Errors in Assembly Doctrine and Practice

[Stillwater]

Hi, everyone,

  We've talked a lot about how we were blinded or subjected to control in the Assembly. I think there are certain teachings that have to be implanted before a Christian can be blinded and manipulated the way we were. I wrote this paper in an attempt to identify those teachings and why we fell for them. Brent suggested I post it here for discussion. Tell me what you think! Did I leave anything important out? Did I say something you don't agree with?

It's too long for a single post, so here's part 1:

Deadly Errors in Assembly Doctrine and Practice

It was then I began to study other religious, new age, philosophical groups that had been described by former members as abusive. The more I read the accounts of these people, the more I saw the same patterns emerging. It was then I came to a conclusion. All abusive groups are, at the core, the same. The outside coating, the words they use, the doctrine they use words from, may be completely different but the dynamics of the group and the controls used, the ultimate abuses and motivations are all the same.

--Rachel Steepleton (Geftakys)

Deception

  The club I initially joined was called "Studies in the Old and New Testaments." There was no mention of any church affiliation. It was not until much later that I found out I was actually joining a much larger organization. My "one on one discipleship group" on the campus was not only designed to help me "grow in my walk with the Lord," as advertised, but also to show me how all other churches fell short in light of the corporate anchors. People in the community were invited to "community Bible studies" or "Christian outreaches," words which seem to imply no church affiliation, when in fact, these were Assembly meetings. Each Assembly claimed to be independently led by Christ, while in truth, George Geftakys had the final word on all doctrine and practice. George Geftakys' lectures during his visits were billed as lectures by a "world missionary" rather than lectures by the leader of our church. New members were only introduced to doctrine "as they were ready." For example, a sister might not be judged ready to submit to direction from all the brothers, so that teaching was kept from her until she was committed. It's a well known fact--and often exploited by marketers--that people will fulfill stipulations they wouldn't normally agree to if they've already signed an agreement. In this example, the sister would agree to join the Assembly and only later find out that that mean submitting to all the brothers. These are all standard ways the Assembly practiced deception.

Anti-Intellectual Teaching

  Brother George taught us that the knowledge of good and evil was sinful, as it was gained at the fall. He taught that members must have a "single eye" for the will of God. Thinking things over and doing what we thought was right was sinful. It was relying on our knowledge of good and evil. Instead, we were to wait for revelation of the will of God. Revelation was given to us through Bible reading, counsel from those above us, open and closed doors, prayer and peace. We were to have these five things in place and unanimous before we made any decisions.
  First of all, it should be obvious that we cannot limit God to speak to us in the five approved ways, and we cannot insist that He always give us all five of these things. Perhaps, for example, the counsel we've received is wrong. That doesn't mean God hasn't spoken to us.
  Secondly, it is a distortion of the truth to teach God's people not to think. Jesus commend the centurion in Luke 7:1-10 for his thoughtful prayer. The man drew from his experience as a centurion giving commands and reasoned that Jesus could give commands in a similar fashion. Hebrews 5:14 says that "solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil." God wants us to learn to discern good and evil. People who do not think are easily deceived, and their senses are not being trained. For this reason, it is wrong to teach God's people not to think. We shouldn't "lean on our own understanding," but we shouldn't abandom our God-given faculty of reason either.

Distortion of the Concept of "Self"

  "If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me" (Mark 8:34). In the Assembly, we learned that our sinful self was dead, and we were part of the new man in Christ. We were to deny ourselves in order to "take up our crosses" and identify with Christ. God certainly does want us to deny ourselves sin, but that doesn't mean we need to deny our self altogether. An Assembly discipler could turn anything into sin on the basis of "you're doing it for yourself." This is a great tactic to stop people from doing what they want to do. Yet, we never see people in the Bible rebuked for being themselves; only for being in sin. Ephesians 3:10 speaks of the "manifold wisdom of God." Each person, made in God's image, is an expression of this manifold wisdom. God delights in the variety of our personalities, including our personal preferences, just as long as they aren't sinful--like "preferring" fornication. Deny yourself sin; otherwise, go out and become the whole "self" God made you to be.

