AssemblyBoard

Dear Friends,

Most likely this is the last time I will post anything on the BB, under the current circumstances.

It dawned on me today, that I am taking a huge risk, and putting my family in jeopardy, by maintaining that George is guilty of sexual impropriety.

I have absolutely no way of proving this, as the "women," are unwilling to say anything.  I am now highly suspect as to the truthfullness of the letter the Fullerton leaders wrote to excommunicate George.  It seems to me that they did so in order to take over from their aging teacher.  George has factual evidence to back up his claim that Timothy is an "absalom."

On the other hand,  with the "women" unwilling to say anything, I haven't a leg to stand on, and by being out front in all of this, I am putting my family's future at risk.

God doesn't want me to sacrifice my family for a "cause" that has no merit.  For my own protection I shall remain silent, unless it is to retract things I have said.

Under the current climate, this is the only prudent course of action.  I must think of myself and my family first.  I am going to quietly go away, and pretend that none of this ever happened.

Brent

I don't know about what GG did.  I only know what I experienced, what was passed down in an abusive system to me.  I only know that this was wrong and that I stand against it.  I know that Rachel's story is true because I experienced the spiritual equivalent where I lived, as did others, in three Canadian assemblies.  That's the truth.  We all want the truth.  Walk away and you say you have no idea that there was abuse and that is a lie and you know it Brent.

ARe you getting sued or something?
delila

No, I'm not getting sued.  But if I did, I could count on Rachel, Judy, Mark, Kirk, and others to back me up.

However, in the matter of George's adultery, I have no leg to stand on.  I can't count on his vicitims, therefore I am championing a cause I have no business being invovled in.  I should have stopped with David and Judy.

The truth isn't what is important here.  What is important is my comfort level, and the degree of personal trauma that I am willing to subject myself to.  It hurts too much to stand for the truth, if it means being left holding the bag by the only ones who actually know the truth firsthand.

There is no proof that George did anything wrong, other than a short, vague letter.

I am not going to stick my neck out on flimsy hearsay.  I wasn't there, I didn't have sex with George.

Do you get it people?  I am done taking risks in this matter.  It's not my problem.  I just want to heal, and put the pieces back together.  

My house won't stand under the present circumstances, because I have no proof to back up what I have said.  The fact I really do know what happened is meaningless, if those that told me aren't willing to speak again.  

Why should I spend ten minutes on their behalf?

I'm not talking about Rachel......I know I could count one her in a second.  I'm talking about the fact that I published information about George based on facts that have disappeared and can't be brought out again.  

Like Joseph Smiths magic spectacles....you just have to take their word for it that they really are behind the curtain in Utah.  

If you were in my position, would you take this risk?  I kind of went it alone for the most part, and now I realize that in the final analysis I would be left alone and without a leg to stand on.  

Again, this isn't my problem anymore.  

May George's work ever prosper.  Certainly, we don't want to do anything that causes us pain in order to stop it.  I won't twist in the wind as a result of the people I am trying to help being too cowardly to defend me.  This isn't the gospel, and I'm not Paul.  Paul had proof about what he was saying, I have none, the truth notwithstanding.

Brent

and another thing:

You (Brent) seem to indicate the dissolution, like the building of that abusive GG dynasty to which we belonged, must be top-down operation.  Does it?  I don't think so.  And that Matt fellow on the other bb who claims that somehow there weren't victums has no idea.  None.  What oils and tender care many of the x assembly members have taken to tend to the wounds of those beaten and robbed, no clue of the damage that was done to Kimberly's children.  And I wonder what healing Matt's words do.  I'm involved in healing, listening, caring for those working on their own recovery - a recovery from the abuses of this gg system.  And for this, I am not afraid to stand.  Believe me, or not.
drj

Matt's words may not have any healing attached to them, but they are true.  Can you prove to him that any of it ever happened?  I can't.

I know names, sure.  But I won't share them.

The only people that can prove anything are those that were there, and they ain't talking, therefore none of it ever really happened, as far as Matt and many others are concerned.  This is not the type of thing we want to take on faith.

Brent

So you aren't our champion.  Christ is.  So shut up about George and his alleged 'lovers'.  I for one think there's a lot more interesting and a lot more important things to talk about, a lot more healing things too.  You don't have to take an oath of silence b/c you're so hurt by those you tried to help.  Thank God Christ didn't.  
delila

Again:  what is this board all about?  The GG accusation?  No.  So am I getting it wrong when I think you're 'signing off' b/c you can't prove G 'slept with' the women?  Or are you saying that b/c none of the abuse can be 'proven' in any assembly, then we should all keep our mouths shut?  What exactly are you through with, talking about G's trash or the board altogether?
drj

Good question.  And one I'll try to answer.

People wonder how groups survive, and keep on ticking, despite being exposed for who and what they are.  The Assembly is one of these groups.  We all know how messed up it was, and we all have an idea of how evil the leader was.

However, it is going to continue, and actually grow, because those who can do something, indeed the ONLY ones that can do something, won't.

Rachel did something, and it was effective.  She had facts, and shared them at great personal expense.  She did it when everyone told her not to, because she knew it was the right thing to do.  David's ministry is over, and will never return, unless George is welcomed back and he makes it so.

Now, people who are still involved (and some that aren't)  are asking the very valid question,  "what proof is there that George did any of this?"

Can you give them any proof?  

"Brent said so," is not proof.

"We heard that the women told the fullerton LB's" isn't proof either.

Here is an example:

Judge:  so, you claim that George is an adulterer?
"bob": Yes

J: what proof do you have?
b:I heard from this guy Brent that it happened.
j: did he tell you who was involved?
b:no

j: do you have any firsthand knowledge that Mr. Geftakys ever did anything wrong?
b: no, but hundreds of his ex-followers believe that he did.

J: Mr. Geftakys, do have anything to say in your defense?
George: yes your honor.  Some of my former followers plotted to remove me, in order that they might bask in what they perceived as the power and prestige that I have.  Chief among these is my son.

