Existing Assemblies

[Matt]

Matt, I shall do my best to answer your questions again.

Again?!?! Brent, you haven't answered it once! You gave a passage about an evil leader (Diotrophes) and used this as evidence that we should rebuke the LB's - but you didn't tell us why the LB's are evil. Surely some were - but the vast majority? No, sir - that's ridiculous.

First of all, recall the post I did a while back, where I highlighted a bunch of stuff in yellow.  I was attempting to communicate, with that post, that not all the LB's were evil.  In a recent post, I asked the rhetorical question:  "Were all the leaders false brethren?"  I answered that one "No, sir, that's ridiculous."

That's true. You said the LB's who were forced out of the assembly or who left the assembly on their own were NOT evil. I pointed out your inconsistency because you said that the LB's were all guilty for having been appointed by GG and for having promoted him, having had weekly contact with him, etc. However, the LB's who were forced out or left earlier (before GG's excommunication) still had been appointed by GG, still promoted him at some point or another, and still had weekly contact. We can't say that they are not guilty just because you admire them for leaving. I, however, say they are not guilty for another reason. These men were Christian men who served the saints. If there was false doctrine (and there was because every church has some false doctrine), then they are no more guilty of it than any other church leader of any other denomination.

So, you are asking me speak of the LB's as a whole, in which case we must allow for varying degrees of guilt, as outlined in my "yellow" post.

Sorry, leaving the assembly earlier than the other LB's doesn't make them any more or less guilty.

If the Assembly was a church, then it is quite clear that we are to hold fast to sound doctrine, and rebuke those who do not.  Elders are to be rebuked in the presence of 2 or 3 witnesses.  With regard to adultery, there were more than 2 or 3 against George.  With regard to false doctrine, taught in EVERY ASSEMBLY, there are hundreds of witnesses, dozens of them have written publicly about it.

Have you read the material on GA.com yet?  The last time we had this discussion, you had not, but you will find your 2 or 3 witnesses there.  Matt, you must remember that there are several LB's who post regularly on this BB.  They readlily admit to false teaching, among other things.

Because a few leading brothers who have posted on this bb have felt the need to repent for their assembly involvement, doesn't mean that every LB is guilty. Every single church leader in the world needs to repent for there being false doctrine in their ministry - only Jesus Christ had perfect doctrine. I have read enough material on GA.com and we have already discussed how one-sided it is. You can find negative personal stories from any church and only post those things and make it look like the first church of Satan. I'm also aware of the bias of the people who are writing on that site, and so I have a duty to be wary of that site. Because you have put that site together, Brent, doesn't make it infallibe.

In the case where we conclude that the Assembly was a cult, masquerading as a christian church, we are to expose it, resist it, and warn people about it.  The verses that come to mind are many.  The entire epistle to the Galatians fits this bill, in one sense.  The many conflicts with the Gnostics also does.  The Bible uses the term false apostle for a reason.

In the book of Revelation, God tells his people to come out of Babylon the Great.  Babylon is hardly a legitimate church, but yet God called HIS OWN people out of her.  The fact that Christians were in the Assembly does not mean the Assembly system was legitimate.  Certainly the leader and founder of the ASsembly was in no way legitimate.

Babylon - reminds me of that David Gray song. Anyway, the Assembly was most definitely a church. It was a body of believers (and I'm sure the vast majority of LBs are Christians) who worshipped God together, reached out to unbelievers together, got into the Word together, and fellowshipped together. If there was false doctrine - that's irrelevant. If having false doctrine means that it wasn't a church - then there are no churches.

It is up to each of us to rightly divide God's word, which is what we have been doing for the last few days, much to our delight.  I invite you to join us, and I answer your questions again, as a gesture of goodwill.

Brent

You didn't answer them again, though. I "invite you" to answer them. Brent, I also invite you to take a stand. Was it a Christian church or a cult. Pick one. When you do, don't use verses about rebuking elders of a Christian church if you say it's a cult. The Lord bless you, Brent.

- Matt

[editor]

If there was false doctrine - that's irrelevant. If having false doctrine means that it wasn't a church - then there are no churches.....

You didn't answer them again, though. I "invite you" to answer them. Brent, I also invite you to take a stand. Was it a Christian church or a cult. Pick one. When you do, don't use verses about rebuking elders of a Christian church if you say it's a cult. The Lord bless you, Brent.

- Matt

Matt, I have answered you, several times.  I think our sticking point is in the fact that you feel it is irrelevant if a church has false doctrine.

