Existing Assemblies

[Arthur]

I am re-engaging in this discussion after realizing that not all of what I see is pointless argument.  After reading the threads more closely, I see that Brent and Verne are refuting falsehood, and I am convinced now that I should do the same.  I don't anticipate a long, drawn-out conversation.  I just want to say my bit on the matter and then I'll leave off of commenting on it.  

But before I do so, Matt, let's get it straight what you are saying. Tell us what you disagree with.
 
1.  The Geftakys assembly was cult-like, if not a full blown cult.

2.  It's founder, George Geftakys, is a wicked man.

3.  Not all, but many leading brothers were partakers in George's sins by, in the very least, knowing about some or most of his actions and not doing or saying anything about them. Some even took part in spiritually abusing the sheep themselves.  Of these, some have repented.
Some leading brothers refuted George and were not partakers of his sins, and these were usually maligned and/or excommunicated for it.

4.  The assembly fostered pride, exclusivism, and elitism in its members.

5.  An evidence that such pride still exists in some former members to this day is that they attack those who expose the truth about the evils of the assembly.


Arthur

[Joe Sperling]

Arthur----

Your 5 points are right on the money. I had put in a post and deleted it. I wish I hadn't now--I was speaking from the heart. I've gotten to the place on the Bulletin Board where I'm afraid to state anything that might cause an "argument".

What I wanted to state is that if we see someone continuing to ignore purposefully the things that we KNOW to be true(much of it in Arthur's 5 points below) let's just ignore them. Everyone has a right to state their point of view, but if they continuously post only to argue and "water down" the truth it's best to ignore them.

We've seen people depart(Brent and Verne) because we have given too much room to people who are obviously stating falsehoods and ignoring stated fact(see again Arthur's 5 points below). This BB was established to help people who have "escaped" the legalism of the Assembly, not to give a forum for those who seek to praise it or "water down" the obvious evil it has spread.

Brent started the Website to expose the Assembly and many wrongs taking place there. The light strongly exposed the darkness and much more evil came to light causing the eventual excommunication of George and the "stepping down" of the leading brothers. But there are those who would seek to "water down" this evil, lessen it, and even defend it in a manner of speaking. And we've given place to them--providing a forum for them to speak untruths.

The Lord has rebuked the evil in the Assembly--if I'm following him I will rebuke it too. The Lord has exposed the Assembly---if I'm following him will I try to cover it up? The Lord has called it great evil---if I am following him will I try to lessen it or water it down? Of course not.

I deleted my earlier post but state the same thing: I choose to ignore someone who continues in self-enforced blindness to an obvious truth. they can post til the cows come home but I will not respond any more. I hope all of us can do the same, and hopefully some of the dear people who left will return and this BB can be ablessed place again.


--Joe

[Joe Sperling]

This will be my last post. Yesterday I posted the message below and received an E-mail from one of the people I have been speaking about.

I realize now that this is useless. In the below statement with all sincerity I stated that "If we are following the Lord we will rebuke what he has rebuked, and not seek to cover up what he has exposed, and won't water down or try to lessen the Evil he has brought to light." We can never lessen evil---but we can try to mask it or lower it in the estimation of others.  EX: "Sure, George sinned, but...(exuses ad nauseum).

This E-mail mocked that statement saying "I'm sorry, but I was laughing very hard while reading this. Wow, Are you the Lord's spokesman now? Hmmm...So you know EXACTLY what the Lord is thinking regarding the Assembly? Wow! We have a new Pope!!! Just in time too!! This reminds me of those people that believe that getting sick is God's Judgement on you for sinning. Wow."

There's some humor there of course. But look at the attitude that is put forth. We have ALL seen George excommunicated. We have seen the brother's step down. We all know about David Geftakys beating his wife. we have all read the stories here of Assembly abuse and faulty teaching. Do we not see a rebuke from the Lord in this?? Do we not see great evil?? Do we not see how the Lord has exposed the Assembly??

