Weird Teachings

[editor]

Sondra,

Here's an example of what I am talking about. In one of the chapters from Penn-Lewis's "Centrality of The Cross,"  she talks about "The Cross and Revival."

In this chapter, she describes holding meetings, where the cross is applied, and the atmosphere is "clear as crystal." People are praying, and testifying spontaneously....until a demon speaks.  Someone speaks up and there is a "metallic" sound to the voice, and a strange spirit gives a tincture, a small pollution into the spiritual atmosphere.  Well, she makes it clear that the meetings need to be conducted by people who have experienced a deep, inward work of the cross, in order that this sort of thing be detected and stopped before God's prescense is quenched.

In other words, those who have become accustomed to the cross, and who have a spiritual wisdom and sensitivity are able to discern the spirits, and should deciseively act upon their intuition. 

That's a far cry from saying this:

Discerning sexual sin might be close to impossible.  History shows that many godly men and women have missed it - and when it was right under their noses.  This doesn't mean that the Word didn't go out and accomplish what it was sent to do.  The Word is a living and powerful instrument and it works upon His counterpart - the Bride or the souls of the redeemed.  George preached the Word.  How could he miss.  His failure did you a favor.  The Word still stands, doesn't it?

Penn-Lewis teaches differently, and her deeper life credentials are pretty good.

I was reminded of something while I was typing this post.  Years ago, when I first got really into The Centrality of The Cross, and Penn-Lewis's other books, I brought this very chapter up to the leadership in SLO.  I longed for the experience that she talked about, the revival and crystal clear atmosphere, where God's presence was felt in a deep, profound way.

The brothers  weren't sure what to do, so they consulted God, (George being the intermediary) and decided that  we weren't going to do that and that I should just drop it. (The meetings were boring and I really wanted some life!)  So, what I am saying is that you are correct.  When push came to shove, George wasn't into the deeper life if it meant changing anything he was already doing. I guess we share a similiar experience on that count.

However, I really was into the deeper life, and really did try to cultivate the inner life...and I was deaf, dumb and blind as a result.

It was the blunt force trauma, and icy cold water of simple bible exegesis that got me to wake up. 

The main point in the Bible was Jesus, not George's Assembly. It was about Christ, not about the cross in me, it was about the Head, not the body....It was about eternal life, not deeper life.

That's my experience, but I reserve the right to grow and change in the future! 

Brent

[editor]

How can one access Christ except through His cross?  The cross is a living instrument, is it not?  If we fellowship in His sufferings aren't we fellowshipping in His cross?  How else can we attain?  And if we die on His cross, how can we live again simultaneously except through the power of His cross?  Isn't there an inward pivot that is typified by the cross of the Lord? 

Can't it be about both, Christ and His cross in me?  Is He not present with us in glory within as we use His divine tool to change?  Dying, death, and resuscitation - 3 positions of the cross that deliver us from sin and regenerate our nature.  Christians use this whether they understand what they are doing or not.  The better we know the tool though, the more proficiently we can use it.

I don't see the cross as a living instrument at all.  I see it as an historical event that took place 2 millenia ago.

Amazing things took place, both in the physical and spiritual sense, but the most important aspect of it, to me, is that  it is finished!  He died in my place, He suffered on account of my sin, He paid my penalty, and the veil was torn.  I now have access to God, by grace through faith.  It says clearly that believing is needed, not access through the living instrument of the cross.

Yes, it is blessed to fellowship His sufferings, but the fact remains, we don't need to be crucified.  We don't need to suffer God's wrath, because Christ did so in our place.

Your point about Christians changing through God's power, whether they know it or not is well taken, and I am in total agreement.  However, I don't see that Deeper Life teaching is helpful.  I see it as a distraction to this working of God, because it makes the cross something it is not.  It's just an old piece of wood without Jesus.  It's the Cross of Christ, not just the cross.

Paul said he wanted to know Jesus Christ, and HIM crucified.  He never said he wanted to know a deep, inward work of the cross in people's lives.