Here is my stand, which I have repeated in writing many times:

The Assembly was cultic in practice, but qualified as an abusive church due to the fact that it did preach the gospel.  Galatian heresy aside, The Assembly was an Abusive Church, that had cultic tendencies.

Brent

[al Hartman]

Dear Saints, all,

     Please consider the following amendments to to the boxed quotes.  There is much more at stake than you and me as individuals, and the scope of things to consider far exceeds the capacity for analysis by any one of us:

The BB has made an admirable attempt the last several days to engage topics of real spiritual interest and edification.

     Please don't think me petty for pointing this out:  The BB is a tool, used by people.  It is the people who post here-- every one of them-- who have made the "admirable attempt" of which Verne speaks.  i am not contradicting Verne's statement in any way, but hoping to direct its focus more sharply.  Please read on...

Why anyone who is of the opinion that the assemblies were places of sweetness and light would want to make that case here is beyond my comprehension.

     Here Verne poses a question i hope to answer:  
The word "anyone" includes the ever-increasing body of saints registering on the BB, and the unknown number of "lurkers' who read the BB but do not post.  Many of the "newbies" hide their profiles for various reasons.  It is reasonable to presume that many from both these groups are still traumatized by their experiences and may, indeed, still regard their assembly as a place of sweetness and light.  Just because that is "beyond MY comprehension" does not place it beyond ALL comprehension.  We must try to see with the eyes of Christ, who is not impatient, trying to bear in mind that we often are, to our folly.  "In your patience possess ye your souls" Lk.21:19  (See also Heb.10:36;  Jas.1:3-4)
     In simple fact, i believed that the Fullerton was the epicenter of God's work on earth in the 20th century when i was unceremoniously ejected from it in 1980.   i believed that all the error was mine.  And, in spite of everything else in my life, i continued to believe that lie for the better part of 20 years!  In fact, it was the assembly website and this very BB that finally enabled me to break free from the stronghold of Geftakysism.  When i began to post here i was still in confusion.  Had my posts brought down upon me the rejection they might have, i could have retreated back into the shadows & still be there.
     But my experiences have not caused me to become emotionally invested in this issue, despite the opinion of any.  My appeal is based upon reason...

The attempt of some to engage in mindless drivel regarding the painfully obvious even to the most irredeemably stupid is not profitable.

     "Mindless drivel" is AN opinion, not everyone's.  "Painfully obvious" is elitist:  what is obvious to you may be an obliteration to me, and vice versa.  "Irredeemably stupid" is patently absurd:  no one is irredeemably stupid.  Some just require more effort and patience than others.  "Profitability," then, is relative.

Let us excercise a little spiritual maturity and occupy ourselves with those things that make for edifying... for Christ's sake.
In Christ,
Verne

     Here is the crux of the matter:  What alternatives can "spiritual maturity" provide, with which we may occupy ourselves toward the edification of God's people?
     For starters, we must demonstrate a spirit of tolerance, so as not to frighten away the injured and the young by the use of severity.  Anyone should feel welcome to post their concerns and questions.  We may say, "There are no stupid questions," but if we then treat the questioner as a stupid person, what message are we really sending?
     But suppose someone begins to take up time and space with concerns that are not of general interest to most who use the BB?  Why, that is the reason we have the capacity to use email or private messaging.  There is absolutely no need, EVER, to take up BB space unnecessarily or with things in poor taste.  The question is, of course, whether the shepherds are committed enough to go the extra mile, or will we just adapt a "My way or the highway" attitude toward all with whom we choose not to associate?
     Verne's closing sums it all up:  "For Christ's sake.    
In Christ,"

al Hartman

[Lurker]

Hello Al

Lately you seem to be quite upset over the tone of the postings.  Starting with one from Brent, in which he expressed happiness that the level of conversation was improving, and was pleased that people were not getting attacked, and ending with my post, which was a mild rebuke to Matt, for his (to quote you, Al) "far more insulting and inflammatory post,"  you seem to be expressing that Christ is not being honored by the posts, especially by those who, "play games."  The names you attached to the game players were Brent and Matt.

What sort of things do you want said here?

Also, if we must show patience and tolerance to the young ones, what are we to show towards the "older?"  Shall we grade acceptableness of speech on a curve?  Shall we handicap those whom you consider, "older," and publicly rebuke them for hiding carefully crafted challenges among fair speech, while showing tolerance to outright abusive language?

Al, I think it would be helpful and enlightening if you would lay down some quidelines we can all follow, in order to edify God's people.

