Why Luke Robinson May Become a Future Assembly Leader

[al Hartman]

     i am the fearless leader of a small band who believe that to walk by faith, not by sight, means to post on the BB without thinking!!!

     All kidding aside, the only way you'll see me leading an assembly is down the sawdust trail to repent...

al

[Mark C.]

Hi All!
  Thanks Kimberely for your kind remarks .
  Matt, I now live in Northern San Diego County, which is why I refer to you as "neighbor".  I hope our private communication was helpful.
  Luke, thanks for your PM and I hope that I was able to explain my position.
  I think it would be helpful to try a public posting re. some of the issues re. how to have profitable discussion on the BB.
   I am a moderator, of sorts, who is often away from the BB and as such limited.  I don't view my contribution as being "neutral", as is commonly thought of one called a moderator.  I have a bias that I will freely admit upfront and that is the defense of the Grace of God in truth.  This defense is not just from a doctrinal point of view, but as it concerns the lives of specific individuals.
  Jesus and the Apostles identified two classes of individuals as, "offenders" and the other the "offended".  The "Offenders" were often directly described as teachers/leaders of false teaching.  
  As ex-assembly folks we were subjected to what I believe was a system of spiritual offense.  Some have suggested that the Assembly was not all that bad and that we shouldn't throw out "the baby with the bathwater."  While individuals all have different levels of culpability for their involvement in the group, and it would not be fair to lump all into the same condemnation, the erroneous system must be clearly identified and rejected.
   All this to say that, when I see those who post even a partial defense of teaching and practice of the evil Assembly system I will post a rebuttal.
  Re. defending the offended:  I will always side with those victims of abuse, even though I may wince at their angry reactions to what they feel is a defense of a system that damaged them.  These individuals have been deeply hurt and don't need to be told by me that they must moderate their anger.
  Yes, we are taught as Christians to forgive one another, but Christian forgiveness can only come when the Offender honestly and clearly repents.  Abusers twist the meaning of forgiveness to be able to continue their mastery of the abused by suggesting all the burden for change in their relationship lies with the abused adopting a forgiving spirit (as seen in the Dave and Judy situation).
  No, I'm not saying that anyone here is like GG. or that Luke is defending the old Assembly system 100%.  To say Luke is trying to restore the old evil empire of GG is ridiculous and as such Eulaha's thread title is out of place.  Of course, I don't think anyone really (including Eulaha) believes this.
   It is good, however, to examine what teaching and practices we may have carried out of the wreckage of the old evil system.  Our bias should lean toward doubt concerning our former teaching and entreatability toward those who have been trying to reach the Assembly with their concerns.  These concerns re. teaching and practice pre-date the current GG revelations of immorality and corruption.
   If we view the attempt to entreat and correct false Assembly assumptions as personal attacks we will effectively plug our ears to the knocking of the Lord at the door of our consciousness.  
   Those who recently have left, and have discovered that they were taken advantage of (some for 30 years!), must be excused for having some pent up anger.  As time goes by this anger can be replaced with a more moderate appeal that bears the signs of God's healing grace.  This does not negate the facts that are stated, nor the true need of the hour which is clarity of our past teaching and practices, and repentance from same.
   It is truly amazing how different the responses can be from those who were in the Assembly.  The Bible exhorts us to care for those of us in The Body who are most needy and to have a bias toward humbly lifting these.  Cocksure insensitivity and indifference is classic "Laodicean" attitudes, and as such should be eschewed.
                                      God Bless,  Mark  

[MGov]

Hi Al, Mark C

You have an excellent moderating influence on this BB.  And I say Amen to Mark's post.

MG

[Mark C.]