Yet, this person refuses to see this. He claims that I am speaking for the Lord when it is OBVIOUS what the Lord has done through the Website and the BB. When I speak for the Lord I speak from what is an obvious occurence--to say otherwise would be to deny the work of the Lord in all of this.

So, I see that these people will continue here and it is fruitless to continue in an atmosphere like this. "If the blind lead the blind they will both fall into the ditch". I've seen what the Lord has done since the Rick Ross Website. I saw the founding of the Webiste and how the Lord used it to expose the Assembly and bring evil to light. I saw George excommunicated and all that followed.

It confirmed to me what I had known for a long time---that the Assembly had something very wrong with it. The Lord has done what he wanted to do--and now he seeks only to heal. But this BB has become only a place for bickering, and a forum for those who want to question what the Lord has really done. There has been enough rebuking, and they will not desist.

As I mentioned to this person---this BB was supposed to be a place of healing for those who have "escaped" from the legalism, and the hurts of the Assembly. If you were at an AA meeting to help get free of Alcohol, would it help you to hear someone get up and say "OH, alcohol isn't all that bad. People say it hurts people's lives, but it never hurt me. Until I seem some "reasonsable doubt" that completely convinces me I'm going to keep drinking, and I think you should too". And what if this person stood up and argued with you every time you mentioned the pain alcohol had brought to your life? Wouldn't you want this person to cease and desist? Sure, he has a right to his opinion..., or does he in a setting like that??

As long as this place continues to be forum like this I don't want to even visit here anymore. I'm sure there will be further sarcastic remarks made about this most recent post too---it's a pattern with them--to argue, make sarcastic comments and ignore obvious truth.

God bless all of you who continue to post here. I've enjoyed all of the old threads where we had great conversations and fellowship.

--Joe

[Matt]

Hi Joe and Arthur,
Firstly, for the record, I did not email Joe Sperling anything. I don't disagree with it though - whoever wrote that to you was calling to attention your pride - not mocking you.

Now, Arthur,
I will attempt to answer your question regarding my stands on the following 5 points:
 
1.  The Geftakys assembly was cult-like, if not a full blown cult.

Yes, of course, I disagree with this. The assembly was a church - a body of believers who came together to worship their Lord, to fellowship together, to take the Lord's supper together, to get into the Word together, to reach out to the lost together, to love each other, to help each other, etc.



2.  It's founder, George Geftakys, is a wicked man.

True.  Aren't we all wicked though? But, yes, he should have stepped down much sooner and let the other more Godly men lead.

3.  Not all, but many leading brothers were partakers in George's sins by, in the very least, knowing about some or most of his actions and not doing or saying anything about them. Some even took part in spiritually abusing the sheep themselves.  Of these, some have repented.
Some leading brothers refuted George and were not partakers of his sins, and these were usually maligned and/or excommunicated for it.

I wouldn't even say many leading brothers were partakers in GG's sins. The vast majority only saw him a few times a year. This is all repetitive of course, but how would they know about his sins? They weren't the topic of seminars or weekly phone calls with GG. Those brothers who abused the "sheep" and have repented - praise the Lord. But those LB's that haven't abused the sheep (most of them) - well no need to repent. To be honest, I believe that most of the "best" preaching did not come from GG - he was extremely hard to understand. The best came from the leading brothers. The vast majority were of Godly character and were unfailing in their service to the Lord and to their flocks.

4.  The assembly fostered pride, exclusivism, and elitism in its members.

Hardly. Exclusivism? I recall trying to get many of the lost into the assembly - not exclude them. We welcomed people from other churches to visit too. As for pride, how's that? I remember "forgive me brother" was a very standard saying in the assembly. I hate to say his name publically again, but our LB, Bob Starr, is one of the most humble men I have ever met in my entire life. Perhaps at  your assembly, you didn't invite other people to come - or you felt pride. Who knows? I can only speak from my own experience as this is all a subjective matter.

5.  An evidence that such pride still exists in some former members to this day is that they attack those who expose the truth about the evils of the assembly.