What sort of things should be avoided, and by whom?  If a person under 30 is posting, or if we perceive that person to be "injured," what standard of acceptable speech should we apply?  If a person should know better, like Brent or Verne, how much less tolerance should we extend towards them?

The reason I am asking, is because I was under the impression that people were able to post their thoughts here.  Pretty thoughts and ugly thoughts were both allowed.  However, now you have brought things to another level, and have declared that some things are "Insane," and are not honoring to Christ.  I certainly don't want to do anything that isn't honoring to Christ, and neither do you, or Matt, Verne, Brent, or the other regulars.

So, before we post again, please clarify for us what sort of guidelines to follow, in order that we don't share real thoughts that might not be correct.  


Until you clarify what sort of things are not "Insane," and the general direction of speech that is ok with you, I will not post again.

Lurker

[al Hartman]

Al, I think it would be helpful and enlightening if you would lay down some quidelines we can all follow, in order to edify God's people...  I certainly don't want to do anything that isn't honoring to Christ, and neither do you, or Matt, Verne, Brent, or the other regulars...  So, before we post again, please clarify for us what sort of guidelines to follow, in order that we don't share real thoughts that might not be correct.

 

     My previous post speaks for itself, but one must be willing to hear.  My remarks are applicable to whosoever will, but are specifically directed toward shepherds of the Lord's people.  In my opinion, one who would lead God's people would not wish to remain anonymous and hide his or her profile.

Until you clarify what sort of things are not "Insane," and the general direction of speech that is ok with you, I will not post again.

Lurker

     Thank you.

al Hartman

[editor]

     My previous post speaks for itself, but one must be willing to hear.  My remarks are applicable to whosoever will, but are specifically directed toward shepherds of the Lord's people.  In my opinion, one who would lead God's people would not wish to remain anonymous and hide his or her profile.

Until you clarify what sort of things are not "Insane," and the general direction of speech that is ok with you, I will not post again.

Lurker

     Thank you.

al Hartman

Al,

Who are the shepherds you refer to?

Brent

[Matt]

[There is a time for compassion, and there is a time for truth. Being confused about the difference results in places like the assemblies. If you think no one is irredeemably stupid, then you should go and preach the gospel in Hell Al. I am sick and tired of people making excuses for the inexcusable...
Verne
p.s before you accuse me of being precipitous, go back and read my posts prior to this latest idiocy...this community is what we make it...

The inexcusable in Brent Junior's eyes (Verne) is anyone who dares to question his leader, Brent. Actually, Verne, no one is irredeemably stupid until their earthly life is done. Only after you have passed on and you rejected Christ - only then are you irredeemably stupid. So no one on this bb is irredemably stupid since everyone here is still alive. Al is saved, obviously, so he's not going to be able to take up your invitation to preach in hell, so sorry.

Al,

Who are the shepherds you refer to?

Brent

Well, probably you. Both you (and possibly Lurker) have endeavored to lead God's people from the assembly - have exercised some spirtual authority over others - as when you called the saints in Fullerton "foolish" for wanting Tim G. to lead them. So, pretty sure he's talking about you and Lurker when he says "shepherds."

And Lurker,
You're not above reproach. Brent and I remained silent in the face of our admonition from Al. I can't speak for Brent, but I did out of acceptance and gratitude for his fairness and for his insight. I appreciate Mr. Hartman's posts and if you don't want to post here, Lurker, then...as one wiseman said..."Thank You" =)

[al Hartman]

"My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation...  But the tongue can no man tame;  it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.  Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.  Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing.  My brethren, these things ought not so to be...  Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you?  let him show out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.  But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth...  For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.  But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocracy.  And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.

Jas.3:1,8-10,13-14,16-18
(PLease read entire context vv.1-18)

[Arthur]

My friends, I think we agree on the main things.

How I see it:
-- Al makes a good point.  There are people out there who are just coming out of the Geftakys snare.  They haven't confronted it yet and are maybe now checking out this site for answers.  They see all the argueing and just cringe because they came for answers and see fighting and confusion.  "Oh, there's no use in trying" they may think
May it not be so, friends!  Let's help them.  

-- Verne also made a good point.  There are people who come on this site who are not seeking help at all.  Their only purpose is to cause trouble.  Let's deal with them with tact, friends!

I think there are some things that we all can agree on.

This bulletin board is a community of sorts in that it is a place where people like you or me can go and talk about things.  A lot of you I consider to be my friends.  I'm happy to hang out with you and ponder the deeper things of life or just chit-chat.  

