrongs done. When we look at the Assembly and it's fall we don't see God failing, we see the free will of man at work, and God's allowance of that will to exist."

   Good points and well stated.   Also we should be able to recognize that these points are being made by imperfect people who are capable of letting  emotions cloud the sincerity of their desire to see repentence and not blood.   But, one would have to be asleep not to see that the majority of things stated are clearly in a desire to welcome those who would repent.  


Joe said
"so he expects US to keep a guard over the sheep, over the doctrine. He doesn't want us to sit back and say "It's the Lord's church, he'll take care of it"---no, he expects us to be like David and keep and eye over the flock and LEARN from the times the wolves arise, or lions attack from the outside. He expects a vow that "this will not happen again"--he allowed it so that we may learn and help to prevent it from happening again."

   For those who are called to do so (which is anyone with Truth and conviction), it would be wrong not to act and expose these wolves.

Joe said:

"What should be our response to a wolf? As long as a wolf acts as a wolf we should be very wary, and angry that he is still around, able to hurt more of the sheep."

   I have read and heard far too much to be willing to ignore the possibility that this poison is still out there luring unsuspecting or deceived little lambs.

Joe said:
" If George repents and turns from his ways, of course we should all receive and forgive him. But as long as he remains a wolf he is a danger to the flock and needs to be pointed out to others."

   Does anyone not understand the above statement?


One last point: What we have suffered at the hands of George does need to be told. A sheep who has never been attacked by a wolf is careless and can suffer under false confidence. But let the same sheep see the wounds inflicted by a wolf on one of the other innocent sheep and they will become far more careful and wary than to approach a wolf. This Bulletin Board is full of people who have been hurt by a wolf and can testify to it. It serves as a warning light to any that may be traveling in that direction, and as a refuge for those who have passed through it already. It exposed and continues to expose a wolf and his pack and calls for repentance. Some may see this as "bitterness" or "refusing to let go" while they sit back and say that the Lord will take care of everything.

The Lord never fails, and he has never let any of us down in any way. He keeps his promises and is faithful when we are unbelieving. But he does ask us to do something---for us to take responsibility---

"Peter, lovest thou me more than these?"
"Yes Lord, you know that I love you!!"
----
"Then sit back, and realize I am in charge of all, don't worry about the wolves, I'll take care of everything".
-----

No, it's  "Feed my sheep"(be a shepherd, watch over the flock and protect them)

Well done!

--Tony

Dear John,

And all this time, I thought that he might be the Bob Smith from Atascadero.

Niaga Daerter Doe

Amen, Joe!

i want to add my voice of agreement to what is being expressed on this thread. i think a critical mass of outside criticism is causing us to ponder who we are as a community. granted, a bb is a very loose community, but it is a community. yes, there is some anger here, but if there was no bb to post it on, would there still be anger? YES! its a very predictable response to having ones trust and faith violated, along with the trust and faith of so many others that we care about. its the only healthy response, in my opinion. for those of us with any compassion left, it would be impossible to sit by idly and let george and those who still believe in him set up others for the same betrayal! and then there are those who do not yet realize how deeply they have been betrayed, and want to hang onto parts of what george and the assembly taught them, and teach those things to others. all the sincerity in the world is not going to make what they believe in any more healthy.  :( but having a place where they can read these things being openly discussed (if they are not ready to participate) can help, on occasion.

its also true that for some people, its much harder to handle the hurt and betrayal of others than their own. for instance, verne can be very harsh in what he posts sometimes, but that harshness is triggered when he sees people being unjustly accused, or when he gets a rumor of more innocents being led astray. you know why? BECAUSE HE CARES! a lot! and that is really obvious to anyone who wants to be reasonable on the subject. and although we may not all express it the same way, the vast majority of us are here for the same reason. because we know that what we went through was serious enough that it matters whether it happens to others all over again or not!

but there is more to this community than just that. i think we also recognize something in the people here that we would have a hard time finding at the local church, and that is others who know what its like to have been under the kind of system we have been under. while moving on is very important, its also impossible without figuring out what one is moving on from. comparing notes is invaluable in the aftermath of situations like this, as many of us have found.

sharing stressful experiences creates a bond, to state another obvious and well-proven fact. and one adjective i think we can all agree would describe life in the assembly is: STRESSFUL! to an extreme degree, quite often. cults exploit that bond by severing meaningful contact with those who do not conform, shunning them, and this is a harsh and very effective punishment. but i have observed that when we can interact with those we once shared that bond with who have also left, it can counteract the effects of shunning, especially when a lot of people leave at the same time. this is a very helpful thing.