I suppose one thing I've learned about the assembly is that the sins were of men - not of the system. I've been intimidated (by you!), called names, humiliated, etc (as have Paul and Luke, Affirming, teaters, etc..) by ex-assemblyites. The same ex-assemblyites who accuse the assembly system of fostering intimidation, name calling, humiliation, hypocrisy, etc.  I've been treated far worse by ex-assemblyites than I was ever treated in the assembly. I'm not posing myself as a victim, by the way. I just wanted to point out why it was so hard to take you seriously.

I know that I have mistreated people on the bb too. You pointed that out, of course, for everyone to see, although I'm sure everybody has seen all that before. I'd like to publically apologize to Brent Tr0ckman, Verne Carty, Eulaha Long, Laurie-STL sister, Heide, Kim..I'm sorry Kimberely Tobin, Lurker, for my many harsh, unkind things. I know I've been vulgar at times and very mean-spirited. I pray that you will forgive me. I cannot apologize for my arguments though because, like you, Arthur, I feel I'm in the right with regard to my defense of certain elements of the assembly (but not all) and the LB's (big surprise).

I also apologize to any LB's or their families that may read this. Sometimes I'm worried that my defense of the LB's did nothing more than spark more posts from people blasting you. If I have been the source of any distress, please forgive me. Also forgive me for saying unkind things to the above people, forgive me if that caused you distress as well.

Do you have anymore questions, Arthur?

- Matt

[Oscar]

Arthur posted:

 
1.  The Geftakys assembly was cult-like, if not a full blown cult.

2.  It's founder, George Geftakys, is a wicked man.

3.  Not all, but many leading brothers were partakers in George's sins by, in the very least, knowing about some or most of his actions and not doing or saying anything about them. Some even took part in spiritually abusing the sheep themselves.  Of these, some have repented.
Some leading brothers refuted George and were not partakers of his sins, and these were usually maligned and/or excommunicated for it.

4.  The assembly fostered pride, exclusivism, and elitism in its members.

5.  An evidence that such pride still exists in some former members to this day is that they attack those who expose the truth about the evils of the assembly.


Arthur

About 10 years ago I did some research on cults and developed a list of common characteristics.  Here it is.

1. Most cults have some writings that constitute extra-biblical revelation.  

2.  A false basis of salvation.  Salvation redefined in some way that puts it on the basis of works.  You can never do enough works to be sure.

3.  Uncertain hope.  Constant and continuing faithfulness required.

4.  A Claim of special spiritual annointing or light by the founder.

5. Doctrinal ambiguity.  Some doctrines can't be clearly stated.
   (It's better felt than telt).

6.  A faulty doctrine of God.

7.  An enslaving organizational structure
    a. The leadership is exalted and remote
    b. There is an inner circle who support the leader and control
        the flock.
    c.  Sheperding style accountability system.

8.  Financial exploitation.

9.  Fortress mentality, usually including constant denunciation of others.

10.  Identification of individual members with the "mission" of the cult.  Loss of personal relationships and outside interests.

11.  Members committed to intensive learning and proslytizing.

12. Control through fear.  "If you leave you will...a. go into darkness.  b. Satan will get a hold on your life  c. God will punish you...you might lose your life.

I think any fair minded person can see that number one on Arthur's list is right on the money.  Anyone who can't see this simply doesn't understand the assembly system.

With the possible exception of #1 and #6 from my list, the assembly fit these elements perfectly.  The assembly was a group of Christians, so it qualifies as a Bible Based Cultic group.

Good work, Arthur.

Thomas Maddux

[Oscar]

Arthur wrote:


3.  Not all, but many leading brothers were partakers in George's sins by, in the very least, knowing about some or most of his actions and not doing or saying anything about them. Some even took part in spiritually abusing the sheep themselves.  Of these, some have repented.
Some leading brothers refuted George and were not partakers of his sins, and these were usually maligned and/or excommunicated for it.

I spent 18 years in the assembly.  Along with Steve Irons, I was in the leading brother's meeting in Fullerton from the day it started, about 1971 or '72, until I quit in 1988.  I was also a worker during that time.