The uniqueness of this community is that it's mainly for former (and some still present, I guess) assembly-members.  We all went through a difficult time, wouldn't you agree?  There was some serious problems and spirtual abuse going on.  I don't think anyone desputes that seeing as how George Geftakys was excommunicated.  I know that I'm still trying to figure out what happened to me and what to make of it all.  Talking with you, my friends, has helped tremendously.

That's the point of this community, isn't it?  To help people?  I know that many of you are caring and genuinely want to see others be healed and recovered from the abuse and misdirection they received in the assembly.  It seems that we have a responsibility to
1. help people who genuinely are seeking help and
2. to stand for the truth and tactfully deflect the blows of those who are not seeking for help but to cause trouble.  


1.  Help others:  Al brings up a good point.  There are people out there who are just like we were not too long ago.  You remember how it was back then?  Everything was so confusing.  We were in deep, deep spiritual and mental pain.  But This board shed some light.  How about it be that and only that, huh?  I wouldn't feel too safe in a hospital that has gun-fights in the hall-way.


2.  Tactfully deal with rabble-rousers:  When they come and insult you, I think it would be best to ignore them, maybe delete their post, and they'll go away.  NOTE: This does NOT mean that we go about deleting posts or ignoring anyone who has an opposing opinion.  I am strictly referring to those who break the rules of their login agreement and personally attack others or are in some other way clearly disruptive.  

The following passage is a wonderful guideline for how to handle these types of situations.  

22 Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. 24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. II Tim 2:22-26

v22 - here we are--fleeing the youthful lust of pride that ensnared us in the assembly in the first place. And here we are learning about the grace and mercy and love of God again.

v23 - please note the word "avoid" because it creates strifes, don't we know.

v24 - we have no need to strive.  We know the truth.  We did not originate the truth.  We were once without it and lost in darkness, but God taught it to us.  Now we are in pleasant patures and at peace, and therefore we can have great patience with which to teach the truth to others.  We know how patient God was with us.  

v25,26  - we're hoping that people will see the light.  We're not hoping they'll be doomed to dwell in darkness, to lay in the horror and misery of satan's snare...right?  Do we wrestle with flesh and blood?  

In summation, We affirm the truth.  We do not explore or respond to their foolish and strife-causing remarks.  If they refuse to listen, so be it, but we hope they will come to the truth.  

We don't want to detract from the purpose we have here of helping others to heal and to know the truth of the mercy and grace found in Jesus.


Arthur

[al Hartman]

Al,
Who are the shepherds you refer to?
Brent

Dear Saints,
     i have answered Brent in a private message, but since he asked me publicly, i will also respond here:
     The shepherds are those who take the responsibility of leading.  They are the ones everyone else follows.
     The shepherds protect the flock, feed, water and herd the flock.  Above all, the shepherds love the sheep, and would lay down their lives for all or any one of them.
in Christ,
al Hartman
     

[al Hartman]

Dear Saints,
     It grieves me deeply to point out these excerpts from the recent posts by Verne Carty on this thread, but he has made it necessary:

I want to say a word about the simple matter of respect.

    The following are terms used by Verne to describe certain of his brethren, the people of God, and their views:

morons
you Pharisees
hogwash
ignorance ...exceeded only by... hubris  
sophomoric
irredeemable stupidity
frightfully unGodly behaviour
temporisers
uninstructed dolts
completely frivolous and fruitless idiocy
renegade mentality
clearly disturbed and depraved
minds too foolish to justify their own stupidity!
a confused, pitiful mind
repeatedly thuggish, vindictive and puerile
cannibalistic and counterproductive

    The above are all Verne's own words, lifted from their context only for the sake of brevity.  You can see them as written in his several most recent posts.
     i have nothing derogatory to say about Verne.  He is my brother in Christ, and i love him.  He also said:

Arthur your comments are insightful and obviously borne of a tender spirit.

al Hartman

 

[Matt]

Al,
I thank you for trying to stick up for me on the bb. I have to admit that it was kind of unsettling reading this - especially because I know that nobody will mention to Verne the user agreement to the bb (the one that I'm always reminded of). It was difficult to watch Verne and Brent verbally abuse L and P Robinson, the Teaters, and also affirming. It was astonishing to see a woman (affirming) treated that way by the bb, and I know first-hand what it's like now to be verbally degraded by somebody who thinks it's his oh what's the term Verne used..."sacred duty?" I can't imagine the Lord commisioned Verne and Brent to verbally degrade the younger brethren and a woman to the point that many of them had to leave - but who knows?