Is there growth?  Of course!  There must be growth, as He is The Vine and we are the branches.  Growth is natural, because of our source of life.  Deeper Life teaching, if taken too far, basically says that union with Christ is not enough, and that there must be a "tool" as you put it, in order for growth to occur.  That's not right.  We are under the care of a Vinedresser.  He has the tools and he uses them as He sees fit.  He doesn't give them to the branches.  It's the branches job to grow bear fruit

I do agree with you when you say the better we know the Lord the more we change.  However, it is my contention that knowing ideas about something we call the cross, and knowing God are not the same thing at all.

That's my opinion, and I add that I speak as one who used to be an adherent to Deeper Life theology. Just because we disagree on this doesn't mean we can't have friendly fellowship in Christ.

Brent

[Joe Sperling]

Just a short addition here. As you said Brent, "It is finished". The Bible says I AM crucified with
Christ, nevertheless I live.."(Gal. 2:20). It doesn't say "I am BEING crucified with Christ". It's speaking
of an accomplished act, "I am crucified"---not an ongoing crucifixion as the Catholics seem to adhere
to. The way of the cross is to believe what has already been accomplished for us, not a dreary walk of suffering to attain holiness. "I am crucified" implies a finished work, and a simple act of faith---"I am being crucified" implies works, and a neverending stream of "duties" to crucify ourselves more and more on a daily basis. That is not Biblical, and it is what led the Assembly into the endless meetings, and stewardships, and total "commitment" required to be a faithful Christian.

--Joe

[Mark C.]

Sondra,

  The following comments are not meant as a personal attack, but I must strongly disagree with some of what I think you are saying.

!.) Your contention that "GG preached the word" and as such should be seen as an instrument of God.

   You admit that GG is an unrepentant adulterer, but that God was using him inspite of this. (Do I understand you correctly?)

  I can only guess that you believe this based on certain verses that say things like, "His Word will not return to Him void", and when Paul "rejoiced that the Gospel was preached," in Philppians, even though it was proclaimed by contentious and self centered preachers, etc.  If this is the case, let's talk about the possibility that you are not properly applying them.

   Jim Jones preached the Bible,  as did David Koresh.  Jehovah Witnessess and Mormans preach "the word", as in public teaching of their belief system from the bible: Are these also vessels of blessing that God is using to minister to souls?

2.) Are GG's dalliance's with those he "pastored" his only failure as a leader?  In other words, was GG's treatment of those under his control sinful in other areas? (as in abusive shame based techniques of attacking those  who he felt threatened by?)

   On the first point above: Just because someone speaks from the Bible does not mean they are presenting a proper interpretation.  God's word must represent God's truth or it is what the bible calls false teaching. 

   False teaching is not only false, it causes damage to souls.  Paul says that the Galatians were put under a curse by following Bible teachers that taught a merit relationship with God, vs. one based on grace.  Error followed by believers will not take away their regeneration, but it will make life on earth a living hell!

  On the second point re. the scope of GG's destructive influence:

      Of the many women that GG seduced how many of them have had their faith overthrown, or at the very least damaged?  Though I was not hurt directly by GG's philandering---- What about them??!!  Are we just to dismiss their injuries as "the way of the cross" and a lesson that they can learn from?!  Do you think that God takes a "boys will be boys" view at pastors who mistreat his children like this?!

   But the range of GG sin widens beyond these, though the immorality would be enough in my view to earn him scathing rebuke and rejection by those who name the name of Christ!

       (His repentance is the one opportunity to alter the above.)

  How about Judy Geftakys and her children?  Physically beaten and told that it was her fault?  Then the cover-up by GG and Assembly leadership of the whole issue allowing her and her kids to be continually abused??!!

   How about the very many sincere children of God who dared to cross GG at one time or another and were preached about in the meetings---- being openly shamed--- and brought before "workers meetings" to receive psychological beatings??!!    Terrible false rumors circulated by GG and leadership in an attempt to force compliance to GG's dictatorial control??!!

  Some of these left thinking they were total failures and cannot step back into any church again, read their bibles, or pray without servere psychological pain!!    

I'm with Jesus on this one re. such abusers: "better that a millstone were tied around their necks and they be tossed into the sea then that one of these little ones are hurt!"