Sadly, in order to say this I have to hang my sins out for all to see, but I think this needs to be said.  All I can say is that I have repented openly, opposed GG openly, and done what I could to make amends to offended individuals.

1. All the leading brothers, in all the assemblies, were involved in the financial exploitation of the saints.  We were  taught, and taught others,  that God wanted 10% before taxes, in cash, in the box.  Other than counting this and delivering it to GG's house,(usually to Betty), no accounting of the use of this money was ever given.

This is clearly a violation of New Testament standards.  The rule is that we are to "Provide for things honest IN THE SIGHT OF ALL MEN".  No specially priveleged individuals allowed.  We failed in this.  Leading brothers had NO IDEA what was done with this money other than the vague claim that it was used for the work, "here and abroad".

2.  The leading brothers in every assembly helped GG to decieve the saints.  We learned and repeated GG's false teachings on the Church, prophecy, finances, guidance from God, and much more.

If you didn't do this YOU WEREN'T A LEADING BROTHER ANY LONGER!  None of us can escape this.  As I began to see through these teachings, I stopped teaching them and preached on other things.  But I didn't stand up and tell everyone what I thought.

Please forgive me.

3. Every assembly had at least one worker, usually more.  The workers were the third level of the assembly authority structure, (below G and B and the "special workers", and above the local leading brothers and saints.  The workers were told what to tell the saints about all the problem folks, how to answer critics, and how to maintian secrecy about any inner problems in the group.

The saints were talked about constantly.  Their loyalty, intelligence, weaknesses,  and actual or potential contribution to the work were evaluated regularly.  Problems shared in confidence with a trusted brother or sister were common knowledge among the workers.

The workers enjoyed being "in the know".  The assembly was like a small town.


Although the abuse of Judy Geftakys and, of course, GG's adultries were "inner circle" level secrets, those of us who didn't know about these things supported them by supporting the authority structure of the assembly that made the abuse possible.

We also participated in the abusive treatment of many many of the saints.  I'm not talking about the Dave/Judy type of abuse, but we micro managed the lives of hundreds of people.  We made them dependent on us, and did NOT lead them to trust the Shepherd of their souls.  The assembly leadership INTERPOSED ITSELF between the saints and God, and acted as if they were commissioned by God to rule over the flock.

It is and was a disgrace to the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Forgive us all Lord.  We were blind leaders of the blind.

Nothing in my hand I bring...only to the cross I cling.

Thomas Maddux

[al Hartman]

Dear Saints, all,

     Many years ago, when we used to witness on Van Nuys Blvd., amidst thousands of lost souls searching for they knew not what, i learned to ask two questions of the people i spoke to.  They came from every imaginable background, and fell back upon any and all kinds of philosophies, religions, beliefs and hopes to argue against the gospel of Jesus Christ.
     my two questions were:  [1.] Is it possible that you are wrong?  [2.] If you are wrong, do you want to find out and learn what is right?  These were not conversation-starters.  i pressed for a simple, direct YES or NO answer to both queries.  If the answer to either was "No," i usually moved on to someone else before long.  But if the answer to both questions was "Yes," the door had been opened for witness and prayer.
     Those same two questions are applicable to every person on the globe, and good for every situation.  i ask them of myself all the time, and i don't accept discussion for a reply (i don't want to listen to my rationalizations).  Just YES or NO.  It's pretty simple, no matter what the subject is.  Whatever you believe about the assembly, the Bulletin Board, this or that brother or sister, just ask yourself:  Could I be wrong?  If I am wrong, do I want to find out what's right?
     The inference of question #1 is not negative.  Being wrong is not a sin.  Being wrong is a natural occurence and common to all mankind.  Being wrong only affirms that you are not God.
     Question #2 can be quite revealing.  How important is image to you?  Would you rather attempt to convince yourself and others that you are right than to find out you are wrong and have to adjust your direction and reputation?  One day each of us will stand face to face with our Lord and he will show us every detail of our lives.  Will we be able to look at the scars he received for us, then look into his eyes if we have avoided the truth in this life for the sake of comfort or reputation?
     Does it take courage to answer these questions honestly?  No, but the fear that it may require more courage than we have can keep us from an honest answer.
What it takes to say "Yes" to both questions is faith in the Son of God.  "Is anything too great for Thee?"  He has begun a great work in us, and will continue it until the great day of the Lord Jesus Christ.  Never be afraid of the truth, for he is the Truth, and the Truth shall set you free.