those who take a few of the more extreme posts on here and try to use them to characterize this board clearly have their own reasons for trying to be misleading (if not downright deceptive). some of them may be sincerely deceived themselves. the ultimate goal of those lobbing criticisms is to disrupt the dynamic of this community, which includes all of the things i've been talking about in this post, and others have been talking about on this thread. but one thing we are doing more and more, and i love to see it, is responding by clearly stating who we are and why we are here, rather than trying to box all the shadowy accusations. boxing shadows is a pointless and highly frustrating exercise, and noone ever wins (including the shadows). what is especially disturbing about some of the most recent attacks on this board and those posting on it, is the willingness of those on the eagle site to concentrate their heaviest public attacks on the most sensitive wounds in some people's lives. and there are plenty of wounds for them to choose from among those who have been subjected to the assembly's loving caresses. i think an effective way to counteract this is to support each other, through posts, email, phone calls. we have been doing this all along, but perhaps we could make an extra emphasis out of checking in with those who the loving eagles start mocking and pecking on to make sure they are holding up ok. that way, without rewarding their despicable attempts to get people's attention by hammering on old wounds, we can turn it into something positive. i'm only putting this out there because i am becoming convinced that they are not going to just go away as long as there is someone they can pick a fight with, so i'm trying to think of ways to minimize their ability to actually hurt people without taking up shadowboxing.

brian

I think "Bob's" opinions would have some credability if we knew:
1. his real name.
2. what assembly he was in and for how long.
3. if he was in leadership.
4. if he has a family, did he or other family members suffer estrangement, loss, and/or sorrow because of assembly "policies".
5. whether George ever stayed in his home, etc. (ie. did he have personal contact with him on a regular basis.)
Well, Bob, will you answer these? If not, why not?
Pat Mathews
former worker
wife of leading brother
hosted  George twice a year for over 14 years.
worked in George's library for two weeks in 1996.
estranged from parents and sibling for over ten years because of George and Betty. Strained relationships until 2003.
in since 1976 (Omaha, Norfolk, Champaign)
out in 2003

Dear Mrs. Mathews, :)

Personally, I do not think that the knowledge of that info about Bob would give his opinions more credibility. However I do agree that it would help me to know where his sympathies lie, and whether or not he really is an honest inquirer OR whether he has another agenda.

Last night I carefully re-read all of his previous posts on this BB. I concluded that he is definitely anti-Brent/Verne. I also re-affirmed my opinion that he asks 'leading' questions in order to box in the discussion. And he removed snippits from the Rick Ross site which gave the snippits a whole different meaning when taken out of the context of the entire article (BTW I noticed this at the time he did it, and at that time I went to the Rick Ross site and read the snippits in their context). So I "think" he is not sympathetic. He makes concluding statements that appear to summarize what this BB stands for, but upon closer examination are sometimes unbiblical and reflect his own point of view. He has great potential to be a LB if he isn't already one. Since Bob has not revealed his identity, all I can do is speculate at this point. He has avoided queries that I have presented to him on this BB, so it isn't like I didn't make the effort.

DISCLAIMER: Bob Smith has made some accurate statements on this BB. Maybe he is a wannabee 'honest inquirer' but the assembly influence is still too strong. So I am and was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Lord bless,
Marcia

P.S. my email address is on my signature line. :)

Brian,

I say Amen to your entire post. For an unbeliever-according-to-Matt, you have shown a lot more wisdom and compassion than some believers. I do not remember disagreeing with anything that you have posted, even in my fence-sitting days.

From what I have extracted above, I can see that you have a true shepherd's heart.

Lord bless,
Marcia Marinier aka MGov aka M2 aka MM
former Ottawa assemblyite

 :o :o :o :o :o :o :o



Au Contraire mon ami...the harder they come...the harder they fall! Boy I really like that Brian guy...! He the man!!
Verne  ;D

I will try not to reply to things posted on the SWTE website, but I had to reply to one more thing. I am amazed that after my post and the replies to it that the administrator over there seemed to miss the whole point. She has centered on one thing alone: the word shepherd. She states that because the word shepherd is never used to describe a believer, then the Lord has not made us shepherds!!

Yet the Bible does call Christians "fathers"(see 1 John)
which is a far more endearing term than Shepherd. If one is to be as a father to other christians, this is a term that implies even more watchfulness than a shepherd possesses.  But I don't really want to argue over words. The Bible clearly implies that we are to watch over one another, guard one another and protect one another AS a shephed would do. When Jesus says "feed my sheep" he is saying to follow his example and be as a shepherd is. If one wants to disregard the whole message of the post because you can't find a christian referred to as a shepherd, then fine. But if one wants to you can simply go to any thesaurus on line and look up the word "pastor"---a direct synonym is "shepherd"--a pastor is a minister. Jesus says that "he that will be chief among you let him be your minister."  1Pet. 5:4 says "And when the CHIEF shepherd appears ye shall receive a crown of life... "  being "chief" implies other shepherds under him.