False Accountability

  Over and over, I heard it preached that I needed to be accountable to church leadership in order to be in the will of God. Since most other churches don't practice Assembly-style accountability, this teaching pretty much meant you had to be in an Assembly gathering. I am utterly baffled as to where they found this accountability in the Bible. We hear about church leaders having certain responsibilities, but the Bible doesn't say that believers must be "accountable" to leaders in order to be spiritually healthy. The Ethiopian eunuch was baptized by Philip, only to return to Ethiopia alone (see Acts 8:25-40). The Spirit of God removed Philip as soon as the eunuch was baptized. Are we to believe that the Ethiopian eunuch committed spiritualy suicide by returning home without a human spiritual advisor? God was the one who took his human advisor away!
  We don't see the apostles checking every decision, from when to visit their extended families, to which house they'll buy, with the church leadership. We don't see young couples asking the church leaders' permission to get married. We don't see Paul admonishing the believers to call if they're going to miss a meeting. Acts 2:41 says that "there were added that day about three thousand souls." It is doubtful that the early believers had enough manpower to keep tabs on every aspect of these new members' lives, and besides, church members are accountable for their sin, not for what time they get up or how often they want to visit their grandparents.

"The Joy of the Lord" and "The Peace of God"

  Now we come to the aspect of emotional control. "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace. . . ." (Galatians 5:22). "Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice!" (Philippians 4:4). It was argued to me that if we have Jesus in control of our lives, we will have the fruit of the Spirit, namely, constant joy and peace. Not having joy and peace was a sign that Jesus was not in control and thus was an indication of sin in a person's life. Further, it was said that God commanded through Paul that we "rejoice in the Lord always," once again meaning that believers must always have joy.
  Obviously, Jesus was not always happy and peaceful. He cried; He got angry; He endured anguish at Gethsemane. Therefore, joy was redefined in the Assembly as something distinct from happiness; it was not an emotion but a spiritual state accessed by faith. "Peace" was similarly redefined as "passing understanding." However, "joy" and "peace" were applied in people's lives as if they were emotions. I was admonished to repent any time I experienced emotions such as anger, depression, sadness, fear or guilt. These emotions transgressed the commandment to always be joyful.
  Why was Jesus allowed to be sad, but I wasn't? Jesus was under God's leadership; I was under George Geftakys'. Brother George taught us to ignore our negative emotions so that we wouldn't feel bad and start questioning our involvement with his ministry. It is clear from Jesus' example that God didn't mean for us to repent of our emotions. He gave us joy and sadness. "There is an appointed time for everything. . . A time to weep, and a time to laugh" (Ecclesiastes 3:1,4). All emotions are God-created and only become sinful when we use them in sinful ways. Committing murder because you're angry is sinful; boycotting segregated buses because you're angry about racism is not.

[Stillwater]

Here's Part 2:

Bible Roulette

  Believers were encouraged to "get promises" from their times of devotion and while listening to sermons. That meant that whatever passage you happened to be reading or hearing about, God was supposed to give you a specific message from it. For example, you might read that god will exalt the humble, which you interpret to mean that you should humble yourself and take your church leader's advice to move to another city. You "stand" on the promise God has given you and quit your job, uproot your family, and move across the country. If anyone opposes your plan, you tell them that you must stand on the promise of God. If difficulties arise, you attribute them to spiritual warfare and continue to "stand." Once you're locked into a "promise," you cannot change your mind without disobeying God. It you are looking for this sort of promise, you become vulnerable to mistaking any thought that passes through you mind during your Bible reading or church sermon as the imperative voice of God.
  God never promises to directly tell us what to do, like he did for some people in the Bible. This process of "getting promises" is actually only a variation on Bible roulette, where one asks God for guidance and then randomly opens up the Bible. It is magical thinking to say you will be reading the exact right passage ona given day for God to give you a specific message. Christians should base their lives on the whole Bible, on biblical principles, not on out-of-context Bible verses misapplied as if they were direct instructions for their lives. The Bible does not say, "Marry Ted So-and-so," or, "Move to Denver," and, unless we add to it, it never will.

