ASSEMBLY HISTORY and why it is important.

[Scott McCumber]

I wanted to start this thread for thoughts about Margaret Irons postings on ASSEMBLY HISTORY. Brent was right to lock out replies as it is an important stand-alone article.

There has long been a question as to whether this ministry began as the work of God and was led astray as George began to fall away, or whether it was George's invention from the very beginning.

I believe Margaret's testimony clearly answers that question. This "ministry" was a calculated, planned invention of George Geftakys to satisfy his ego and need to dominate and control as well as to line his pocketbook. It turned into a cottage industry that supported his entire family (we all know the sad exceptions) and select group of underlings. GEFTAKYS CULT, INC.!

It underscores why I believe the fundamental doctrines of this organization are not only flawed but deliberately designed so that a few select men can control large groups of people.

I would like to hear your thoughts and expansions.

Thanks,

Scott

[jesusfreak]

I have been curious for awhile as to the orgins of GG, and what all transpired.  I would love to talk to the brethern at that church to ask them what they thought about this current situation with the assemblies.  Anyway, i am glad that this history was given.

Even given the orgins of how this was all started, I will still give testify to how the assembly (the meetings, the people in it, ect) have led me to my current reality with the Lord.  Although i am grieved that even I was decieved with this man (GG), I still firmly believe that the Lord used this deception of a man for His Work.

[outdeep]

Steve and Margaret's article is excellent and it certainly has filled in many gaps in my understanding as to how the Assembly came about.

The history of the Assembly was always kept as "it's so wonderful I couldn't begin to explain it."  There was one time I remember where we met at a gym in Fullerton for a potluck (I think Valencia park, but my memory of landmarks is fading).  It was exciting as George was going to give the "history of the Assembly".  To no one's surprise, he gave a few vaugue facts and taunted the Lord's faithfulness in raising things up.

If I can give a few suggestions for this thread to keep the discusson on task:

Steve and Margaret's article does not address what George's personal motive was.  Was he intending to deceive a bunch of people so that he could start a cult and line his pockets?  Or was he really seeing himself as doing God's work through the fog of personal baggage and a warped perception of God and himself?  In other words, was he a throughly evil man or was he a deluded man?  I would tremble at trying to discuss or acertain this as God alone will judge George's motive of heart.  I would encourage the discussion not to go too far down that line.

What I think the distinction that the article makes - an excellent one - is this:  was this a work that was raised up supernaturally by God (as was always claimed) or can we look at the historical facts and see that the the church was merely a function of good connections worked by an ambitious, chararismatic leader that happened to bless people in spite of itself?

I think the historic facts clearly speak for themselves.

Thanks, Steve and Margaret!

[Peacefulg]

Hi Dave, well put.  We do not know what this MAN's motives were, and need to stay away from that type of judgement

May we all learn from this history, for as it has been said time and time again, those that refuse to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it!

Lord Bless,
G

[Arthur]

Our first invitation to George and Betty's home in Fullerton set off alarms in us.  It was very dimly lit by a small lamp with red bulbs.  There was a statue of a laughing Buddha set on a table by itself in a prominent place in the living room, along with several smaller statues of Tibetan holy men on a side table.  There was a huge plank on the wall in the entryway carved with Chinese characters.  Within a few months, a missionary from China took George to task about the Buddha, and he removed it.  She also told him that the plank advertised a brothel, and made him turn it over to the side that said grocery store.

When George learned that my degree was in English, the one and only book of poetry he wanted to share with me, out of all the world's great poetry, was Flowers of Evil, Baudelaire's 1857 collection of poetry which was condemned for immorality in the courts of France.  George had a Satanic Bible, and claimed to have gone to Hollywood to confront Anton LeVey, the satanic high priest.  He also had the Tibetan Book of the Dead,  a scripture from Tibetan Buddhism which was "traditionally read aloud to the dying to help them attain liberation."  It teaches that awareness, once freed from the body, creates its own reality like that of a dream. It needs guidance and forewarning so that key decisions that lead to enlightenment are made. The Tibetan Book of the Dead teaches how one can attain heavenly realms.  (The last report of a journey that I heard in the fall of 1989 was all about how he had been to Tibet and visited famous monasteries.)  

Oh man!  I wish I would have known about this sooner.   How could such a man preach from the Bible?  The two are at odds with each other.  It all becomes clear now.  
A thought came to me that maybe George was just ignorant and so didn't know that these statues were evil, or that sign.  But, he was a Christian for what, 25 years by then, as well as a preacher, and went to seminary.  He knew what he was doing.  Scary  

It is very difficult for me to try to see these beginnings through the lens, "Did God raise up this ministry?"  I think that God spoke to us through the many Scriptures that were read, through the many doctrinal hymns we sang, and He fed us through the Lord's Supper, because we were the sheep of His pasture, not because this was a special work of God.  In so doing, He preserved us and we were even able to grow in grace, to some extent.  

Yes, that's it.  It was never about "the work" after all. The only reason there was any blessing at all was because of God in the sincere Christians, not because of George's vision.  The latter actually being contrary to the former.  
If there was ever any movement of God it was in spite of George, not because of him or his "vision".  

[Arthur]

kk, will do soon.  Thanks Rudy.  Man, the possibility (probability, fact?) that there were satanic influences in the assembly is a trip!    But it does fit and make it all clear.