J:  do you have any proof of this?
G: yes, your honory.  These false charges about sexual impropriety were brought against me.  My accusers wouldn't even give the names of my imaginary victims.  As you have seen, they aren't able to produce any proof that it ever took place.

Furthermore,  My son is leading what he was able to salvage from my old church.  Clearly this was their design, and this is what they have accomplished.  They have no proof against me, and they have seized control and have gained their objective, based on falsehood and slander.

Judge:  Mr. "bob," can you counter this?
B: uh...what he is saying isn't true.  He's denying everything.  This is a pattern with him.  He was excommunicated by his own followers!
Judge:  On what grounds did they "excommunicate" him?
B: They spoke to some women who were involved.
J: did you speak to them?
B: well, yes, sort of.  I know that they were telling the truth.
J: Are they going to testify?
B: No, they are unwilling at this time.

Judge:  in light of the fact that there is no proof to substantiate the claims made by "bob,"  I find the defendant not guilty.

This parody is exactly what people are using to justify their continuance with the ministry, and their rebuilding of George's ministry.

WE all know George did it.  I am absolutely convinced, and even more so.

However, we can't prove it, because the people who were involved won't say anything.  The leadership can't be trusted, because they excommunicated people falsely in the past.  who's to say that they aren't doing the same thing with George?

A man is innocent until proven guilty, therefore, George is innocent, because there is no proof he is guilty.  He is innocent and will remain so until one of the women comes forward.

Brent

I know people want to believe that if the adultery victims would come forward, George would finally be pinned to the wall and what is left of his system of churches will disband forever.  I don't think so.

Holding George to account is like nailing Jell-O to the wall.  Even if the sisters came forward, there is always a way he would spin it and there would always be people who would believe him.  Even if all his associates disowned him, he would go down the street to a Bible study in his retirement community and take over.  He believes in his own ministry with all earnestness and he will continue in the power of the energizer bunny as long as the Lord gives him breath.   To assume that those who are supporting George will suddenly disown him if given more evidence is akin to believing that Norman Lear's "People for the American Way" or the ACLU will suddenly start allowing prayer and Bible reading in schools after we produce compelling source documents from the Founding Fathers.


To say that I don't want to spend my time trying to warn everyone about the Assembly and attempting to dissolve what remains is not indicative that I am a wimp.  It is just a pragmatic decision that recognizes that there are far worse threats to the church than the ministry of an aging man and his pitifully few followers (e.g., postmodernism, so-called tolerance, angry, Hollywood-type secularism, attack on the family unit).  Further, there are a great many positive ways one can leave their past and begin to positivly support and be supported by God's church.

In my opinion, the website a year ago was about bringing the Assembly down.  Now, the bulletin board is about helping people get on with their lives, shedding baggage of the past, putting pieces together, and involving themselves in healthy churches and relationships.

If God has stirred your heart differently, then I believe he will bless your efforts.

-Dave

So...there are women who have tangible proof of George's sexual immorality, yet they won't talk.  And Brent thinks that they have an irrevocable obligation before the court of Heaven to tell their story.  Since they won't, he has made the drastic posts which we have recently read.  I hate to have to disagree with you, Brent, but that is like lying down on a railroad track, and saying, "I'm going to let this train run over me because Person X over there won't do what I think they should."

Regardless of whether these women come forward or not, there is still plenty of evidence out there to crucify the Assembly system.  There is also the witness of our own experiences with leaders who proved to be worth less than a used drink of water.  Think of the men we allowed to boss us, demean us, hit us in the face.  I'm certainly not done sticking my neck out, and I still intend to warn people to stay away from the Assembly.  If they listen, well and good.  If not, then as Gandalf said, "The burned hand teaches best..."

Clarence Thompson

If a victim stepped forward and shared their testimony in a forum like this one, (that is not  controlled by the assembly )I believe it would have a tremendous impact on stopping further abuse.

One other thing: I am an engineer by profession, and a male by creation.  But I say, let's show these women a little tenderness.  Perhaps for them to come forward would open extremely deep wounds in them.  Why should they have to pay for something that was really forced on them by George?

Clarence Thompson

I was under the impression that Keith Walker is in possession of statements signed by these women.  We received inquiries from France seriously doubting the allegations.  We directed the person to Keith and Dan Notti, and to the best of our knowledge, satisfactory evidence was produced to convince the most reluctant.

Yes, I know this as well.

However, this evidence isn't available to people who ask the question,  "What women?"  "Did Brent make this all up?"

I am in trouble if pressed.  I can't count on these people to back me up, although they counted on me to tell the truth at one time.  

Silence is the wide open opportunity for George and his followers to say,  "none of it is true.  It can't be proven.  Where are the witnesses?"

This whole thing is not about what is true.  Most of us need no convincing with regard to the truth.  This is all about what can be proven.

George is innocent until proven guilty.  If there are secret documents in the possession of Keith Walker, this proves nothing, as they are secret.

The golden tabletures and magic spectacles reside behind a curtain in some Mormon temple.  No one can see them, so do we have any proof that they really exist?

Don't you see the dilemna?  The truth has no power when we are unwilling to speak it.  

What a shame.

Brent

Yep!  Indeed we are seeing Brent's posts are messing with peoples' heads.  I am glad to see a few "thinkers"though.

Because I am concerned that a number of people are becoming really uncomfortable, confused and maybe even stumbled, I have to offer a few hints, as I live with the man.

Think carefully before you react and assume he has lost his marbles.

Is Brent repenting of saying false things? or is he saying he can't prove what we all know to be true?

Who will tell the truth?

How is silence allowing things to be rebuilt?

Do you agree, that a "man is innocent until proven guilty?" and if so can you help substantiate a single claim that George is guilty of sexual sin?  

Who can and will.

Has Brent flip-flopped or is he merely reporting the facts from another perspective?

Have any of you ever played poker?

Suzie

Poker? Yes indeed! And the ace-holders are hiding in the bushes.

Anyone ever play Rook? It's hard to flush out the high trump cards.

OH, I forgot,

Another thing.  Do you suppose that even if George was faithful to Betty for their entire marriage that the Assembly was a healthy place, and that nothing bad ever happened there?