"The Unity of the Spirit and the Bond of Peace"

  It was often preached in the Assembly that we must "preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4:3). This meant that the church leadership had to always be unanimous about all church decisions, that we had to "stand together" when a believer had determined something, such as moving to Denver, to be the will of God, that we were not to publicly criticize and cause faction in the ministry, and that we were to stay unified Assembly members even if there were practices we disagreed with.
  Is this what Paul meant when he said to preserve the unity of the Spirit? If so, we should see him living the principles outlined above.
  Did Paul insist that church leadership always be unanimous?
  He wasn't very unanimous with Peter, a fellow leader, in Antioch, "But when Cephas [Peter] came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face" (Galatians 2:11). If church leaders have to be unanimous on every decision, that makes it very hard to be a dissenter. It encourages just going along with what everyone else thinks. What if the dissenter is the only one who's right? That person faces not only disagreement and guilt over holding up the decision making process, but the insinuation that he or she is not able to hear God's voice, since everyone else has heard the same thing from God. From the sounds of the council described in Acts 15, the view that Gentile Christians should adopt some Jewish customs was pretty well established in Jerusalem. That didn't stop Paul from disagreeing and arguing his point.
  Did Paul insist on "standing together" on every decision?
  "And Barnabas was desirous of taking John. . . But Paul kept insisting that they should not. . . And there arose such a sharp disagreement that they separated from one another" (Acts 15:37-39). The Bible does not say the Paul was right, and Barnabas was wrong. It merely records that they disagreed and separated. I would argue that they were still in the unity of the Spirit because they were both still preaching the gospel, which is revealed to the heart by the Holy Spirit. Being unified in the Holy Spirit does not imply that we agree on all decisions; it means that we agree with the revelation of the gospel by the Holy Spirit.
  Did Paul hesitate to publicly oppose the leadership?
  Again, "But when Cephas [Peter] came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face" (Galatians 2:11).
  Did Paul insist that we remain "in unity" with people who have opinions or practices we can't condone?
  "For there must also be factions among you, in order that those who are approved may have become evident among you" (1 Corinthians 11:19).
  From these examples, it should be clear that Paul was not preaching Assembly-style unity. In the Assembly, "the unity of the Spirit" was just another tactic used to squelch disagreement, force conformity and prevent people from leaving to healthier churches.

Fear and "The Kingdom"

  Geftakys believers couldn't technically lose their salvation. We could only lose the kingdom, lose our inheritance, end up in outer darkness, be saved "through fire," experience los, experience temporal suffering, receive our inheritance with the unbelievers, or be blotted from the book of life. I don't plan to hash out all the details of the afterlife here, but I will say this: These teachings were used to scare us into doing "the will of God," that is, the will of the Geftakys ministry. We were taught that if our works, our lives and even our thoughts didn't measure up, if we didn't "take advantage of God's enabling," we'd lose out in eternity. Often we were in quite a quandary to find the "Spirit's enabling" to fulfill commands He'd never given (Thou shalt not feel sad?!?). If we failed, we could count on some sort of horrible punishment or deprivation in the afterlife. Some gracious God! What happened to the God who blots out our sins? Who doesn't remember our transgressions? Who separates our sin from us as far as the east is from the west? To quote the apostle Paul, "Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies; who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?" (Romans 8:33-35). In the words of our Savior, "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and DOES NOT COME INTO JUDGEMENT, but has passed out of death into life" (John 5:24).

Final Summary

  I believe this sums up the major doctrines used to enslave people in the Geftakys ministry. There were, of course, innumerable other falsehoods, some of them major; these are just the really, really, really big ones. I called them deadly because these are the doctrines that killed our hearts and replaced them with commandments. These doctrines impaired our ability to think, feel, be ourselves, reach our own conclusions, change our minds, and make our own decisions. These are the doctrines that destroyed God's creation, individuals, and replaced it with man-made replicas. Deception was the mode of delivery; "biblical teaching" was the mode of control. I hope all God's people will discard these false teachings and step into the full liberty of Christ. "It was for freedom that Christ set us free" (Galatians 5:1).