It does reek of GG'ism. If anyone dares to question Brent Tr0ckman, or his followers, then prepare for the worst.  What can I say? It's his bb, really. He's the administrator. He has every right to tell everyone who disagrees with him to get off. As long as he's gracious enough to let me post here, I will. I can't expect Brent to publically rebuke Verne - Brent has asserted that Verne is a man of class and "grace." If that's Brent's idea of Grace - give me the assembly anytime. People are so blind to Brent and Verne's indiscretion and sin (like they were to GGs), but quick to see the oppositions. If I do get kicked off one day, I would liken to those rare times when a letter was read at an assembly telling people not to fellowship with so and so..

I'm not saying that I'm innocent or that L and P or the Teaters were innocent. (I don't think affirming was that guilty of anything - she had some very good posts). But I have to laugh because Verne can't see the hyporcrisy of his statements. My "renegade name calling..." What was the quotation of yours that was so stunning, Verne? Christ reserved his most strident criticism for hypocrisy?

Verne, write me brother.

- Matt

[MGov]

I must confess that earlier today I noticed Verne's brash language and wondered why no one had called him to task on it, until Al did.

With Matt, I communicate via private communication.  I have been unsuccessful communicating via PMs with some others, hence a public post.

I am sad that some have decided that they will no longer post, because there was/is much to learn in investigating the Scriptures with regards to various issues.

Mark C, as global moderator, has encouraged us to be open in communicating, but careful with our language.

Anyway, each must decide for themselves what each will do.

Lord bless,
M

[Arthur]

Al,
I thank you for trying to stick up for me on the bb. I have to admit that it was kind of unsettling reading this - especially because I know that nobody will mention to Verne the user agreement to the bb (the one that I'm always reminded of).

Ok people, wake up and smell the hypocrisy!  Al, Mgov--why do you support Matt?  Come to your senses.  
Shall I stand by and let you say things about Verne like that.  No.  The difference between Matt and Verne is (among other things), Verne stands for what is right, Matt does not.  Do you understand that?

Let's take a trip down memory lane, shall we.


The history of Matt's posts:

Dear Bluejay,
I've read some of your posts and it saddens me to see how extremely angry you are. It's sad because I know that your anger is doing nothing more than making the Geftakys laugh. After a period of time, this anger is your problem, and not theirs. You have to let it go...let it go from your heart, let it go from your head. Learn from the experience and let it all go. Don't let them keep you in bondage like this! I used to feel that way too, and I know it's easier said than done. But you must strive and don't let the Geftakys get you all riled up just thinking about them! They're not worth it! May the Lord give you peace, brother. Take care.
- Matt

A fairly good beginning -- maybe this is advice to be heard.

As for lurking and for seeing how everything is, please give yourself a chance to sober up first. Nobody wants a drunk butt swaggering around and "lurking" about.

Matt's first scuffle -- on his third post on the board

Rather, Verne, I think the BB would like you to stop embarrasing yourself. Don't have you have anything better to do than harrass people half your age? Maybe some knitting needs to get done? Or catching up on your almanac?

Bad show, Matt.

I think that you need to apologize to everyone, really, for existing. Let's see you and Vernecarty repent.

"apologize...for existing..."  And Matt said HE was unsettled for reading Verne's posts?

How bout you castrating yourself and moving to Iraq? Just a suggestion.
You know, you just can't resist "correcting" people, can you? You're just like a Geftakite to the nth degree...

"castrating yourself" --  enough said.

Nice try Verne trying to make it look like I was telling Bluejay to move to Iraq instead of you! haha, but surely nobody else was that stupid...now stop trying to stir up trouble.

Another display of immaturity.

How funny, Verne! I had a feeling that you were a jackass and guess I was right. I never asked Bluejay to stop posting; do you have some words you are trying to put in my mouth? Yes, Bluejay, keep posting. And we know how "tender and solicitious" you've been, Verne, with everyone, especially the Robinsons. So keep up the caring spirit.

No respect.

no kidding! castration?? jeez... i  HATE spending my time here trying to defuse potential flame wars, and am this -->||<-- close to just suspending the accounts of those who want to start them.