If witnesses refuse to prove that George was an adulterer, who cares?  I know that the place was rotten to the core, George's infidelity was only the icing on the cake.

We left for other, valid reasons, mainly because of the fact that the abuse, lies and false teaching was an affront to God.  We were not silent about our reasons, and have told our story.  When people said we were liars, we didn't shut up, we proved them wrong.

Again, thank you Rachel for your powerful contribution.  If anyone was ever a victim, it was you, and you have led the way and set the example on how to deal with things.  You had no choice where to be born, and were not involved willingly, yet you took the responsibility to warn others.

Your courage and character are to be commended.

Suzie

Hey, if anyone is confused, just call Brent.  Email us for his number.

I have a few things that I would like to get cleared up!

One, from Wendy's quote above and other things like the evidence given to the French brethern, etc., that there are some women out there that had sexual relations with George, or this all could be some big scam, but Wendy's note really hit home in regards to these other women.  

Note to Wendy; I love the fact that you John took a very hard stance once everything "hit the fan", also I your friendship with Perry and Elaine M., really impressed me as you were the only people in leadership that I saw remained close to people that had left.  If I mis-read you then please let me know.

Second, from day one the "sex" stuff hit, all should have been laid out in the open.  I know of people that even though out of the Assembly the sex charges against George they could not believe.  I wish it could have been done in the manner in which Paul did when dealing with the church in Cornith.  When that letter was read to the WHOLE church, most people were not guessing who the man or the woman was, PAUL laid it out (thank God their was a "happy" ending we see in II Cor.).

I say this, those of you who would defend these women (if there are indeed many) for not coming foward and therefore let them continue in sin, do you have love for the brethern?  Again if this is true than many more than just them were/have been hurt.  You basically are saying that the l"little" sin not being dealt with is better than a whole loaf being saved.  I weep for you if you are more willing to stand for an individual than the body of Christ being purified.

Last, I do agree that for many any confession by these women would not mean much as most have already set their hearts one way or another.  My beef in riding this train is that from what I am seeing some would let this happen again in their new places.  Do any of stand for God even in our own lives all the time?  May we continue to GROW in the GRACE and KNOWLEDGE or OUR LORD and SAVIOR, may we truly SAY I MUST DECREASE and HE INCREASE.  

This whole thing the last two days has caused me to REALLY examine my self and the LORD has said look at this part of your life George.  I could be one of these "women" if I continue to not deal with the little things.

Peace be to all of you, and no matter where you stand in all of this, my Prayer is that all of you may be found faithful.  I got nothing but LOVE for all of you, even George G. (cause Christ came to save sinners)!

GOD BE WITH YOU TIL WE MEET AGAIN!
Cheers,
G

Bingo!  Jackpot!  Ding Ding ding ding.  
Peaceful G,  thank you for your insight and balance.

One of the main reasons that people in the SF and SAC assemblies hang on is because they have been told blatant lies about George and the "sex."

However, these lies are actually the "truth," because no one will come forward and counter them with anything but hearsay.

Your point in bringing up 1 Cor. is right on the money.

Brent

Folks,

As I said before, I am not at all sure that even if the sisters went public it would discredit GG with some people.

After several of us left the assembly back in the 80's we published a little paper we called the "Noble Inquirer".

 Dave Sable wrote an article that proved that GG taught that Christians could end up in the lake of fire.  Another article showed the error of GG's ideas on "leaving fellowship".

As I recall, we sent out about 140 or so to addresses that Steve and Margaret supplied.

As I also recall, it accomplished nothing.  At least, nothing I ever heard about.  

Some of the people that post on these boards wrote us and asked for their names to be removed from the mailing list.

So, having the truth staring you in the face does not guarantee that you will accept it.

Some will not believe, even if one comes back from the dead to tell them.

God bless,

Thomas Maddux

Dave,  one comment re. Geftakys-assemblyism's threat to the church.  Some who have left the assembly in their locality by choice or not by choice, are actually influencing other healthy church gatherings and infecting them with their poisoned stew of the 'heavenly vision'.  This is scary.

I agree with Suzie and Clarence and others.  I did not leave the assembly because of GG's immorality anyway.  Other gatherings have similar problems where their leaders slip up.  It was that and the other indicators of a system-gone-wrong that finally clinched it for me.  A clear conviction that the assembly is a false religion.

The Fullerton LBs excommunicated George because of immoral behaviour in keeping with 1Cor5.  When I asked for verification at the time of excomm..., I was told that they, the LBs, would not have done it if they themselves were not sure.  So I did not pursue it at that time.

Brent, we appreciate your perspective on this BB.  Most of the day to day discussion has helped tremendously to put many of us on the path to 'recovery' from spiritual abuse.  Maybe you can convince the women of a witness protection program or something. ;)

Lord bless,
Marcia

Tom---

You stated below that the printing and mailing of the "Nonle Inquirer" accomplished nothing.(at least that you know of.). I have to say that it did accomplish much in my own life. Though it wasn't the "end all", and didn't end my doubting and inner suffering, it switched on a light that could not be doused thereafter. It helped me know that there were others out there asking the same questions, and facing the same things. It made me continue to look further, and investigate more. I still have the copy that was mailed out to me.

When I received it I was amazed. I had no idea who had gotten my name, or why I was picked out to receive it. But as I read it I thought "yes yes--this is exactly what I had asked before--this is the same teaching I had doubted, etc..." I truly believe the Lord had it mailed to me--it was a stepping stone towards freedom---and I really and truly mean that.

I just wanted to state that, because often times when we feel nothing has been accomplished by a small action on our part, the Lord has really accomplished a great deal.

God bless,  Joe

Heavy D (i.e., the overweight lover).  Man is that a blast from the past.  Great rapper, one of the better "positive" hip hop artist.  

Vern what else are you into (Chuck D, Tribe called Quest, Roots, etc.), you very much surprised me!   8)

Cheers,
G

Joe,

Thanks for saying that.  You are right, we do not know the ultimate outcome of anything we do.

Thomas M.

Okay.

