i just read the article referenced by dave here:
while its true that mike was far better at this gag than george was, some general parallels can be drawn. they both used lies about their past to pump money into their pockets from sincere and deeply affected believers. those who joined their inner circle were forced to choose between being corrupted by them or driven away. but the part that caught my attention the most were some of the letters to the editor, in which some people condemned the superlative investigative journalism of cornerstone on the basis that warnke was leading thousands to Christ. paraphrased: 'if he was speaking God's word, he was speaking truth, even if he was lying the rest of the time, so shame on cornerstone for exposing his lies.' forget the paraphrases, here are some quotes from that same website (
http://www.cornerstonemag.com/features/iss099/letters.htm ):
PLEASE EXPLAIN
Why are you trying to bring down Mike Warnke? He has saved more people than you can imagine. Maybe not all his life is what you think it is. I have been to three of his concerts here in Pismo Nazarene Church, and I and two friends have reached the Lord through Mike. You know Satan will give and make up lies to bring Mike down because he is afraid of Mike. Please explain yourself to me.
E. W. Billings
Paso Robles, CA
this is starting to sound unmistakably familiar, i hope. many people point to the (meager) salvation that took place in the assemblies as evidence of the Spirit, and conclude that anything said against george must be from satan. you can form that kind of conclusion about anything at all you disagree with, but there are still those pesky objective facts that will make you look like such a fool when you do.
MANY WRONGS MAKE A RIGHT?
I was not impressed with your article on Mike Warnke—you have done no more than what the secular press does. It’s bad enough what happened in Mike Warnke’s life, but you went way too far! You mentioned Jimmy Swaggart many times, but that’s beside the point. I didn’t agree with Jimmy, but, at the same time, I didn’t agree with a fourth marriage by Warnke. What about the scripture that says whether it’s preached for the wrong reason or the right reason, nevertheless Christ is preached?
You talked more about condemning this man and making him out to be a fraud than saying we need to lift him up and pray for him. Christ didn’t condemn the woman caught in adultery. Is sin different because a man is on a pedestal? Or how about looking within your own life? Yes, sirs, I am angry. I am a minister and I come under fire about things. I have been in a situation where my own senior pastor was caught doing the wrong thing. The Body condemned him! And still does! I forgave him. You spoke on forgiveness slightly; why not totally focus on lifting up a brother rather than condemning? Think about it! Does God condemn you even now when you mess up?
Rev. Q. Coleman
San Antonio, TX
we have heard a lot variations of this in relation to the assembly situation. hey, we are all sinners, right? so we should ignore all of the blatant lies george told us, and quit informing people about them when those lies are (still!!) being used to pour money into his fat wallet. this is slightly more defensible than a flatout denial of the existence of objective facts using the massive satanic conspiracy fallacy, but still an unbelievably weak arguement for anyone who cares about truth, justice, or plain decency in the slightest. instead of denying that facts can exist, this approach invites you not to care about them. this line of reasoning would have you accept the idea that we are all just as corrupt as george and mike, so we might as well start acting that way by working to shut the mouths of those who wish to fight their corruption. this is one way compromise and deceipt poision the souls of the sincere. you can quote verses out of context at me all day, i will never accept that there is no difference between a sincere imperfect (even decieved) believer and a thoroughly corrupt thief of mens' souls (and money!) like george. to call the two equal is to expose yourself as having been corrupted. i'm guessing the only person who would make such a claim of equality is a person who has already acted on this belief and have compromised their conscience. they must then defend their actions with desperation, mortally afraid of the brokenness that would occur if this extremely thin line of reasoning were to break.
there is lots more, but i'm out of time. to sum it up: the vast majority of the christian world's reaction to this article was relief and gratitude towards its authors for their hard work carefully bringing the horrible truth to light. although warnke's lies brought him far more fame and fortune than george's ever could, the sins and abuses of the geftakys family (especially when you add in david) seem to me much darker, crueler, and more flagrant than warnke's. yet a much smaller percentage of assembly folks are grateful for the truth that has come to light. this, despite the fact that warnke mainly wanted money and attention, while george demanded every part of our lives! i would be far more grateful to someone who gave me my life back than to someone who informed me my love-offering was given under false assumptions. yet in the post-assembly aftermath gratitude and joy are suprisingly spare, while suspiscion and accusation quickly resurface. that is because the assembly in most parts was, and many parts still is,
a cult.
brian