Brian, since you used me as an example of a misbehaving poster, I hope you will allow me to say a little something in my defense. Al has a good point about it consistently being Vernecarty vs. other people. Yet, "other people" are the ones that get singled out by the moderators. I'm sure a lot of it has to do with this ministry's history of ganging up together with the person in authority (usually older) and sweeping any of their wrongdoings under the rug. Out of sight, out of mind, right? Wrong! Vernecarty has twisted my words around and put words in my mouth to try to make it look like I was encouraging Bluejay to stop posting. In addition, Vernecarty tried to make it look like the comments I had made toward him were really meant for Bluejay. Now, I'm not saying that you didn't read the posts carefully, so I'm just curious why there is a double standard going on here. That's all.

So...Matt you are saying that it's all Verne's fault that you said Verne should castrate himself.

Matt,

The difference between your posts and the other adamant posts, is your brash name calling and language.

Oh my goodness! Is that the difference? Thank you kindly! I don't know what I would do if you did not have a keen sense of the obvious, MGov.
- Matt

Laurie and Eulaha:
oh my GOODNESS! Eulaha, rejoice! Finally, someone even dumber than you has reared their ugly head! ...
I'm going to go ahead and repeat it all, Eulaha. You are the most selfish, egotistical, self-centered jerk. Thank you for showing the board how dumb you are and I hope you praise God that someone else (this Laurie character) has proven herself to be even dumber than you!

And, yes, I still think that you should have your shrinks treat you for narcissism and paranoia rather than for your "pain and suffering" from the people who really loved you in the assembly.
- Matt

I just wanted to quote this so it doesn't get deleted next time Matt decides to apologize.  Since he has said stuff like this 3 times, only to delete it, I think it is important that we not erase it this time.

Lurker:
hahahahahaha...I'm glad it's posted twice now! Twice the effect. I'm not going to apologize to Eulaha anyway, so it doesn't matter. I never said anything bad about Pat Mathews. Anyway, when you get enough guts to tell me who you are, maybe I will start taking your posts seriously. For the meantime, thanks for the laugh!
- Matt

Too bad you aren't here to say these things to my face, Carty, or I'd bust out a can of whoop ass on ya. Now why don't you turn your attention to the real psychos (Laurie and Eulaha)...

And fortunately for me that you have remained in your neutral corner verneswitzerlandcarty? I guess lucky for you I'll be kicked off the BB if I say what you really deserve to hear, Jack ahhh.....

And why hasn't this happened yet?

This is just a brief glimpse at Matt's character.  Need we show more?

People, stop being so foolish and make a proper judgement.

Upbringing or being in the assembly is no excuse to  deny the truth.  Everyone has the opportunity to humble themselves and listen to the truth.  Matt has clearly shown that he will not.  And yet you side with him?  More than that you criticize those who clearly state the truth?!?  Shame on you!

Arthur

[Matt]

oops..Arthur, you left our a portion of that PM threat of yours:

Quote from: Matt on June 09, 2003, 04:32:09 pm    
Al,
I thank you for trying to stick up for me on the bb. I have to admit that it was kind of unsettling reading this - especially because I know that nobody will mention to Verne the user agreement to the bb (the one that I'm always reminded of).
 

Matt, you are not one to talk.  Don't put on this show.  You have consistenly shown that you will not listen to the truth,  rather you malign those who are clearly stating it.  Cease and desist immediately!
Please remove this post, or I will post the following:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And yes, you did post the following. I'm sorry, I can't let you intimidate me or threaten me by erasing my last post to Al and Verne. Isn't that strange - the anti-assemblyites claim that the assembly worked by intimidation. Anyway, Verne needed to hear these things, and he has. I regret saying those things, as I have said times before, but I do believe I rose above that. The most recent quote in your list was from a month and a half ago. To be honest, I had a good laugh reading through them again.

I guess what is really "hypocritical" is the way you treated me with this post. It's the same kind of treatment that you complained about on the GA site while you lived in DG's house. Yes, I read that testimony. How can anyone ever think of you as a victim now when you are doing the same kind of things to others? What this site has confirmed to me is that the factors of abuse that may have been present in the assembly are also present in the people who despise the assembly system. Therefore, it was the people in the assembly - not the system that promoted any kind of abuse.

Your arrogance is also overwhelming. You claim that everything Brent said, Verne said, you said is the truth?! LOL. And I'm stupid for denying that....oh my...to think you had the gall to say *I* need to humble myself. The truth is what you want it  to be on this site I guess. Anyone who disagrees with you is a liar. I'm sorry that you're feeling that way. Maybe one day you will stop following a man (Brent or Verne) and follow the Lord. Take care.

- Matt