I am going to make the utmost attempt not to visit the other BB again and to refrain from further replies.
Being human, I have this awful weakness called "curiosity" which leads me back to read what they have to say :D, but I find that often after visiting I feel sad and discouraged at the lack of real openess there.

take care everyone   --Joe

I agree, it is tough trying not to respond to some of the stuff over at the eagles, but responding only seems to make matters worse.  Yet, I also end up in the same situation as you and also end up responding.  I am not sure why I even read any of the stuff over there, yet I do.


Don't worry about that.  You were very clear, and I think most of us even after reading the eagles site do still get your point.

Joe-
We were certainly taught to be shepherds while in the assembly.  Remember all the "spiritual care" workshops, and the "competant to counsel" ministry from Romans 15?
True shepherds do tend to be revealed in times of trouble.  There are  a number of them on this board.  I'm grateful for them.
Speaking about the assemblies, the problems and the damage they caused, or are still causing, is not speaking evil. It's speaking out.  
Becky

You are quite right of course Joe.
Greek for shepherd is poimeen

The imperative cognate poimaino commonly translated feed, (tend ASV, RSV; shepherd NKJV) is what Jesus instructed Peter to do in John 21:16, and what Peter committed to other elders in 1 Peter 5:2

Leave her alone...
Verne

Hi all,

On my journey in July and August, I met one of the young men who was involved in the attempt to sow dissention on this BB around that time.

I did not immediately connect the person I met with the name on the BB.  It was only later that I realized who he was.  But my brief meeting with him gave me some perspective on just who we were dealing with.

What happened was that several "assembly kids" showed up at a home where I was visiting to collect one of the young people there for an outing.  This individual was with them.  

I observed some behaviors, (not evil behaviors), which demonstrated these young people's level of maturity.

What I saw was young man, just entering adulthood.  Having been in that state, and having raised four kids through that state, I have at least some insight as to what folks in that stage of life are like:

1. They have had some experience of adult freedom, but little of adult responsibility.

2. They see issues in a very black/white way.  Because of a lack of life experience, there is little understanding of "shades of grey", and little understanding of people.

3. They believe that they know and understand far more than they really do.

4. They tend to be unentreatable.  After all, If you know more than most other folks, especially your parents, why should you listen to others?

5. They are full of opinions about just about everything.  Most of these opinions are based on information from others their own age.

6. They are very future oriented, full of dreams and plans about what they are going to do....because to date they haven't done very much.

7. If you meet them in 10-20 years after life has kicked them around a bit...they will be much more knowledgeable and wise....and a lot nicer as well.

Now, here is what I suspect.

I suspect that the "Soaring" website is mainly a bunch of people like this.   It is quite easy to get to another computer besides the one at home and log in as "Joe Blow" or "Brassy" or R2D2 or whatever.

My suggestion is that trying to convince them of anything just feeds their need to prove themselves to themselves and each other. The most likely result will be more and more replies in the same vein.  They will just become more and more stubborn in their determination to "win" and to "strut their stuff".

I suspect that they have very little understanding of the deep suffering so many adult members of the Geftakys assemblies have experienced.  This is a game for them.  

But not for us.

I think that simply refusing to read or reply to their absurdities would be the wise, (for us) and merciful (for them) thing to do.

That is my .02.

God bless,
Thomas Maddux

I agree with Tom. I no longer go there.
Verne

You are obvioulsy a thoughtful individual so let me sugget this. People coming to a forum like this should clearly understand the context in which it evolved. The BB's very existence was a counter-stroke to a system that thrived on secrecy, subterfuge, and sinsiter shadowy silence in matters that should have been shouted from the roof-tops. It completely escapes me, knowing why we are all here, that someone as intelligent as you would try to make such a specious argument about "privacy" on a forum with the clearly stated goal of exposing that whcih some would like to keep hidden. All things clandestine are incompatible with this environment and you of all people should extend those of us who move here a modicum of respect. You had the option to continue "lurking" did you not?  :)
Verne
p.s I do agree with your exhortation of the need to encourage others  look to the King. Some of us have been doing that on the other site to the best of our ability Bob. This site is the "venting" side if that is O.K. with you  :)
I will pray for you. I think you are an O.K. guy...don't agree with everything but I think you are O.K.

When I was a kid we played "The Quiet Game" when we traveled. The first person to make a noise got thumped.

I vote we play The Quiet Game with regards to the other site. Let's see how long we can go without someone bringing it up.

First loser gets a noogie!

Scott

*sigh* Obligatory note to lurkers: This is humor. Anyone is free to discuss whatever they want without fear of noogies.