Having read the link to that 'other' bb I see that there are quite possibly many motives for bbs.  If Soaring...etc (the bb) were a person, an animal, a plant, how would it justify its existance on earth?  I wondered that this morning.  I mean, I live in the prairies and we know here that even grasshoppers have a purpose, if only to feed birds.  But the link to which Brent lead and what was written there, left me wondering about a lot of motives.  Certainly one motive, was to discredit much of what has been posted on this bb.   Does G fund it?

On a more serious note, these women, should they come forward, have my support.  I offer it now.  How can I help the truth to come to light?  I stick my neck out for that.  How can I be a support to you?  Read my posts.  I claim no status or spiritual superiority.  I do not condemn you, 'out' or not.  But I would like to know how I can be a support to you.  You will not be butchered here.  Or stoned.  Send me a private email if you like.  I support the truth.  And I know how complicated the truth is, how vunerable we are when we decide to speak it, what it feels like when the truth in our mouths is poo pooed.  But it's still the truth, isn't it?  And I also know that your truth, who ever you are, has the power to set others free.  "I see the one who sees me" Hagar said.  And, if no one believed her there in the desert when she was sent away, she saw the fountain God provided.  And that was all that mattered.

delila

Delila,

You are a blessing and an inspiration.
If you were a man I might say that you are both an officer and a gentleman. 8)

Lord bless,
Marcia

Oops!  I messed up the quote thing on the previous post. But, I did want to add something.

It is pointless at this time to "discredit" George and yes, I agree having the women step forward now for the reason to "discredit"  George might be ineffective.

I would like to see them step forward however so that people can't discredit Brent.  When they are silent, people can say, "Who are these women and how do we know Brent isn't making this up?"  etc. etc.

When they are silent, people like George can say what they want uncontested. They are free to abuse others.

I will gladly stick my neck out for the Rachels and Judys, but I will think twice about doing so for the ones who are unwilling to back us up and end up in the long run chopping it off.

Hi Suzie,

How is Brent discredited by their silence?  It was the Fullerton LBs who received their testimony in the first place, and the Fullerton LBs who excommunicated George.  We knew that there were 'some' women by the LBs testimony.  Brent only further confirmed that by his statements of frist-hand knowledge of who they were.  Brent has sufficient proof of their existence by the very same letter of excommunication that brought this matter to light.  I suggest that if Matt really doubts the very LBs he is sticking his neck out for, then he needs to ask them, the LBs, not Brent.

Lord bless,
Marcia

Marcia, no one really knows that, because they haven't dug into the minutia of the website.  Many current members only know that it is a lie, and that there is no evidence and that George was excommunicated "the wrong way."

They are wholesale liars.

Also, it is a real problem that people just take my word for it, and don't find out the truth for themselves.  Margaret said that there are people who know about this.  Have any of you bothered to find out if I am telling stories?

I could be you know....certainly that is what the other side is saying.  By other side I don't mean Matt, I mean guys like Testa, etc.

Their silence has the potential to discredit me because they won't speak up, therefore they don't exist.  For years,  Gay Walker knew about David beating Judy.  She knew about it for decades!

It was when she finally broke her silence and read George the riot act in one of the worker's meetings that people began to realize who George was.  While she was silent, the truth was still the truth, but it had no power.  David was never fit to minister, but he had total control, the truth notwithstanding, because people who knew better kept silent.

Same deal here.

Brent

Brent

Brent,

I understand what you are saying and I see that the sisters' testimony might help a few to actually finally excommunicate George.  I doubt that the Ottawa asssembly would benefit from their, the sisters, coming out in the open though.  Ottawa has declared themselves autonomous and refuses to be penalized in any way because of George's sin.  They claim that they were not very influenced by Fullerton anyway.  As you know, I disagree with them on that matter.

Your credibility should not be questioned on this matter, however.  Rather it should be the Fullerton LBs.

Lord bless,
Marcia

Suzie,

Well, I for one heard about GG's adultries (pre-assembly) and David's abuse of Judy from people who were never part of the assembly.

I have personally talked with two of the "stepped down leading brothers" about the confirmation of the events that led to the excommunication of GG.

I also witnessed the assembly meeting where they stood up and told the "saints" about the situation...and answered their questions and objections.

One man asked the question, "Why didn't they say anything before now?"

A sister of many years of assembly life said, "Who would have believed them?"

She nailed it.  These folks knew who the sisters were, even though their names weren't read publicly.  You know how leaky the assembly "secrets" are.

And some still wouldn't believe it.  Or at least didn't want to.

As to the "Soaring" bunch...why would anyone care what that bunch thinks?

God bless,

Thomas Maddux
Magnum Veritas Est Et Prevelet

This thread reminds me of my continuing fight to have Jimmy Swaggart exonerated. A lot of people bought into the charges that he visited a prostitute, but I never accepted them for a minute. He was set up I tell you. Only one lady ever came forward with her "story".

Some claim that they even had witnesses that he had gone into some hotel. What can I say to that? Plenty!! These people wanted to see Jimmy Swaggart fall. Maybe they even wanted to take over his pulpit. People say that he had these weaknesses for years. Then prove it!!! How do we even know these things even happened? A few trumped up charges, probably leveled at him by some disgruntled ex-members of his church---that's what the whole witch hunt was!!

To this day Poor Jimmy is still persecuted by those who say to beware the man and his weaknesses. He and his family have been persecuted because of one "alleged" fall and indiscretion. If he has been doing this for years where are all the others who have not come forward to confirm this??  It's a travesty I tell you. Jimmy Swaggart is a holy man, and it's a rotten shame that a few "bitter" people who harbor unforgiveness still spout their warnings about him. Leave the man alone I tell you!!! Leave this holy, wonderful  messenger sent by God alone I tell you.

--Joe

  I think I finally get it Brent !