  The above is not "the way of the cross" but examples of monstrous evil that claims it's authority as being of God.  God's "way" for Christian relationship is truth and love.  Though evil is around, and God can turn it into good, he is never the author of that evil, nor does he encourage us to be non-judgmental in our attitudes toward such----- God most certainly is not indifferent to perpetrators of unloving destructive actions against His children--- and neither should we.

  Can we learn from our abusive treatment?  Sure, but that's a very, very long way from suggesting that GG, inspite of his evil, was a source of blessing to us by means of his twisted and self serving interpretations of Scripture!

   If your opinion is correctly expressed by me above I believe your understanding is totally contra the Spirit of God and that the inner guide that you now have should surely be tested as to it's source.  I entreat you to humbly consider that you may be in serious error.

                                                God Bless,  Mark C. 

[editor]

Rom 7:9-25
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
(KJV)

 
Sondra

To me, it is clear that Paul is talking about himself when he was a jew, and contrasting that existence with the moral power and confidence in God's grace that he had in Christ.  Romans 7 is BC, Romans 8 is in Christ.

There will be suffering, and there will be joy.  I defy any one of us to compare our worst moment of "suffering" to those who found themselves in the colliseum, or as one of Nero's candles for naming Christ.  Our suffering is nothing in comparison!  Yes, we all have bad days, and in those we can often learn something, but certainly, if suffering was the necessary ingredient for holiness, almost zero Americans have been holy for many, many years.  Christians aren't tortured much in this country, and even in the most liberal congressional district, the churches are still open on Sunday.

I used to think that all believers were sort of at point zero.  They were saved from hell, but any progress they made from that point on would depend on them getting hooked up with mature christians and making choices to "go the way of the cross."  Of course, most people didn't make these choices properly, for various reasons....but I did!  Consequently I grew up in my faith more than most other christians....or so I thought. 

Now I see differently.  Every child of God is fully adopted and is a full member of God's household.  Each will have different experiences in life, and learn different things, even as each one will have gifts of service that may differ from another.  The point is that God knows, and He is more than able to bring about whatever things need to happen in order to accomplish His will in any one of us.

In the final analysis, none of us, not me or you can make the right choices, or do the right thing enough to become like Him.  However, we are told that when He appears, we shall be made like Him.....This implies that there will be a need for perfecting, regardless of how much one applies the cross, or any other tool. 

The danger in over applying Deeper Life stuff is that it becomes Galatianism.  We've covered all this before.


Sondra, I am curious how you arrived at the conclusion that demons are easy to deal with?  I would love to hear about any experience you had in this area.

Brent

[editor]

That's a good post and I agree with quite a lot of what you said here, but as I've experienced in the past, practically none of my detailed questions were answered.  I'm glad you and I don't saw trees down together.  I think I know who would be doing all the sawing.     

Well, anyway, I need to go. 

sj

p.s. Just for the record, I don't agree with you that we can't make the right choices.  I don't see that's what Romans 7 is saying.

Please ask me one of the questions, and i'll try to answer it.  I honestly didn't catch a list of detailed questions.

Ask one, two or three and I'll give it my level best.

Brent

on edit, I re-read your post and found 6 sentences that were questions, 4 of which were more of a thought process than an actual question.  The one that seemed like a question was this:

What is your specific experience in the cross as it relates to Romans 7 ?  If there is nothing left to work out and all is covered in the cross 2K years ago - what then is Romans 7 referring to?  If it's all said and done - what is left to work on in your experience?

I thought I directly addressed that with my post.  It was all about Romans 7 and how it relates to our discussion of the cross.  I'm sure I missed something, or failed to do something that I should have, but if you would please be so kind as to just re-ask the questions, I'll give it another go. 

Also, if we were sawing wood, I would be doing equal work, as working a saw is something I understand quite well.  It was another matter with your post, which I understood to be an explanation of your views, and not really a question about something.

Brent

[M2]

....
p.s.  Btw.  IMO, George taught the Word about as well, if not better, than most other Christian preachers and teachers - works oriented and all, but it wasn't his doctrine that was the big problem.  The fact that he didn't do what he preached was his problem.  Koresh, for example, lived in open sin and the people didn't recognize it.  When George was exposed, the test of a Word centered people is that the people left showing that God was leading them through His Word.  Yes, a few stayed.  By a wide majority, people left.  Hey, that's a good idea.     