I agree with both of you.  They are free to express their opinion and I'm free to choose not to have any part of their theology

Preparing for noogie.    ;D ;D

--joe

What is the soaring website?  Has the current leadership of the assembly's countered with their own website. I'd love a good laugh.

Tom---

Thanks for your post. As is almost( :D) always the
case you are right on the money. Thanks for your level-headed thoughts. You and Scott and several
others are very correct(and I wish I could get it through my thick skull) that silence would be the
best medicine.

God bless,  Joe

Bob,

Now that it's all out in the open, I still do not know who you are. You've heard the saying 'curiosity killed the cat', well I'm dying to know. :)

Anyway, I find it veerrry interesting that you were willing to tolerate exposure from assembly leaders these many years past, and you cannot take a little heat on the BB. Scott-or-?? recently posted of an event when he told TimG something in confidence and all of a sudden Scott-or-?? was surrounded by THE GANG.

What was your reason for remaining annonymous? I am just curious and am not trying to be malicious.

I can assure you that I am going on with the Lord. I do not know why you would think otherwise.

I have more to say but I will conclude here for now.
Lord bless,
Marcia
PS send me an email if you wish.

Hi, Marcia,

It was Kevin Welsh who told the Tim G story. If you have not read Kevin's testimony on the GA website you should.

Scott

PS - I don't belive Bob should have to reveal his location or Assembly affiliation (though it would lend excellent context to his opinions), however I can't give much credence to someone who cannot take credit for his own opinions. He needs to give his name.

When I was in the newspaper business we would not print any letters to the editor that were not signed for similar reasons.

My Two Cents - the name of my weekly editorial column back in the day (clever, huh?  ::))

Hi Bob and Others,

  I am hesitant to add any thoughts here as we've been down this road before, and as Brian stated it leads to a lot of shadow boxing.  
 But I just can't help mentioning something that I noticed about "Bob's" concerns in his recent posts re. this BB.
   The first thing is the use of the word "everyone" (with the exception of a couple of posters) "who always express bitter attitudes against GG and the Assembly."  This is a strawman argument because it obviously is not true.  I am always suspect when there are those who come here and instead of specifically debating a topic attempt to assainate the character of the BB with sweeping denounciations.    Also, the use of loaded language like, "kill", as if the BB is inhabited with rabbid vengeful individuals, is likewise an attempt to mis-characterize the BB.  We often discuss learning to live by grace and healing from our past experiences here.  Please check the "Wounded Pilgrims" thread and see that there is much that is positive posted there.
   The 2nd item is making the focus the reactions of those who have left the evil in the Assembly vs. the evil in the Assembly itself.  Again, as Brian so well said, a truly compassionate person is not passsive in the presence of that which can damage God's people.  While learning to forgive those who do us wrong is clearly a Biblical teaching it is also equally true that there must be a passionate defense of the truth of God.  The concept that Jesus was unaffected and ignored the actions of evil against Him is also not true as He warned of the dire consequences of those who mistreated His little ones.  We can understand what God means by forgiveness through studying how Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc. behaved themselves in certain situations.  I would encourage you to make that study as it might change your thinking as to how we should behave ourselves on this BB.  
   Third:  The notion that GG and the Assemblies are gone and are now dead is clearly not true.  There are presently active groups that fully support GG and those inside are in a very dark and dangerous place.  There also is the idea still held by some that GG failed, but his teachings and practices were exactly what God wants!  These groups continue because the leaders do not want to lose their positions of power in these groups.  To give up on warning God's people is exactly what the master of evil religious systems would advise and open God's people to further rending.
   "Bob", I do indeed pray that God will help you to consider that you might be assisting the wolves more than the Shepherd as you strive to serve The Lord.  Many have tried to reason with you on this thread and I don't detect a willingness on your part to consider their entreaties.  Pardon me if I seem a bit suspicious, but there were a couple of young men, a while back, who tried to play us for fools on this BB.  Many tried to be very tolerant of their position (myself included) until it was clear that these were not interested in honest conversation at all.  When they were discovered they sent very malacious and hateful e-mail messages to me, and others here, laughing about what fools we were for thinking that they were sincere in their involvement.  Their one desire was the destruction of the BB, not builidng up others in Christ.
                                           God Bless,  Mark C.
   

Dear "bob,"

You wrote this:
I agree with you wholeheartedly.  If you want to see some of this encouraging talk, go on http://www.restfortheweary.us/bb/index.php (http://www.restfortheweary.us/bb/index.php).  On that website, I am much more in the "encouraging" mode.  Like someone else said, this BB is for venting, or at least that is it's current function.  Every now and then we stray into a really encouraging topic for a while, but 17-20 years of the Code of Silence needs a couple years of venting to balance out----for non-overcomers.   Overcomers, or course, don't need to vent.