   If I was going to start a major corporation, or try to accomplish anything in this world, I would try to hire Brent as my CEO!  This isn't for Brent's ears (so just tune out Brent), as I think I understand what he's trying to do here.
   When Brent raised up the website on the Assembly I was filled with doubts, but what the heck--- it was worth a try, and why not give it a shot!  He was the one that stuck out his neck and gave a huge amount of his time to do this.
   I just thought the whole thing was wonderful, but my expectations were very low, and my personal cost was just the time spent writing an article or two and posting on the glorious new BB. (when I say glorious I really mean it!  This is by far the best forum I have been on!)
   Brent did this because he was confident that certain actions will lead to certain results.  Now I don't know if this confidence springs from a natural gift he has, or if God has specially enabled him with faith to see things this way, but God has clearly used this.
   Brent knows how to call one's bluff, and if we will ever get unrepentant Assembly folks to face the facts they must be confronted.  It is a chance for them, and for the few followers still clinging to the "GG is God's man" deception.
   I don't say this as "a follower of Brent" and I still think the first step for "these Women" is to help them understand that they are truly victims and that their relationship with GG was not consensual.   (thank you Delila for offering to help these Women.  God touched my heart as I read your post  :))
   As has been already shared, Paul did make public some issues in the church, and did name names; he took action in a public forum.  There is some differences to make here as some things are better dealt with in private, at least first, and then with a few witnesses, and then if it is a matter like we are talking about let our fellow Christians know.
    Writing articles and posting on the BB can provide a wonderful resource for those willing to think about these things, but with those in deep denial and/or just downright lying we must call their bluff!  
    I have recently talked with one of the exleaders of the Valley Assembly and he was very fearful that I would go public with my conversation with him.  He asked me, "brother--- let me ask you a question-- are you tape recording our conversation?"  I laughed out loud! ;D  He asked then, "are you going to publish what we say here on the internet?"  Well I wasn't going to Andrew Gunther, but since you blocked reception of the e-mail I sent you I think that qualifies as not hearing me out, which allows me to bring your name into a public sphere.
  But, why was he so fearful?  Why doesn't he want his conversation about his/our relationship with the Lord to be discussed?  I told him that he could tell anybody he liked about what I said to him.  I had been contacting his new Pastor, along with others, and he was getting nervous that he might be exposed for what he was to this Pastor (I had tried, along with others, to communicate to the Pastor what kind of group Andrew, Tim McCarthy, and John Durst had come out of.  That's another story (the pastor's response) that I will bring up at another time.
   Brent helped in this effort as well (why? he's not from the Valley) and even told the Pastor he would drive down to participate in a "reconciliation meeting" with these Guys!  His e-mails' to the Pastor were great!  Why?  He called their bluff and when they saw the truth would come out they ran and hid!!
   So, while I stick to my belief (I don't know them and could be wrong) that these women are typical of those who have been brainwashed in a cult, and are in need of some tender care first, we need to be able to act on what most of us know to be the truth, and keep the Assembly cancer from spreading into the Evangelical community.  I will write more on this last comment, as I believe as former Assemblyites we have been prepared to help our brothers and sisters in Christ in a special way.
                                  God Bless,  Mark C.

OK, here's the deal, so to speak.

For quite some time I have been puzzled at how people can actually doubt that George did what he did, both in reference to the sexual sins, and the myriad other problems associated with his ideas and agenda.

If you read my words, you will see that I never deny that the "women" exist, and I come right out and say that they all came forward and told what happened to the Fullerton leadership last January.

I said this:
What I am saying is that I have no way of proving what I know to be true, because although I have spoken to two of the "women,"  I am not at liberty to share what I know.  Therefore, I can't prove anything.

Then I said this:
Matt is stating facts, to the best of his knowledge, in his post.  He hasn't seen or heard any evidence that George had "improper sexual contact," other than the fact that I reported it, and others repeated it, on a website.  I assume he read the sentence in George's excommunication letter as well.

All he has to go on is some guy's word, on a website!  I think it is safe to say that Matt doesn't have much respect for me, and that he is generally negative in his opinion of what I say and what I have done.  So why should he believe any of this?  

Now, I understand what has motivated Matt, and I am making the leap to say that this is probably what is at the root of others who don't believe that George did anything wrong in this area.  Matt, and others, have no proof whatsoever that anything happened.

The Fullerton leaders have said exactly nothing about this.  Sure, they may have uttered some words in Fullerton at one time, but they continue singing the hymns and praying the prayers, and doing itinerate ministry and outreaching on the campus, and having doorkeepers etc.  and they haven't made a single public statement that a guy like Matt can look at and say,  "hey, I guess it is true."

I don't blame Matt for being skeptical one bit.  

Now, George's side of the story, which has been heard as far North as San Francisco and Sacramento, and as far South as Riverside is that it is all a lie, and that a palace coup has occured.

George is one of the parties named in the sexual impropriety, and he has told his side of the story.  Others are repeating it.

The other side of the story has indeed been told.....but it might as well have been told to the bottom of the sea!  No one knows for sure if it happened at all, and people like Matt doubt if the "women" even exist.

Silence on the part of the "women" and silence on the part of the Fullerton leadership means George is innocent.

I never said George didn't do it, neither did I ever say the "women" don't exist.  I also was quite clear in saying that I didn't make up any of my claims.  What I came to realize is that Matt has a very valid objection, based on the fact that he knows nothing about any of this, and has nowhere to go to find out what really happened, because of the Code of Silence.

Matt, I apologize to you for branding you in a negative light, when all  along you had valid doubts about this aspect of what I was saying.

I accused you of ignoring the truth,  when in fact you were only exercising healthy skepticism.

I also understand a good part of the reason why people in San Francisco, Riverside and Sacramento believe George's side of the story.

There really is no other side due to the fact that the "women," and those they spoke to haven't given any information to the contrary.

George has said that Mark Miller and some "other Brethren," trumped up charges against him, and drug a sister out of the past in order to build a case against him in order to take over the ministry.  He also named his son Timothy "Absalom," in reference to David's son who conspired with Ahithophel, David's chief counselor to usurp the throne.

That is George's story and if you look in Fullerton, Placentia, West LA and Goleta you see that the men George named are leading their Assemblies, with Tim Geftakys back on the campus at Fullerton College, just like the old days.