Hi All!
  I have been urged via e-mail to explain my previous post on this thread more fully.  I sent an explanation to the challenger of my post via e-mail.
  Please, all should feel free to publicaly respond to errors/ bad thinking/ etc., that I may post.  Though I'm a "Global Moderator " the idea is that we have a forum here to discuss things, not a place for me to pontificate unchallenged.  I will try not to take comments personally and will attempt a civil response.
  The issue addressed was anger from offended exassemblites on the BB and my tolerance of same.  The concern was that I was contra scripture and supporting sin in the lives of those seeking recovery.  I was told to suggest love and forgiveness from the abused toward those who seem to defend some aspect of Assembly teaching/practice.  Jesus taught, "to love our enemies" and as such we are to even love those who hate us, etc. and not wait for honest repentance to forgive.
  In the same Mt. 5 passage we find other verses that exhort us to "be perfect that we might become the sons of God".  If we take this verse and interpret it privately from the context of scripture we might conclude that performance of sinless perfection is the path to salvation.      
   We must ask what the context of the "love our enemies" verse is and what was Jesus intention in the message of the Sermon on the Mount.  I believe the Sermon had the same purpose as the law of Moses, and that was to reveal our own sinfulness and need for salvation apart from law.
  How about the Epistles and their exhorations to love and forgiveness and the need to eschew bitterness?  It is sometimes hard to apply principles without an example to show us what these things look like in real life.  Jesus and Paul provide us with an understanding of what they meant re. love and forgiveness in the context of abusers and false teachers.
  Jesus did not feel that loving one's enemies meant not excoriating the Pharisees.  Love is rooted in justice, and the two can not be separated.  For ultimately the truth can not only set the abused free, but the abuser as well.  Love is not pacifism and egalitarism, but active and morally discerning in nature. Without the ability to judge moral differences and evaluate what is more sinful and what is less sinful in daily life we make a mockery of justice and as such are not loving in our approach to life. (I understand re. salvation all sin is equally condemning, but I'm talking relationships here, not salvation)
   One key to understanding the Bible is to have a common sense approach to it's application.  When Jesus teaches it's better to cut off body parts, then miss the Kingdom, we must ask if Jesus really meant for us to cut off our hands.  When Paul spoke the truth in Galatains in his correction of Peter was he hypocritical, for being so angry, or was he passionate in his love of the truth?  Common sense tells us here that Christ's love in Paul was not a "spiritualized" kind of ignoring of the situation, but active specific correction.
  Okay, but there are those who "hate" GG and Company and why encourage such bad motives?  I do not wish to encourage hatred of these pathetic souls, but my attempt to further silence these lambs is not helpful either.  I have found that anger is a phase and if individuals are allowed to vent they soon get over their anger.  I don't have chapter and vs. for the above, and would relegate my views to the area of observation of human behavior.
  The understanding of forgiveness and abuse can be seen in the following example.  You look out the window and see a man attacking a child.  You rush out and defend the child and then, after subduing the attacker, you demand the child shake hands and forgive the attacker.  Good practical application to loving our enemies, or stupid?  The application of discernment in the above situation demands that the attacker be brought to justice first.  Certainly it is not the time to enjoin the abused with lessons of forgiveness!  Nor would I correct the victim about controlling their anger against the would-be rapist.
   Is anger sin?  Sometimes.  Is wallowing in bitterness good for one's soul? of course not, but how to get out of it?  We must first be clear that passion re. truth and justice are not bitterness.  But, sometimes the reaction to the abused seeking a honest repentance from the abuser can be the defensive responses from those who don't want to deal with their abusive character.
  I understand posters' who make a partial defense of Assembly teaching and practices are not "abusers" like GG, but neither were the "bewitched and foolish" Galatains false teachers.  These Galatians were just recipients of the dangerous teaching and in danger from same.  So are posters who have not clearly seen the errors in their previous instruction and practices.
  Assembly abusive teaching and practices are the priority of the moment (as in the example of the attacker above) and defense of the abused.  Without moral clarity and establishment of what is most important in the Assembly situation we run the risk of making the abused the focus of correction (shaking hands with the attacker) instead of the attacker confessing and repenting of his crime.
                                     God Bless,  Mark  

[MGov]

I understood that MarkC was saying that this BB provides an open forum for communication, such that we can minister to one another and find healing.  Some of this communication happens via private messages and emails, and some openly on this BB.
I quote MarkC here (from a post on another thread):
It does no good to tell people not to be angry; we must help those dealing with it to find healing and recovery.  This occurs when we try to understand the reason for the anger, let them know Jesus is angry too, that they are just in their anger, but that they can move beyond anger and find consolation in Christ. - end quote

When one is angry, just telling them to not to be angry will not bring true healing. Rather it is the 'listening and understanding ear' and the correct application of God's word that will enable the brother/sister to change.
This is not only about GG and his family, but rather that God is cleaning His house, and preparing all of us for His Son's return.