Regarding the RickRoss articles, Rick didn't want to put my name on them.  I put my name and phone on the Macgregorministries articles.  
I don't recommend anyone else to put their phone number, etc.  I don't even have a problem with anonymity.

However, it is Biblical that we have a right to face our accusers.  I didn't like the fact that I couldn't get my name on the Ross articles, so eventually I had to start my own site, and take responsibility for my words and actions.  Thanks for the Wyatt Earp comparison,  BTW.

When you posted snipets of my writings and then said,  "I am questioning your credibility Brent,"  you at least owe me to tell me who you are.  If you only want to comment on the public domain that's fine, in light of anonymity.  However, if you get personal (which is fine) you should be a person.  Nevertheless, you may post anonymously if you wish.

As far as people silently being against the BB,  there may be a dozen, perhaps more.  However, I have hundreds of letters that say just the opposite.  

Chuck Vanasse will be back, and I'm sure Al will stop by from time to time.  Do you really want everyone to be doing this?  Isn't it "healthy" that so many have "moved on?"  I think so.

The overwhelming testimony I have received has been that people are happy to have been delivered and gotten into healthy churches.  Chuck Vanasse himself put together a book for me that contained testimonies of people who had been blessed by the website and BB.   The vast majority of people who registered here over the last year have found green pasture and fresh water and are "getting on" with The Lord.  

I guess the real question is,  Why are we still here?   ??? ???

For me, it's not because I am bitter.  Mostly I laugh my head off when telling "Assembly" stories.  I'm here, at least for now, because I presume to be a help to others.  Perhaps I am mistaken in this,  but I base this on the mail and phone calls I get.

I do have a few critics,  but as far as I know, I have no followers.  No one has given me a dime in all of this, except that Steve sent me a check for the balance of time on the web-hosting service.  If I have inspired people, then I am happy.  If I have stirred them up to throw off the yoke of bondage, praise God!

I know I have angered some, but as I posted somewhere else, this endeavor has been a hundredfold harvest for Suzie and I.

Before the website we were excommunicated, no inheritance, no Assembly friends except our fellow outcasts.

after the website,  we have 80% of our Assembly friends back.  We went from about 4 Assembly friends to about 40, in the space of 3 months.  That's pretty good if you ask me.  You can't make that many friends with a Dale Carnegie course, now can you?  ;)

Brent

BECAUSE IT'S FUN!!!   OF COURSE!!    ;D  ;D  ;D

But seriously folk,  I do get a little weary with the pontificating of some of the Pharisees that so carelessly impugn the integrity of the BB posters. This is a group of some of the spiritually healthiest, most well-adjusted folk you could meet anywhere. The ones that come in here whining about all the "hate" and "bitterness" give the impression that everything that is occurring here is doing so in some kind of contextual vacuum. The accusations are for the most part not those of thoughtful and intlligent people, lets face it.
It is difficult for me to understand how anyone familiar with all the evil that transpired in the assemblies, and the terrible wrong-doing perpetrated by those in places of responsibility, could possibly fail to feel a sense of outrage and to speak out accordingly. I have had very little patience with people who come here trying to add insult to injury, and somehow implying the righteous indignation expressed is somehow cause for condemnation. I would like to ask all you assembly sympathisers this question:
Why did you, with your supposed superior theolgical paradigm fail to function as either light or salt, and illuminate the darkness, or stem the awful spiritual rot that spead throughout that system? Critisise others after you have satisfactorily answered that question!
 With very few exceptions my response to those people has been withering contempt because that is exactly what is appropriate. These people are not credible. These are the kinds of people that made the assemblies what they were and they should be given absolutely no quarter.
Have you noticed how the very harshest new testament language is reserved for those who by virtue of their positions of influence or authority, engage in the promulgation of doctrine or conduct inimical to the spiritual well-being of others? Whether it be the hypocritical Scribes and Pharisees, the mutilating Judaizers, or simply the careless individual responsible for giving offence to one of God's little ones? Go back and read Paul's remarkable rebuke of the Galatian church. He actually called them foolish! Tut! Tut! Paul...such temper! Why did he do this?

Because so much was at stake!

Some of these folk engaging in thoughtless criticism really ought to go back and read their Bibles more carefully.   'Nufff said!  :)
Verne

p.s. ....and another thing...this website has some of the funniest people in the universe posting here so just lighten up a bit and  have a laugh or two will ya? Leave the heavy lifting to the pros! (like Steve Fortescue...man have you seen some of the equations that guy posts?...makes my head spin!) ;D
Bottom line is we love the Lord Jesus!! He is the Blessed and Only Potentate...to Him be all the glory!