Perhaps this represents what is being said by Assembly sympathizers,  "If things were so horrible, what are they doing by continuing to meet?  It looks to me like George's story is true, because they certainly haven't said anything to contradict him."

Again, regardless of whether or not George did anything wrong, he is innocent, because no one has said anything to substantiate the accusations against him.  

I also heard today that the Fullerton leadership are "hurt" by what I have said, saying they aren't to be trusted and made things up.  

I guess they could clear up a few things if someone down there would actually say something.  But they won't, because they don't want to shake the house of cards they are so carefully tending.  At least that is my opinion.

I do know that George's sin was explained in great detail by those women.  However, Matt doesn't know this, and I can't give him any proof.

Others can, but they don't, for one reason or another.

I said this:
Yes, I do know that George did something wrong.  I know it is true.  However, he didn't do "it" to me personally, so I can't prove anything.  Therefore he is innocent.

OJ is also innocent.  He is free to come and go where he pleases, even though it is pretty plain that he committed murder.  Notwithstanding, he is innocent.  Same with George.

So, why am I saying all this?

It's because I want people to understand that as long as they remain silent with the truth,  people like George have free reign to whatever they want and say whatever they say.  

People like Matt are absolutely correct in being suspicious.

People like me are taking risks by saying something I can't prove.  (perhaps I could prove it if I forced the women to testify via a subpoena, but that is extremely unlikely to happen)

Now, to Poker.

Am I playing a game?  Yes and no.  

My objective since day one has been to expose the unfuitful works of darkness that surround Geftakys and his group.

To use Poker terminology, I was being dealt great hands and drawing full houses on the flop.  

Now, due to the silence coming out of Fullerton, and the understandable reluctance of the women involved to say anything,  I am holding an unsuited 7,2,  and my opponent appears to have a high pair in the pocket.

What do I do?

I hope to draw a winning hand, but I might have to fold.  I could always bluff, but I might get called.  I could bet in order to see what the other side has and then make my decision...

or perhaps I have a miracle hand and I am sandbagging.  Which is it?

We don't know yet, do we.

Until something is said that lends credibility to the accusations of George's adultery, he is innocent.

Now, if it should come out that he is indeed guilty, it's another story altogether.

I didn't stary this topic over here, and I would really like to get back to what I was doing before ASAP, but I will be happy to answer questions if anyone has them.

Brent

Pretty good Mark.

Who's bluffing?  Who has the best cards?  You don't know until the showdown do you.  

I am not trying to get the "women" to talk, although I would be happy if they did.  

I think it is time that those that spoke for the "women" talk.  If they don't, they are going to have trouble.

Jeff lehmkuhl is attending seminars with the SF "saints,"  is Wes Cohen going to as well?  I don't know, but Wes and Scott were once very close.  I have no knowledge about Wes going up there, and would be shocked to hear that he did, but his Bro. in law did.

Wes goes down to Fullerton and Placentia on itinerary...yet Wes stepped down as a leader in Goleta.....or did he?

Tim stepped down, but he getting more involved and is obviously a leader, whether he calls himself one or not.

These guys, by their silence and total lack of clarity about where they stand are allowing George to paint them as usurpers, and are allowing him to spin everything to where he is innocent.

Let's face it, if it wasn't for the website, they would all still be bowing down before George and saying, "Amen, Praise the Lord," every time George said something.  

Now, they are in a position where they need to step up and say something, or else be totally discredited.  Their past demonstrates that they lied about people before, and failed to discern the plain truth many times over.  

Now, they excommunicate their master, who taught them everything they know, and then they go dark and silent and go on to manage George's kingdom in his absence!  Was it an evil man who created a glorious testimony to Jesus?  I think not.

I think an evil man created an evil little world, and they are torn between their love of it, and the truth about it.  

Well, their fence sitting and silence is allowing George to rebuild, and his loyal followers to press on, claiming that Mark Miller led an ouster against George while his own son is Absalom.

There is no evidence to contradict George's story.....at least none that has been said out loud.  Sure, words have been carefully said, and meanings have been alluded to in confidential, secret meetings among "downstepped" leaders,  but no statement of wrong doing, no explanation about George's excommunication, no clarification of past wrongs....nothing has been said about what they believe.

Am I saying it has to be said on a website?

No, although that would make the most sense.  If it was said publicly, then we could talk about it and understand that it was true.

If Mark Miller came out and said,  "We did speak with several sisters in great detail and can assure you that George is guilty of adultery,"  then people like Matt could understand.  

But Matt hasn't heard anything about that, and neither have any of you.

George is innocent, and his version of events seems to line up with reality at this time.

Brent

Statements like this really get to me.  The leaders are hurt??  Amazing!!  First of all, where is that rhinocerous skin that they boasted they had.  Secondly, what of all the "hurt" they have dished out over the years on the sheep and now they can't take it, the truth, about themselves??  ARGH!!

How many lives have been mis-directed and ruined because of their counsel?  How many times did they unjustly counsel and when the sheep attempted to clarify they accused the sheep of trying to justify themselves?  How many times did they treat the sheep unkindly to train us to go the way of the cross?  How many wounded pilgrims are out there still suffering even after 1, 5, 10, 20+ years of having left the assembly?  How many still suffer anxiety attacks and nightmares?  How many marriages remain dysfunctional because of unhealthy marriage counselling?  How many husbands are still lamenting because thay cannot control their wives any more?  How many are poorer now because of all the money they gave to Geftakys and his servants, while they 'the trainers' live in homes that are paid off, those that they 'trained' are still paying off their own mortgages?  How many do the leaders have a 'hold' over because of knowledge received in counselling sessions?

I know there's more, but I think you get the point.
Marcia

Re. leaders being "so hurt" --
People told us that is what George said when we left.  It is an expression of deep narcissism.  What happened was interpreted entirely as a narcissistic injury of rejection.  It shows complete and total lack of empathy for what was going on, which is what you are describing, Marcia.  So what does it say about these leaders now?  They imbibed gg's narcissism - scary scary thought.  Read the new articles on evil on ga.com.