At one MWS, about 7-8 years ago George announced that he was reading a book which had to do with satanic worship.  I can't remember the title and do not want to advertize it anyway.  He was quite fascinated with this book.  I believe he justified much of what he did with Titus 1:15 To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled..  He was the pure, and any of us who puzzled about it did so because we were not pure.  The signs were there, we did not recognize it either.  Those who claim they recognized it and yet did not speak out, are guilty of the sin of pride.

Marcia

[Oscar]

Sondra,

You said:

You guys have a problem, alright.  It's rudeness.  Apparently the acorn didn't fall too far from the tree, huh?  You are what you condemn.  If someone doesn't line up with your theology - they have a demon

Sondra

You have been back about two days, and you have already started your personal attacks. 

I am not going to discuss this with you, I am just going to delete any post containing a hint of this sort of thing.

Thomas Maddux

[vernecarty]

At one MWS, about 7-8 years ago George announced that he was reading a book which had to do with satanic worship.  I can't remember the title and do not want to advertize it anyway.  He was quite fascinated with this book.  I believe he justified much of what he did with Titus 1:15 To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled..  He was the pure, and any of us who puzzled about it did so because we were not pure.  The signs were there, we did not recognize it either.  Those who claim they recognized it and yet did not speak out, are guilty of the sin of pride.

Marcia

Marcia, is this a fact? Did he actually publicly disclose that he was in possession of and actually reading a book like this during a seminar??!!
Verne
p.s. most of us are loathe to publicly discuss conduct on our part that might be viewed as questionable.
If he was willing to talk about this in public, what was he doing in private?

[M2]

Marcia, is this a fact? Did he actually publicly disclose that he was in possession of and actually reading a book like this during a seminar??!!
Verne
p.s. most of us are loathe to publicly discuss conduct on our part that might be viewed as questionable.
If he was willing to talk about this in public, what was he doing in private?

It was a relatively new release novel; I do not remember the details.  The point I was wanting to make was re. Sondra's comment "George preached the Word" and us "Word centered people".  His preaching of the Word was so askew as to keep us "Word centered" around his interpretation and application of it.  Possibly he used Titus 1:15 to justify, to himself and his secretaries, what he was cooking in his kitchen.

People did not leave the assemblies because of their super-duper Word discernment abilities.  The assemblies crumbled because God intervened to pull us out of there.

Marcia

[vernecarty]

It was a relatively new release novel; I do not remember the details.  The point I was wanting to make was re. Sondra's comment "George preached the Word" and us "Word centered people".  His preaching of the Word was so askew as to keep us "Word centered" around his interpretation and application of it.  Possibly he used Titus 1:15 to justify, to himself and his secretaries, what he was cooking in his kitchen.

People did not leave the assemblies because of their super-duper Word discernment abilities.  The assemblies crumbled because God intervened to pull us out of there.

Marcia

As I have stated many times before, George could not have gotten away with what he did without his enablers.
I am sure those close to him who knew the kind of man he was justified being partakers of his sin with:

"But he preaches the Word".

So what? So does the devil.

As Christians, I believe we have an obligation to be salt and light.
It is unthinkable, either volitionally or by inaction, that we should allow evil around us to progress unchallenged.

Verne

[Joe Sperling]

I never said there would not be any suffering in the Christian life. Suffering is a part of
being a human being, and more as a Christian due to tempatation, etc.  But the crucifixion
is an accomplished fact, and in the past tense.

In the Catholic Church the Crucifixion is far more emphasized than the Resurrection. In fact, the
Mass is a perpetual crucifixion, and the mood is one of constant solemnity, with the Gregorian chants,
and all the religiosity. This doesn't just apply to the Catholic Church--there are many Protestant
churches where all of this solemness takes the forefront.