[David Mauldin]

Anyone interrested in "Plymouth Bretheren" feelings about George can contact Fred Kaiser Elder while George was at Grace Bible Chapel  714 538-8418 or Max Krieger (Elder and former good friend of George) at Ave 54 bible Chapel 323 478-9881

[Joe Sperling]

Thanks to Steve and Margaret for their article. I have often asked the question of whether God had started the ministry in Fullerton or if George did. I recently was in contact with an Assembly member who made the statement:"Things are messed up here--the Lord may have removed his candlestick." I E-mailed back that maybe he was looking at it all wrong and that God was really PLACING a candlestick where one had not been before. A MAN had been leading the church there and not God, and God in his time was removing this person and taking over the place he should have had in the first place. I've often wondered whether God led me to the Assembly--at the time I started going to meetings I was under horrible legalistic beliefs about God and felt condemned. In this context I first attended a meeting at Pierce College which was led by George. He was teaching the Minor Prophets, and was in Hosea "Return oh backsliding Israel and I will return to you". I felt at the time God had led me to that meeting because of that one verse. But a work that God starts should not lead to further condemnation and legalism, it should lead to liberty. And I definitely was not lead into liberty, but into works of the flesh. So many warning signs were there but I chose to ignore them--or was blinded by my own ignorance. A work of God should bless the church but also be a HUGE blessing to the community around it, the poor and the suffering. The Assembly served the Assembly--at least when I was there it was totally ingrown and served itself. It's funny that the Buddha was mentioned, because I visited Georhge's house once for dinner and saw a Buddha----I thought it was on the fireplace but my memory may have failed. I also saw books on his book shelf that I was a little amazed to see.
Ever since I've left though I've always had that suspicion that God was not the author of the work, but a man was.

--Joe

[Arthur]

Joe and others, how do you see it now?  I've been wondering the same thing.  It seemed so clear at the time, and even now the circumstances seem too arranged to be coincidence -- that God led me into the group.
Was it all in our heads?

[Arthur]

Regarding George and his satanic bible and other books, I remember something that George said during the summer school of '99.  He was preaching and had us to turn to Acts 19.  

He read this text, And many that believed came, and confessed, and shewed their deeds. Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver.

He then told us that he was reading this very passage at a brother's meeting or something like that in his house.  He said something to the effect of, "As I was reading this passage I suddenly stopped.  The Holy Spirit convicted my heart that very moment. He said, 'Yes, that, you know that doesn't belong in your house.'  So I went upstairs and into my study.  I took that book off of the shelf, went downstairs and threw it into the fire in the presence of all that were there."

He didn't tell us what book it was.  Now we have a better idea of what that might have been.  How 'bout them apples?   Do you think after 40+ years of being a Christian, he finally repented of owning a satanic bible?
I don't know what to make of it.

[David Mauldin]

Was George just a "Flim-Flam-Man" from day one?  can anyone remember a sincerely genuine moment where he behaved like Jesus would? I did notice him ask Rand Bates "if my car is too worldly?"  But I really can't recall anything else!

[David Mauldin]

I think a question that people are wrestling with now is "Even though this ministry was not begun by God,  Did God lead me into it?  Did God speek to me?  Did God say "I want you to fellowship here?"  I would like to read your responses!

[Arthur]

Ok how bout this.  Let's list it:

Is the following the fruit of a false prophet or of a saint?

1. He prayed with and for people.
2. He preached from the Bible.  Saying things such as, Jesus is Lord, we need to follow Jesus, I am a wretched man were it not for the grace of God.  
3. He went on missionary trips around the world.
4. Some people got saved through his ministry.
5. He invited people over to his home for lunch at the seminars.
6. He allowed people to stay at his home.
7...others?  u add to the list

If we didn't know anything else, we'd say that the above person is probably a godly man.  Ah, but now enter the satanic bible, adultery, money, etc. and now the list is viewed as:

1. "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward...
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation."
Prayers just for show?

2. "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction...And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you."  
"These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage."
"Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:  The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely"
Yes, he said that it is by grace through faith, but that is just "bare bones" salvation, or mere initial salvation.  Inheritance, or full salvation, comes by obedience (more specifically, if you are going to reign with Christ then, you need to learn to submit to George now.)  

3. "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves."
Yeah, scary huh?

4.  "Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:  The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:  But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.  What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice."  
"For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."
"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."
The word of God stands on its own.  George just happened to be reading out of the right book.  The Holy Spirit by the word of God is who saved people, not George.

5 and 6. "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess...Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness."
Yes we ate at George's house, but was George ever there to say "hi"?  Rather his servants (those "guests" in his home) were the people who showed hospitatlity, not George.

Topsy-turvy isn't it?  The only thing I have a problem with is that for points 3 and 4, from what I remember, most of what George said was good.  How could he even say one good thing if he was so messed up?  Maybe I was messed up in my perception of what he said?  I dunno, I'd like to hear some lectures again and see if they were as good as I thought or in error and I didn't see it.  

[Arthur]

I think a question that people are wrestling with now is "Even though this ministry was not begun by God,  Did God lead me into it?  Did God speek to me?  Did God say "I want you to fellowship here?"  I would like to read your responses!

I don't understand it, and maybe I am so far gone that I don't see it clearly--I dunno, how would I know if I was?--but I'd have to say, "Yes."  What about you?

[Arthur]

Arthur,

forgettaboutit when it comes to clearing your thinking by
coming to the source of the problem for your answers.
// Slap upside the head //  Whadda you thinkin', are ya
retarded or sumthin'

just gotta love ya and watch out for ya

Ya brudda,
and ya betta mind what i said

Huh?