AssemblyBoard
November 01, 2024, 09:31:29 am *
The board has been closed to new content. It is available as a searchable archive only. This information will remain available indefinitely.

I can be reached at brian@tucker.name

For a repository of informational articles and current information on The Assembly, see http://www.geftakysassembly.com
 
   Home   Search  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Discussions of former leaders.  (Read 5896 times)
d3z
Guest


Email
« on: January 14, 2004, 10:30:07 pm »

A few people have asked me questions about people that were involved in leadership (or other positions) in the San Diego assembly.  I wanted to make a brief posting to explain why I don't give out all that much information, especially on the board.

I still keep in regular contact with the former LB's of the San Diego assembly, and consider them friends.  For all, I would simply describe their state as somewhere between that of regular posters to this board, and people who are still "in fellowship".  They have made efforts to "make things right" with people who have left formerly, although it did take a bit of explaining on my part to get them to see this was even necessary.  None have specifically denounced any particular doctrinal issues.  At some point I may explicity bring this up.

None have expressed any interest in being involved in this BB.  I would like to respect that decision and not talk about them in a forum that they won't be reading or responding to.
Logged
editor
Guest
« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2004, 01:50:04 am »

A few people have asked me questions about people that were involved in leadership (or other positions) in the San Diego assembly.  I wanted to make a brief posting to explain why I don't give out all that much information, especially on the board.

I still keep in regular contact with the former LB's of the San Diego assembly, and consider them friends.  For all, I would simply describe their state as somewhere between that of regular posters to this board, and people who are still "in fellowship".  They have made efforts to "make things right" with people who have left formerly, although it did take a bit of explaining on my part to get them to see this was even necessary.  None have specifically denounced any particular doctrinal issues.  At some point I may explicity bring this up.

None have expressed any interest in being involved in this BB.  I would like to respect that decision and not talk about them in a forum that they won't be reading or responding to.

sounds good to me, Dave.

Brent
Logged
summer007
Guest


Email
« Reply #2 on: January 15, 2004, 01:58:29 am »

Funny you mentioned this ...I was thinking this A.M. I really dont need any more info re:GG ...What I have now is too much information...If I learned anymore grusome details I'd surely be Sick...I prefer..Phil4:8 Whatsoever Things are Good, Lovely,etc....
Logged
d3z
Guest


Email
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2004, 12:53:47 am »

One thing I've definitely noticed, is that the more things that I learn that happened, the less I think of those that were in leadership.  This is especially true locally.

I will say this of San Diego LB's: The manipulation techniques discussed on the board on the website were used here. People were threatend to not be able to partake in order to manipulate them into specific behaviors.  Other times, people would be guilty over sins, and be brushed off.  They would be told to go ahead and partake.  I really feel they didn't want people skipping the Lord's supper on their own, because it would lessen the impact it had when they wanted to manipulate.

People who left were shunned, and rediculous false stories were told to justify this shunning.  Our schedules were micromanaged.  Major and minor life decisions were to be made under council of the LB's.  The thing is, if you just went along with it, everything seemed fine.  But, if you "rebelled" against it, much could be brought against you.

I think little has been addressed in most places because these former leaders just don't realize the magnitude of what they've done.  This is clear by so many going into other churches and quickly taking positions of leadership and teaching.

I was offered the possibility of leading a small group at my church.  I turned it down for two reasons: 1.  I haven't recovered, especially in mentality.  Maybe some day, but for now, I need to learn.  2.  It is not something I'm gifted for.  I got fairly good at acting the part in the assembly, since all men were supposed to lead.  I only found it burdensome and somewhat depressing, since I knew what was really inside me.
Logged
jackhutchinson
Guest


Email
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2004, 01:21:26 am »

Dave,

So I wasn't the only one that refused on my own to partake?  I did that many times.  I was usually condemning myself because my messy apartment was not up to the standard of excellence that I saw in the homes of so many in the assembly or some other legalistic concern.  The leaders would gently explain that this was not an issue of sin and that I could partake.

Even in times of my worst failures the leaders were always gentle and supportive.  When I refused to come to meetings because I was so discouraged with the apparent lack of spiritual progress in my life one leader even told me that if I came to the meetings I could leave early without having to speak to anyone.  They just wanted me to come and hear the preaching and possibly be encouraged.

However, looking back I can see that I never rocked the assembly boat until 1/22/03 when the ship was already sinking (I'll be posting about this on the 'One year ago today' thread).  I always supported the leaders, so they always supported me.

It was so surreal for me to read the accounts of so many people that saw the underbelly of the leadership firsthand.  It was as if I were reading about totally different people than the ones I thought I had known for 19 years.  And yet, the more I read the more lights went on and I started to think, "so THAT'S why they did such and such!".
Logged
al Hartman
Guest


Email
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2004, 04:20:14 am »



I got fairly good at acting the part in the assembly, since all men were supposed to lead.  I only found it burdensome and somewhat depressing, since I knew what was really inside me.

     David's words above resonate in me.  It is a hollow, empty sound.  I spent about a decade functioning in the role of LB & worker in the Fullerton assembly and the San Fernando Valley without ever rising above the condemning sense of "what was really inside me."
     In retrospect, I realize that, had the whole thing been legitimate as I thought it was then, GG's acceptance of me in that position would have spoken loudly of his lack of spiritual insight in not recognizing my inner turmoil and unfitness to lead.
     As it was, the fact that he used me in that capacity for that lengthy period tells that I must have been somehow useful to him in getting and keeping what he wanted.
     Either consideration is mind-numbing and stomach-churning.

     Thank God for His grace bestowed upon us in Jesus Christ and for the Holy Spirit's work revealing all to us...

al Hartman

Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!