Correct me if I am wrong.
MG

[Kimberley Tobin]

God the Father showed his "love" by crucifying his son.  I don't think we as mere human beings truly understand the word of "love" as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit understand it.  Before I have someone come after me, I am not saying that we should be "crucifying" our brothers and sisters who have perpetrated abuse either.  What I am saying is that we should be engaged in the proceess, much as Mark C. has illustrated.  It is a "process".  For each brother and sister involved that process is different.  

What concerns me are the people who do not want to allow dialogue to ensue.  These people would have us to believe that any discussion about the past abuses is constituted as "negativity" and should not be tolerated.  Jesus was very vocal about the abuses of the Pharisees, he even called them "hypocrites, whited sepulchres", not very politically correct.  For those who would point the finger and say, "You aren't God either", to defend why we should not be as Jesus pointing at the hypocrisy and abuse at the hands of men and women we considered dear friends, I say, "Then let's look at the life of the apostle Paul."  He was quite adament in his address of those who wanted to bring new believers again into a life of bondage to the law.  He "withstood" these ones.   He wrote letters, warning the church.  He was vocal.  He didn't just "shoo it under the rug."  He didn't just say, "let's 'love' our brethren and show them the same forgiveness that Christ has shown us."  NO!  He took action.  There is a balance.  God is the one who will ultimately judge these ones and hold them accountable.  But I believe, as God has involved us in this place, it is our responsibility to prayerfully involve ourselves.  It does not mean the same thing for all believers.  For one, it is to be in prayer.  For others, it is warning the church.  For others, it is ministering to the wounded.  For others, it is standing up to the abusers and attempting to bring these ones to repentance (yes, I know it is God who brings these ones to repentance, but God often uses individuals as His tools.)

I am here for the process, however God deems fit to use me.

[Mark C.]

Hi MG, Kimberley, and everyone !
  The concerned e-mailer that caused me to write the previous post deserves some public explanation.  My last post was not a specific answer to his entreaty (and I will answer the individual in an e-mail and try to explain my view) but, rather, a general response to those who use verses re. love and forgiveness toward those that have been offended.
  My previous, rather rambling, attempt was to show that pacifism and egalitarianism are not love.  My e-mailer understands this, and was rather concerned that I was missing the last portion of what MGov quoted from another post of mine, which is to lead angry souls to healing in Christ. (Yes MG, I think you are right )
   Kimberley mentioned that recovery is a process and that this process involves different individuals who have different contributions to make.  She also makes the very good point that we fall far short of expressing the Love of God toward one another.  This is the beauty of being members one of another and to talk about these things on the BB;  We all have something to share here.
  In that spirit I would like to get back to the topic of healing for angry souls in Christ.  My example of the abusive man and the child victim was obviously an extreme one.  I did that to make the point that scripture must be understood in the context of scripture and we must test our view of theology with how it would look in real life.  The one who takes Jesus words to "love our enemies" as an exhoration to pacifism must ask what they would do in my example.
   To bring it to an assembly issue (as I did) and suggest that the greater need is to correct abuse, not correction of the attitude of the abused, was a suggestion that Jesus was not equal in the way he practiced his loving ministry.  Jesus, Paul, etc. had wisdom and discernment; this means they were able to make distinctions between, not only what was good and evil, but what was better and what was more evil.
  In the debate between the Pharisees and Saducees Jesus took the side of the Pharisees in re. of how to view scripture and the Ressurection.  They were both wrong about crucial things, but the Saducees were more wrong.
  If the attitude of those offended by evil men, who operated an abusive system is made the focal point of exhortation, I believe a lack of wisdom and discernment is being excercised.  Would I like to help those bitter and angry to get beyond that to healing in Christ?  Yes, but as I stated, part of the process of healing is to understand that Christ views what was done to the wounded as very offensive to Him; He is angry too!
  I know, the posters here are not GG, and all have stated that they have some problems with GG, and are not defending him.  I respect that, and understand that we all fall under the category of wounded pilgrims here on this BB and no one here is in the business of leading false cults.  
  The problem I see, and why I raised the issue in the first place, is the retention of some of the teaching and practices that made up the abusive system by some contributors.  Paul made a big deal to the Galatians that there were 2 separate systems in relation to walking with God: The principle of Grace and the Principle of Law.  He also stated that these two can't have anything to do with each other--"throw out the bondwoman and her son."
   With Assembly teaching it is very difficult to understand how the two systems were merged in GG's theology.  GG seemed to say things that were okay, and in the next sentence contradict the previous point.
   I am going to try in later posts to address how I believe grace works in the Christian life and how different it is to what we were taught in the Assembly.  I will address the "anger" issue in these posts as I believe it might be helpful to our present discussion.  I have much to learn re. the Christian life and I hope to be helped with the contributions of other members on this topic.
  Thank you for suffering the long post.  God Bless,  Mark    