Hey Scotty...one to noogie-fy!  ;D
Verne

No Noogies here.
Have a great day and weekend everyone.I'm stuck here in Chicago
Friday with the family in Chicago means one thing....PIZZA NIGHT !.....Followed by a stop at the Italion Ice stand on Tayler Street

Joe,

Personally I am glad that you chose to comment on that particluar post from SWTE. The discussion process helps me (and possibly others) to be clear in our own minds about a post that that could condemn where condemnation was not in order, and encourage "silence" where "speaking out" is what is needed. After all some of us do peek at SWTE from time to time. It has taken a ton of self control and resistance on my part to not comment on some of the other stuff that is posted there. Having debated with teens has help me tremendously, but I still have much more to learn. BTW my teens are great kids, so this is not a criticism about them.

I did not see any problem with your usage of the shepherding concept. The Lord does speak of Himself as the good Shepherd. I must confess that sometimes I only skim some of those posts and miss a lot of what is being communicated there. Opposition is good to a certain degree, as it helps us to search and know the Scriptures, and then to stand strong therein. Those who are afraid to read the website and BBs are not really mature in their beliefs and feel they may be swayed by the "lie" (NOT) that is being promoted.

That's all for now,
Marcia

Away! Away! Thou foul forum of error
Lest my mind be ensnared, and my conscience - by terror
Lest my poor heart and will, with outrage be inflamed
And so I should conclude, that George was to be blamed!  ;D
Verne


Thank yewwww!....Thank yewwww ferry mush....
   ;D ;D ;D

Lest I laugh at the hilarious jokes of Joe Sperling
Or get crushed by the size of those words Verne keeps hurling
Or the stately calm reasoning of Brian and Brent
Or the cool of Tom Maddux would convince me to vent!   ;D
Verne

And Marcia from Ottawa
She's really cool too... 8)
Though at first was unsure, about our point of view
And our good friend Mark C.
Who's a statesman at heart
And for quite a long time, has been doing his part

So be nice when you come here
We'll be nice to you too
And despite claims by others
This BB's just not through!  ;D
Verne

Say folks,

If GG was a "grievous wolf", and his enforcers qualify as wolves as well...

Shouldn't the "assemblies" that are still meeting, and are propagating GG's teachings and practices be called "wolf packs"?  :-\

Thomas Maddux

Tom,

More like a huddled mass of sheep. I think the average person still involved is probably weak and deceived on many levels.

If they are not, then they are wolves in sheeps' clothing (to continue the analogy!)


Scott

Verne----

Your poetry caused a stirring inside me--it started out small but soon grew into a dynamic yearning for something--I couldn't put my finger on it at first, but as I read further, the need got greater. Thank God I had just been to the store yesterday and had a fresh supply of Pepto-Bismol. ;D

--Joe

What's my chances of getting published? Maybe George could help me out on that score... ;D
Verne

I heard a message on the radio today from Irwin Lutzer (sp?) about what he called "one-way-forgiveness" that reminded me of the lively debate we had on the forum not too long ago. Lutzer pretty much agreed with the position that Chuck Vanasse took and I must say a few things he said caused me to re-think my position. Particularly when he presented the idea that a lack of forgivness has the potential to hold one in a prison whose key is held by the offender. In other words, one must be able to unconditionally forgive, even in the absence of any indications of repentance or a specific request for forgivness. I am still of two minds about this. I have one interesting question if any one wants to tackle it.
After you grant uncondtional forgivness, is it stll O.K. to pray for fire and brimstone to fall if they don't repent? ( you know the age-old question of the mercy/justice balance) What about those you consider to be wolves, do you take em out after you forgive 'em or before? This is all very confusing is it not? ;D
What do you guys think?
Verme

Verne---

I would say that it is never right to pray for fire and brimstone to fall on anyone. In the Old Testament David and others prayed for judgment upon their enemies. But in the New testament prayers are never like that. Remember when John and James wanted to rain fire down upon a city? And Jesus rebuked them and asked them what Spirit they were of? Or Stephen when he was being stoned, he prayed that God forgive the ones throwing the rocks, because they really didn't understand what they were doing? I thnk when we think of George we can become angered at what has happened, and wonder at his lack of repentance. We want to warn others about him. But behind it all we are still praying that God would lead him to repent---because that is truly what the Lord wants.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance". And Jesus said to "pray for your enemies, and for those who spitefully abuse you".  At the same time though, we cannot be "forgiving" towards an unrepentant person. They need to be rebuked, exposed and warned about. But we should be unlike people like the Jehovah's Witnesses who long for judgment upon the world( one told me once "I can't wait for the day Jehovah shows you how wrong you are!!!")