But, the point I was making is that in the Assembly, and in many other legalistic churches, the suffering they "endure" has been self-imposed, by rigorous schedules, rules, sacrifices, etc. that
they use to go "the way of the cross". And they think they are becoming more and more holy
by endruing these things. This is much like monks or priests who deny themselves marriage, or
any of the enjoyments of life, thinking they are holier for doing this. They stay in Romans 7 as
a result, always at the cross, but never realizing the power of the Resurrection and the move into
Romans 8.

The angels said to Mary "Why do you look for the dead among the living?" In the Catholic Church, and others,  they worship a dead Christ, perpetually on a crucifix. But the true Christian message is that Christ has risen from the dead. "I am crucified with Christ" is an acknowledgement of a completed act--I now live in the joy of the resurrection. Any suffering that comes my way will be allowed by God, not self-imposed in an attempt by me to make myself holy, or to "go the way of the cross". I am not being crucified daily--I am being renewed daily by a "finished work" and the resurrection to a new life--"If any man be in Christ he is a new creation, all things have become new".

--Joe

[vernecarty]

I don't find that the evil "around us" is as relevant as the evil "within us" myself.  But, of course, I am just a sinner.  By far, the majority of scripture leads the individual to deal with themselves.

sj

Scripture does not entirely agree.

 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Ephesians 6:12

The degree to which we struggle with personal sin, is in my humble opinion more a matter of maturity, and a failure to recognize our true standing in Chirst. Paul repeatedly tells that we should no longer walk as we did in times past.

If salvation means anything, it means freedom from sin's domination.

For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. Romans 6:14

1 John 1: 8 is no contradiction as I am not espousing sinless perfection. Who for example, can entirely control the thought life?
So, at least for the mature Christian, it seems to me that the focus of the struggle is not internal.
I think this is the experience of those truly growing in grace.
Verne

[editor]

I'm not sure who is deleting Ruth's (Sondra's) posts, except that I'm sure I'm not doing it.

However, please stop it.  I don't think they warrant deletion at all, and I think whoever is doing it is being hyper-sensitive about it.

Deleting unpleasant, or even slightly rude speech isn't warranted, and I really don't think that either of her deleted posts were profane, blasphemous or rude.  They were opinionated and abrasive, but no more so than many of my posts, or even Tom's for that matter.

Honestly, when Tom refers to some of my positions in specious, irresponsible ways, I sometimes feel like deleting him, but I would never do it, because I respect him and his views, even if I disagree with them.

Again, there were things in Sondra's posts that I wanted to comment on, and now they are gone.  Please knock it off.  Deleting is rude and controlling in this instance....and perhaps a bit petty.

We don't need it here, and a moderator's skin should be a good deal thicker.  

Brent

This is what I wanted to comment on:

I don't go to "a church."  I am in fellowship with many believers who actually know me well, but I don't go to "a church."  My point - I have found that once one has been "churched" - then they need to be taught by God.  God called me out and I knew it.  There is a time when sitting under other teachers will only further distract an anointed student of God. 

from Sondra yesterday.

Debate tactics and verbal combat 101 skills dictates that I latch on to this and score a decisive victory in about 4 paragraphs. 

However, decency and discretion dictate that I ask you to clarify what you mean here.  I have said many a thing that was taken out of context, or was poorly worded by me which resulted in someone misunderstanding my true position, so I offer you that courtesy.

Specifically, do you see yourself as an "annointed student of God," and does this imply that you are under the impression that most christians are not?  (Most christians go to church). 

Brent

[M2]

It was a relatively new release novel; I do not remember the details.  The point I was wanting to make was re. Sondra's comment "George preached the Word" and us "Word centered people".  His preaching of the Word was so askew as to keep us "Word centered" around his interpretation and application of it.  Possibly he used Titus 1:15 to justify, to himself and his secretaries, what he was cooking in his kitchen.

People did not leave the assemblies because of their super-duper Word discernment abilities.  The assemblies crumbled because God intervened to pull us out of there.

Marcia

Sondra, I do not know why the Jones and Koresh followers had a different ending than the Geftakys assemblies.  I do know, however, that the assemblies' ending was not because of our discernment.  In fact there are still some who are lamenting the loss of the "good ole days".

God bless,
Marcia