[editor]

Very nice Heather!

Well done

Brent

[Mark C.]

Right On Heather!
   Very clear presentation and also very correct!  
         Brent, Consider putting her 2 post's as an article on your home page.
                                 God Bless,  Mark

[Stillwater]

Thank you. God has brought me through a lot; it's been my hope that I could use my experience to help others. I'm grateful that people have found my paper useful.

Heather

[Jim Haan]

right on heather!
im glad i decided to read the whole thing through!  

[Tanya]

Heather wrote:  "Geftakys believers couldn't technically lose their salvation. We could only lose the kingdom, lose our inheritance, end up in outer darkness, be saved "through fire," experience loss, experience temporal suffering, receive our inheritance with the unbelievers, or be blotted from the book of life...."

    Heather--Wow!  your passage clearly describes one of George's false teachings: Saints--your salvation was free but serving the Lord will cost you everything you have.  Remain faithful, stay in the "ark," (the assembly) and be on board for the work... then maybe your inheritance will be secure.  
    For YEARS my husband would try to discuss this heretical theory privately with the LB; he was often dismissed as argumentative & proud.  In fact, this was a strong source of contention in our marriage while we were in the assembly.  I honestly thought the LB were God's men, the Lord's shepherds, my real authority. My patient husband would try to show me what the Bible really says but I stood firm. Sorry honey, you're my husband but the LB must be right. Besides, there are 5 of them--if one of them was "off", I'm sure the others will correct him with the Scriptures.                
     Unfortunately, I was wrong.  In fact, after some notorious false preaching by DG, my husband & I met w/Tim G. privately to discuss the matter.  After hearing our concerns, his response was, "Sorry sister. In thisministry, we don't publicly correct 'the brethren." He further explained he meant the LB, not just any brother. It was OK to publicly correct--almost to the point of humiliation--a brother but NOT one in leadership.   You know--the whole preserve the unity argument.
     Even if sheep were subjected to false preaching by a "shepherd," we were on our own to figure it out for ourselves...   Thank God many of these men have repented & the Lord is humbling them & showing them these things.  
      I'd like to see Heather's postings on the GA website. They are insightful & well-written.  

[editor]

Did Tim really say, "Sister, we don't publicly correct the brethren?"

Well, sister, I would say that they have been publicly corrected a little the last few months, eh?  

I agree with you, RE Heather's posts.  Today is the first time I have read them, and they are quite good.

I'll see what I can do.

Brent

[4Him]

Heather wrote:  
...  
      I'd like to see Heather's postings on the GA website. They are insightful & well-written.

Right On Heather!
   Very clear presentation and also very correct!  
         Brent, Consider putting her 2 post's as an article on your home page.
                                 God Bless,  Mark

Brent,
Here's a third vote for putting them on the website.
I've dolled them up in MS Word (no content change except typos) so I could read and share them better.  I'll email a copy of that to you.
PS - Mark also had an excellent post in "He who is without sin cast the first stone at George Geftakys" that I thought would be worthy of putting on GA.com.

[Tanya]

BRENT:
    Yep--those were TG's exact words.  "Sister, in this ministry, we DON'T publicly correct the brethren..."   It happened after a couple's mtg @ the now-defunct Olivet House. T & G were in town & we asked to meet w/them privately. At that point, we had no intention whatsoever of leaving the assembly. We simply wanted to let him know of some of our concerns.   (He was extremely condescending towards us but the Lord really used that meeting to begin to open my eyes.)  TG admitted that there had been some preaching by DG  in SLO that was "off"  but you know--he has health problems, he doesn't think straight sometimes, blah blah....
     Also interesting was that it was during that same mtg that TG told us that "contrary to some Christians' beliefs"  God did not become a man.   What? Now we were totally lost. What's the incarnation mean? I thought Jesus was 100% God & 100% man. But TG proceeded to tell us that God always existed & couldn't change to become anything or anyone. Therefore, it was his & GG's view that God did NOT "become" a man.
    Thank God we were out of there within a year.