This is just my opinion of course. I'll put it this way: I'm angry at George(and I do not feel that is wrong) for what he has done and continues to do. I'll speak of what happened to me under his teaching as a warning to others. I'll speak against the Assembly, because it is a harmful place. But I'll always pray that George and others repent and return to the Lord, and I'll rejoice when they do.

--Joe

Joe I think you are right on the money. Of course I hope people realise that my fire and brimstone reference was partly tongue-in cheek but you got right to the spirit of my inquiry and that is the danger of cultivating a vengeful spirit.  I think we walk a fine path between a jealousy for the holiness and righteousness of God and remembering his injucntion to us to pray for our enemies. This is certainly an area in which we all could learn from the New Testament teaching regarding the standard love enjoins and willingness to learn from our brethren who have suffered, yet found God's grace to truly forgive from the heart. Thanks for the insightful response.
Verne

p.s I will confess that although I have prayed for George's repentance, every instinct I have tells me that arena of petition is closed to me...strange to think of God's word to Samuel as he grieved for the rejected Saul. I trust that I am wrong...I hope that I am wrong...

I think what is truly hard for some people to admit is the evidence is overwhelming that George was never a true man of God and all he did was in the strength of the flesh. People nontheless have their "experiences" in the assemblies and refuse to acknowledge that facts are stubborn things. In clinging to that which God has so summarily and signally judged, I think many are sadly missing the entire lesson God intended to teach us...so very, very sad. I think the full conviction of some will have to wait for the completion of God's visible work with regard to the man Geftakys.
Verne

Dear Verne,
  You post a very interesting question that has been bothering me as well and that is the whole issue of Christian forgiveness.  (I will only say re. your poetry what Marcia told me, "don't quit your day job."  ;)
  It is not that I am tempted to buy into the notion that our forgiveness of others means we are passive in the face of evil, but I struggle in trying to express clearly what this word "forgiveness" should look like in our attitude and behavior. No doubt whatever we attempt we fall far short of the proper balance in regard to expressing Christ in this regard.
  I know that Jesus and Paul were not hypocrites, so their views of the principles of forgiveness would be defined more clearly for us as we consider their attitudes and actions.  So, when Jesus commanded us to pray, "For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you," (MT. 6: 14.) and then we see Jesus lashing out harshly at the Pharisees (MT.23) we come to the conclusion that forgiveness does not mean a silent acquiescence to whatever error or evil may come our way.
  Forgiveness, as Jesus taught it, was not intended to blur moral and spiritual clarity (discernment) but to cause us to recognize that every human fundamentally needs to admit their own sinfulness.  The kind of "forgiveness" that flashes the peace sign and says, "can't we all just get along" and then move on to ignorant bliss springs from a shallow pseudo spirituality.  This kind of  "unconditional" forgiveness and forgetfulness is unbiblical and dishonest.
  Doesn't God forgive us unconditionally?   Yet God warns us, teaches us, corrects us, and sometimes takes us to the wood shed (chastisement).
  Forgiveness recognizes all righteousness comes from God's grace, and as such we must demonstrate this attitude toward others.  Grace creates a humble and loving person who wishes all to share in God's bountiful salvation, but forgiveness never suggests a "continuance in sin that grace may abound."  In other words I forgive those that sin against me, but I never say it is not sin, or should not be admitted to and repented of.
  Should a Christian wife unconditionally forgive a husband who is continually beating her up?  Was Jesus' definition of forgiveness to just have this wife, "forgive and forget, and forgive and forget, and forgive and forget, etc." ??  Should we, if we were aware of such a situation as above, ignore and remain passive in the situation because after all, "we're all just sinners too and we need to have a forgiving heart"??!!
   These are some of my thoughts, but I rather suspect someone here can come up with a more succinct way to say this.
                           God Bless,  Mark C.
   

No, God does not forgive unconditionally.  Never, not even once did He do such a thing.

It seems to me there was always the condition of atonement, with regard to forgiveness.  It seems to me that Christ met God's conditions, and we are forgiven in Him.  I think this is perhaps the biggest "condition" in the history of the universe.  

Same with "unconditional" love.  It seems to me that Jesus died in order that we might be brought near to God.  He loved us, but the condition was that we were washed in Christ's blood.

I forgive George, David, etc.  However, I am NOT reconciled to them, and cannot in any way express my forgiveness towards them in a sincere way until they repent.  I really want them to repent.  However, until then, things are not "cool" between us.

I suspect that things will not be too cool between the people who go to Hell and God either.  How is it that He can put someone He has "unconditionally" forgiven, whom he "unconditionally" loves into Hell?

There are some serious conditions here, at least that's the way I see it.  I'm glad we have a saviour, really glad.