I second what Margaret just said.

virtually all of the ex-LB's and workers who haven't made clear public statements of repentance or remorse have become George.  

Especially Mark Miller, Tim G.  Jeff Lehmkuhl, Roberto Sanchez, McCallister, Testa, McCarthy, Matsen-Boze and a few others.

Folks, I wouldn't be surprised if George was preaching again in Fullerton and Placentia.  Yeah, maybe Mark would whimper some words of protest before he slunk away into several years of being dissappointed by "worldly" churches, but he certainly won't stand against George.

To quote from Margaret's article:

Peck also makes this statement:  "Evil...is dangerous.  It will contaminate or otherwise destroy a person who remains too long in its presence."  It may be debatable to what degree George Geftakys is evil, but the characteristics of evil in his life are unmistakable, and many of us were exposed for a long time.  All of us, therefore, but especially former workers, need to ask ourselves not just have we been hurt or abused by George but, "How by dependency and passivity have I become like him and taken on the characteristics of evil? Have I become even a little bit like George?"  


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

Did I become less truthful?

More ready to excuse a lie?  To think that a lie is sometimes justified for a "good" reason?  To lie to get my way?  To lie to control someone, or control a situation, perhaps to someone else's detriment?

Did I become more controlling?

Did I learn to use my rightness as an excuse to become more justified in insisting on my way?  To be discourteous and contemptuous to win a point?  To override the opinions or preferences of others to have the last word?  To set things up so that I am the gatekeeper of information and access?

Did I become more willful?  

Especially in protecting my "innocence", and especially protecting it to someone else's detriment, maybe my family, or others who need an apology from me?

Have I become less able to see my own faults and sins, less willing to admit them?

Did I become less subject to the laws of the land?  More inclined to cut corners in my business ethics, my taxes, my driving?  Inclined to borrow and not return?  Inclined to make agreements and excuse not keep them?

Did I learn to scapegoat?

Shift the focus onto someone else's perceived failings, and away from mine?  Become more ready to accuse others of evil, less ready to see it in myself?

Did I become less empathetic, more narcissistic?

Imposing my rightness on others instead of listening and understanding them?  More focused on what people think of me?  Has this led to a blurring of sexual boundaries, to "innocent" flirtation?

Did I become more passive or dependent?  

Less able to make decisions on my own?  Was I possibly in thrall to an evil person?  Has this led to an inability to say no, or to keep appropriate boundaries, perhaps sexual boundaries?

Have I become more secretive?

Have I become less open?  Did I develop a disguise to cloak my true self, or my motives?  What is my motivation?

Do I now need to seek God's grace to reverse the direction of my life in some of these areas?


These guys are not seeking God's grace, by keeping George's meetings going.  In fact, although some of them won't admit it, what they are seeking is the very evil that George provided them.  It's only a matter of time until they get back into it.

Jeff Lehmkuhl has openly declared that he is back in the "ministry,"  apparently Scott Testa has become enough like George that he is able to give these addicts the fix they require.

Can you imagine being so weak as Mark Miller and some of these others?  They heard first hand what sort of scoundrel George had been right under their noses.  They have signed statements from several women whom George defiled and carried on with, and yet they allow him to say, unchecked, that they made it all up!

They won't utter a word in their defense.

George couldn't buy better friends.  He trained them well.  Cowards and sick addicts will do anything for another fix, and they be plentiful among the Geftakys followers.

Brent

Please, everyone do carefully read those articles on evil as Margaret says.  Read the Scapegoating section for a very good description of what happened in the still existing Annandale assembly last year when members tried to talk to leadership about their problems.  
See the Intellectual Deviousness part about the resulting confusion of long association with an evil person. C-o-n-f-u-s-i-o-n.  That describes the state of mind of a number of these folks.  I experienced it myself many times while in the assembly.  Things weren't right but I couldn't explain why.
See the Coercion and control of others.  Just read the whole thing and the self-examination part, too.  
Also, none of us who left the Annandale assembly think that place will keep going without itinerant ministry from So. Cal., or maybe Ottawa?  We were propped up out here for years by such visits.  Making dust, Phill now calls it.
And much rhetorical questioning went on last winter as well, "If George repented, would we have to forgive him and let him come to meetings?"  Also, only Geo. himself was bad to them.  Everything else 'assembly' was just great in their eyes.  The majority of them anyway.
Deliver us from evil.
Becky

I know someone who is mentally ill.  I've known her all my life.  She's sick. She calls black white and the reverse.  In a discussion, she's been known to argue furiously and then switch sides (slealing her opponent's argument) and claiming it was her own to start with.  It is impossible to discuss with such people.  George is very much like this person I know.  Certifyable.  And he's trained, as others have pointed out, many henchmen to be just like him.  Given this is so, we are all idiots to try and reason with them.  They love the darkness.  They love the evil structure they seek to build.  They speak the same language and this language will enable them to build a great tower so high that they will not need God at all.  
I trust God will overthrow them.  Their purpose is most vile because they entrap the innocent and teach them to love the lies.  We must speak the truth we know, encourage others to speak their truth too, to dig down deep and fight the fear that protects their silence.  I am not afraid of George and all his henchmen: repeat 10 times and follow with the Lord's prayer.  I'm not kidding.  Yes, I am... but I'm not.  God brought Babel down.

drj

The Wisers:

Oh, you were lucky enough to get itinerate ministry from Ottawa?  Wowzer.  I survived four years in that assembly and can attest to the fact that Nancy was handpicked by George to be Armand's wife because she would stand for George's interests in that place.  The assembly when downhill from there.  George is alive and well in that place, his carefully chossen vocabulary flowing it's 'wisdom' from their mouths.  Yes, the assembly is a machine, though so much of it currently renounces its leader.  Doesn't matter.  The source of evil that created it yet affects us all.  ...Deliver us from evil, for Thine is the kingdom, power and the glory, forever and ever, amen.
drj

Hey Verne----

I know it's off the subject, but what are you doing
in Barcelona? Are you on vacation?

--Joe

.  He also named his son Timothy "Absalom," in reference to David's son who conspired with Ahithophel, David's chief counselor to usurp the throne.