[Amy Denny]

What concerns me are the people who do not want to allow dialogue to ensue.  These people would have us to believe that any discussion about the past abuses is constituted as "negativity" and should not be tolerated.  

Kimberly makes good scriptural references here. Having been out a few years I have come to understand a bit about cults and brainwashing... this is a classic example of keeping everyone quiet so the abuse can continue without interruption. I understand that recently it hasn't worked so well... but they continue to say the same thing  - show longsuffering, be humble, keept quiet... they will continue to say it and many will fall back in line.

[MGov]

Question:
Why should Luke Robinson Become a Future Assembly Leader ??

Answer:
Good question.

[al Hartman]

MGov,

     If you're going to carry on both sides of your own dialogue, you obviously don't need the rest of us, so go start your own thread!


Everyone else,

     i'm not suppressing MGov's expression-- i'm just giving it a home of its own!!

                   IT'S A JOKE!!!   A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
                              ( loosen up!!!! )

al

[Luke Robinson]

Dear Everyone,

Thank you all for your sympathy.  But really folks...

Anyways, I changed my mind about the whole "Assembly Leader" thing.  

I am now thinking of owning a bait shop!  You can all come and get free worms!!  They're on me!!

Luke

[MGov]

A 'bait' shop.  I like it - a new name for our gathering, with Luke as leader, of course.

[al Hartman]

     "The Little Bait Shop"-- it's perfect.  But only for small towns and out in the country.

     When we branch out into the metropolitan areas, it will have to be "The Sushi Bar."

[Mark C.]

Hi All!
    I promised that I would address further the topic of "anger" and "negativity" toward the Assembly on the BB.
    I stated that the answer to the above need is to understand the Christian life as a grace based relationship.  
    It is also important to realize that when we become Christians we do no take on a super-human quality that floods our emotions with overcoming power, or infuses our wills with adamant strength to suppress negative feelings.
  Any description of how grace works in the life of the redeemed will only involve general principles because grace is first and foremost God's miraculous power tailored to each individuals personal need; grace is amazing!
   It works in those that have very small capacity and is often hindered by those who have "greater knowledge" or gifts of the Spirit (I Cor. details this).
  Grace working in us is not a mechanical process, but a process of relationship with God.  There is not a single formula for "living the victorious life."  
   Grace is to the praise of the glory of His grace, not to the praise of the glory of our strong faith.  Grace works in our doubts, fears, troubled hearts, failures, and trials and not by trying to deny we have any of the above; honesty before God, and with myself, is where God's work of grace begins.
   There are religious counterfeits to the work of grace and they take many different forms.  All of these false religious systems seek to cover up, or control the evil heart, and are discovered instantly due to their lack of honesty (they are hypocritical).
 These systems defend the ego of the partipant in the evil system and grace challenges all that they have done to "earn" their position in the system.  It is very difficult for the participant in the evil system to admit they were wrong and to be willing to be instructed in the simple life of a gift based relationship with God.
   I've got to go.  I will continue this thought later.
                                       God Bless,  Mark
   

[Eulaha L. Long]

Thank you to all who are trying to defend me.  Some people need to lighten up!  Can't you take a JOKE?