Brent

Thank you Mark and Brent!
Lutzer did make a clear disctinction between forgiveness and reconciliaton. So Brent I take it that Lutzer's concept of one-way-forgiveness (unconditional) is not mirrored in the dealings of God with His own creatures so one could raise questions about its theological validity?
Dispositonally I am inclined to agree with Lutzer
Theologically Brent's argument is unassailable.
Every benefit of God's favor the redeemed enjoys was secured at a hefty price indeed!
The presence of ever sinner in Hell is prima facie evidence that God did not apply the blood of Christ to their sin.
It is simply not possibly to draw any other conclusion, the remakable theological contortions of some on this point notwithstanding.

I sometimes reflect on the assignation of hatred to the strong language of condemnation I employ in rebuking the conduct of George and his enablers. Should the language not poperly reflect the deed? What is the appropriate descriptors for us to employ to tell what these people have done?
I am not about to do any back-tracking but I am sometimes truly puzzled by such characterization.
Nothing about what I say is contrived.
Nothing about what I say is mere ill-temper.
I want to ask about the response of every heart that loves the exalted Lord Jesus Christ, about the response evoked by the telling of what some of these people did in the name of the Son of God.
The depth of anguish, sorrow and dispair cannot be  adequately described. We know what the Lord Jesus Christ is like. We know what He willingly did for us.
For some to come in His Name and do what some of these men did fills my soul with an unspeakable horror.
My strident language is the language of a tortured soul:

How could they do this to the name of the Son of the Most High? How could they so grossly misrepresent Him?
The fire of my indignation has burned with an unquenchable fervency for I deeply love the Lord Jesus Christ. He means everything to me. How could people claiming to be His servants do these things to those for whom He died??
Lord how are we to unconditionally forgive in the face of such impenitence? The heart rather cries out for justice and the vindication of His holy Name!
I must say I harbour deep suspicion of people who interminably wax eloquent about the love and mercy of God to the total exclusion of His awesome Holiness, which, in addition to love, is His essential defining attribute. It is my experience that such people have lived compromised and debauched lives and are seeking refuge in a hollow and careless mischaracterization of the God with whom we have to do. They know little about Jehovah-Tsidenku! The teaching purveyed by these kinds of people is not only generally false it is dangerous.
Is it possible to strike a posture that embraces one-way-forgivenss while the Name of the God of Glory remains impugned?
I honestly do not know the answer to that question.
Apart from repentance, which leads to remission, who will pay the cost?  :'(
Verne

Yep, yep, yep...

::c:v::

Since you have a fiery approach towards assembly matters, I suggest Torch the Testimony Productions for the name of your publishing company. All you now need is some money and a good friend with a printing press.

Marcia

Verne,

This ties in with something that Brent shared. Shadrach Meshach and Abednego in the 'fiery furnace'. They experienced the Lord's mighty deliverance from the furnace, but did not come out of the furnace giving allegiance to the King any more than before they entered. Something like that. It's better felt than telt. :)

Marcia

On that flying high site Matt writes:

Matt, are you sure that you just don't want me to get a noogie? :) Oops, I guess that I just earned one. :(

Torch the Testimony...hmmmnnnn....
It does have nice ring to it.... :)

Verne,
I agree with your position.
I can tolerate someone who is upfront and truthful about what they are after in life as oppossed to someone who is deceptive in attaining their goal.
I have no problem with the person who has the late night TV informercial and is telling you how you can make millions like him for 4 easy payments of $39.99.
I do have a problem with someone who in the name of God uses people to gratify his ambitions.
I respect someone who tells you to use their product, "at your own risk"
I have no respect for someone who preached ; "trust me "..."let me be a father to you" then betrays everything that true fatherhood represents.
Mark
 

Verne---

Your question really, really got me thinking. In my reply to you I mentioned Stephen, the martyr who was stoned to death by a crowd of people, including Pharisees. And I remembered something last night. After this crowd stoned Stephen, and Stephen said "Lord forgive them they know not what they do" it says they took his clothes and threw them down at the feet of Saul of Tarsus.

This truly makes one think. This was an obstinate, hate-filled Pharisee, bent on killing Christians. He was standing there(and perhaps was one who threw the stones) watching a Christian die. It says that Stephen looked up and saw Jesus "standing" at the right hand of God----not sitting. What if Stephen had not asked forgiveness for them?? Would Saul have ever become Paul? Was Stephen's prayer of forgiveness instrumental in leading to Saul's conversion? We really don't know---but it is very intriguing to me.

God bless you Verne, and thanks for your posts.

--Joe

Powerful...and convicting...!
Verne

p.s. Paul talks of his separation from his mother's womb...it seems the gracious prayer of Stephen was part and parcel of God's grand design in calling the great apostle...clearly a marvellously prepared vessel for God's use...although the parallel with George is not arithmetic, the principle still is very thought-provoking...