This is actually a mistake...George renamed his son Flappy Abs - alom after Tim's body fat rose to over 56 percent.  

Seriously though - what on God's green earth is going on here!!!  Brent is correct - the only word that can describe these people is "addict"...

I never met this Lemkuhl (Thank God!!!) character but I can only imagine what hes like.  I just can't believe people who appeared to be at least halfway educated (ex. Mark Miller) would continue to carry on this circus act.

Why adults would subject themselves and their children to this utter nonsense in the first place is beyone me...Why they still subject themself to this after all thats been said and done makes me sick.  

If they are continuing to meet and recruit, I still contend the best way to intervene is to figure out where these yahoos are going "witnessing", and simply follow them around, interupt when they begin their spiel, and hand the people that they are "witnessing" to information from this website.  Harass, Harass, Harass!!!  

Before we get carried away again as we have in the past on this bb labeling certain leading brothers evil, please read the "evil" articles carefully.  The evil person Peck is describing is very consistent in those characteristics in all areas of his life.  

We probably know enough about GG to conclude that he is probably evil.  Certain leading brothers, on the other hand, have demonstrated some of these characteristics in their behavior as we see it in regard to assembly functioning.  This is evil behavior that has been learned from George.  But unless we know the person very well, we can't necessarily conclude that they are the through-and-through malignant narcissists Peck is describing.

We can, however, be alarmed that that they seem to be moving the wrong way on the continuum of good/evil, and this is a moment of choice.  We need to pray for those who have been paralyzed up to this point.

I read this a few days ago:

Proverbs 29:12
If a ruler hearken to lies, all his servants are wicked.

This seems like advice on recognizing corruption in government.  A ruler has resources to find out about things, so his wrong decisions are based on feigned ignorance.

Stephen---

That's very true. I saw the "Passion of Christ" on Saturday, and was amazed once again how Pilate, thinking that by washing his hands, was innocent of any crime. I think this speaks of that feigned ignorance you are describing.

--Joe

http://www.geftakysassembly.com/Articles/TeachingPractice/EvilQuotations.htm

I just finished reading the article.  Wow is that incredibly insightful!
It made me rethink what I am to this day, even though I've been out a few years.  I think the evil's effect still hasn't worn completely off.  I can see where my thinking has completely changed from what it was before I entered the group.  I'm way more proud in a really bad way. :(

So evil isn't a piece of dark matter in the microwave (Time Bandits).  It was right up there at the pulpit in Fullerton and SLO while I was in the room listening.  It was right there in the houses in which I lived.  All the while it posioned my mind.  It's like I was irradiated with evil radiation.  I think I need to rethink some things.  I need a detox.

Things are getting clearer now.  I had some ananswered questions about issues in my life to which this helps shed a bit of light. I'm very glad for the article, thanks Steve and Margaret.

Arthur

this is the opposite of what I was taught in fellowship: follow the leaders, even if they are wrong, God will honor you and God will honor them even when they're wrong, because they are God's leadership.  Excellent safeguard in this thinking for the leaders themselves.  Thus, there was an easy trade for many leaders: check your conscience at the door and take up your crown, yardstick,  and authority.

correct me if this was not representative of the power holders in other assemblies.
drj

Puts it all into words......

Hi Everyone!

  Great article that Arthur and Moonflower have commented on! (follow Arthur's link or go to Assembly Reflections site)
   I have sometimes wondered if my belief that GG was "evil" may have been too strong a word and that I should possibly temper my language in this regard, but after reading this article I see that I have been right on the money!
   Please notice that the author is a Harvard trained psychologist, and yet uses the term "evil".  This demonstrates that there are those trained in this science who bring moral issues into their understanding of the human condition.  The point I'm trying to make here is that not all psychology is totally "worldly" or anti-Christian.
   If the pscyologist/psychiatrist has a foundational belief rooted in Biblical faith there can be an enormous amount of good that this person can do.  This is demonstrated in Arthur's testimony to the insights provided him by clearly understanding what was going on in GG's mind and how it affected us.
   A key to recovery from our Assembly past is to understand the toxic nature of what we daily received, and once identified, how to "detox" (as Arthur stated) from the poisonous affects of evil.  I would like to recommend the book "Toxic Faith" as helpful in this regard.
   For those who still think that psychology and Christianity can not mix, please consider the man Dr. James Dobson who founded, "Focus On The Family."  He is a child psychologist and thoroughly committed to the Christian faith.  He has given his life to serve humanity through a combination of understanding that the reception of the Gospel is the greatest need for an individual, but uses his understanding of our humanity and life struggles as a means to communicate that message.
   Understanding the Gospel without understanding our own soul leads to a shallow experience of what God has for us therein.  Understanding our soul without the Gospel leads to despair.  Growth in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ must include an honest assessment of our inner life within the joyful knowledge that God's acceptance of me is not based on my ability to produce holiness in my life.
   It seems to me that the above is the cure to toxic faith and the knowledge of a faith that is more than an antidote; it actually becomes a fount of health springing up unto eternal life! :) :)
                             God Bless,   Mark C.
   

Hi, all-
For me, these articles highlighted the confusion that long association with evil people causes.  For example, in the assemblies we called evil (g & b), good, and good (other ministries), evil.
A person visiting the assembly for some months once suggested a video series from Focus on the Family instead of another Geo. seminar.  Leadership scornfully looked down on him for even suggesting such a thing, poor man, no vision!
My point is, we didn't know any better.
You can have all the good intentions in the world and still be woefully inadequate to be in any sort of spiritual leadership if your main example, for upwards of 20 years, has been an evil person.  And you held him up as godly.  And you gave your life to serve in his ministry, to the exclusion of all others, and you called it "serving the Lord".  And when you found out he was a fraud, you continued in all he taught.

Now, do we, personally, look at our former leaders as our enemies, or evil in themselves?  Not at all. But they were fooled like we were, maybe to an even much greater extent, and a clear and humble repentance on their part would do wonders for their souls.  IMHO.
Deliver us all from evil, and the resulting confusion that association with it brings.  
Becky