 

[4Him]

BRENT:
    ...
Also interesting was that it was during that same mtg that TG told us that "contrary to some Christians' beliefs"  God did not become a man.   What? Now we were totally lost. What's the incarnation mean? I thought Jesus was 100% God & 100% man. But TG proceeded to tell us that God always existed & couldn't change to become anything or anyone. Therefore, it was his & GG's view that God did NOT "become" a man.
    Thank God we were out of there within a year.

I think what was meant was, Jesus did not become a man, not that he wasn't/isn't a man.  I say this because I think George was teaching, in addition to Jesus being the eternal Son of God, that Jesus was also eternally, Son of man.  I'm sure I heard this, which seemed weird and off, but I haven't searched the Scripture about it yet.

[Arthur]

I don't remember Tim teaching this.  I do remember at a Campus Conference him teaching about the "hypostatic union".  I thought he was in line with fundamental teaching at the time.  Maybe he changed his views  I dunno, everything in the group seems have gone from weird to bizarre these past few years.

[Philip]

Believe it or not, I registered just so that I could respond to the excellent article posted by Heather.  I was not in the Assembly, but had friends in it.

Although I'm not sure I agree with everything that was written, I think most of it is excellent.  It is so important that we all think through these things, because issues like these are not only dealt with in cults, and not only in groups like the Assembly, but everywhere, to varying degrees.  I think we are all "conned" at one time or another.  Even as I read your article I found myself being hoodwinked by an Assembly line until you pointed out the problems in their interpretation.

You're right, these are deadly errors!  Why are we so easily fooled?  I think that each one of you as servants of the Lord will have a ministry to others in both healthy and unhealthy churches who are not thinking through Scripture for themselves.  And yet, as that ministry proceeds, there is so much that we all need to learn ourselves.  This is not just an Assembly problem.  It's true - this is just the beginning . . .

[4Him]

I think what was meant was, Jesus did not become a man, not that he wasn't/isn't a man.  I say this because I think George was teaching, in addition to Jesus being the eternal Son of God, that Jesus was also eternally, Son of man.  I'm sure I heard this, which seemed weird and off, but I haven't searched the Scripture about it yet.

(Verne's response...)
But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law. Galatians 4:4
 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.  Isaiah 7:14
And the Word became flesh... John 1:14
God who...in time past was speaking....has in these last days spoken to us by his Son...Hebrews 1:1,2
etc. etc. etc.
Event clearly time delimited!
How on earth does George Geftakys get away with propagating such patent nonsense???
Verne

Thanks for the lesson Verne.  Like I said, it was "weird and off".  Clearly God interjected Himself into our midst, in time as a man, which He never was before!  Glory, hallelujah, we have the perfect Man as a triumphant Savior!  "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" (1 Tim 2:5)

BTW - George Geftakys, ultimately, does not get away with his nonsense.  

[Stillwater]

Thanks to everyone who's given my posts such compliments, and thanks to God who's used them to help people think these things through.

Philip,

  I wanted to say that you are absolutely right about these issues being all over the church. You're also right about the ministry we former members can have.
  I was blessed with a ministry opportunity just last night. God has not led me to a new church yet, but he did lead me to a fellow Christian in my college Physics class. Last night, after hearing some things from her that concerned me, I had the privilege to share some of my story with her. I don't know yet how God will use my testimony in her life, but I was grateful that I was able to recognize distortions in her view of God and tell her why I don't believe those things anymore.
  This wasn't "witnessing"; this was a true heart-to-heart between friends. I'm glad I can share my opinion honestly now, without the  need to trick people into believing that my opinion (or the Assembly's) is the will of God. God is way bigger than my opinion.  
  Knowing that is one way I've grown through my Assembly experience. God has truly changed me through all this. I have grown more humble through admitting that I was wrong; I have grown more compassionate through the experience of suffering; I have grown more tolerant through the knowledge that my understanding is fallible; most importantly, I have grown in love by knowing God's unending love. It was the knowledge that God loved me that gave me the strength to speak up and eventually get out.
  Philip, thank you for pointing out that God has a ministry for us. He gives us beauty for ashes.

"But if we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation" 2 Corinthians 1:6a