     Remember, i said i ask these two questions of myself all the time?  Well, the truth is that you can't really apply them to anyone else unless you are willing to first (and frequently) apply them to yourself!  Try it.  Sincerely.  You'll be glad you did.

al Hartman

[Matt]

This is so sad. We have another ex-LB who, because he felt led to repent personally, thinks that every other LB needs to repent.

1. All the leading brothers, in all the assemblies, were involved in the financial exploitation of the saints.  We were  taught, and taught others,  that God wanted 10% before taxes, in cash, in the box.  Other than counting this and delivering it to GG's house,(usually to Betty), no accounting of the use of this money was ever given.

This is clearly a violation of New Testament standards.  The rule is that we are to "Provide for things honest IN THE SIGHT OF ALL MEN".  No specially priveleged individuals allowed.  We failed in this.  Leading brothers had NO IDEA what was done with this money other than the vague claim that it was used for the work, "here and abroad".

First of all, 10% is standard teaching in most churches - not just the assembly. Secondly, I don't know about other assemblies, but they never asked me for any money for anything more than paying for campus conferences and seminars. They never forced anybody to give a dime. If a saint gave money, it was freely. Also, if they were told the money was "used for the work here and abroad," and they continued to give freely, then obviously that was enough accounting to satisfy the saint. Perhaps you feel that you financially exploited the saints - in which case you are right to repent. But don't start throwing around that "it wasn't just me, it was everybody..."

2.  The leading brothers in every assembly helped GG to decieve the saints.  We learned and repeated GG's false teachings on the Church, prophecy, finances, guidance from God, and much more.

If you didn't do this YOU WEREN'T A LEADING BROTHER ANY LONGER!  None of us can escape this.  As I began to see through these teachings, I stopped teaching them and preached on other things.  But I didn't stand up and tell everyone what I thought.

Please forgive me.

As an LB in Fullerton, obviously GG had a lot more control over what you said. I remember messages from Brian Daum about what we would do without GG - he pointedly reminded us that GG wasn't going to be around forever. He specifically recognized that the saints were too dependent on GG. So, unlike you, he did stand up and say what he thought. As for false teaching, that's been thrown around forever. If a requirement for a church is to be perfect, then Mr. Maddux, give up the search now. I also believe the label "false-teaching" and "cult" is thrown around too loosely. I believe that the LB's (or any of the other brothers) were led to get up and preach. God clearly spoke to the saints through many of these brothers' messages.

3. Every assembly had at least one worker, usually more.  The workers were the third level of the assembly authority structure, (below G and B and the "special workers", and above the local leading brothers and saints.  The workers were told what to tell the saints about all the problem folks, how to answer critics, and how to maintian secrecy about any inner problems in the group.

The saints were talked about constantly.  Their loyalty, intelligence, weaknesses,  and actual or potential contribution to the work were evaluated regularly.  Problems shared in confidence with a trusted brother or sister were common knowledge among the workers.

The workers enjoyed being "in the know".  The assembly was like a small town.

Quite a strong statement. Did you visit every single assembly to ascertain that nothing was kept in confidence? There's a lot of generalizations going on here on such a serious topic. If you're going to haughtily prance around pointing your finger at every LB, you better be sure that every LB betrayed confidences.

Although the abuse of Judy Geftakys and, of course, GG's adultries were "inner circle" level secrets, those of us who didn't know about these things supported them by supporting the authority structure of the assembly that made the abuse possible.

The structure that made the abuse possible? You'll find adultery and wife-beating outside the assembly - and you'll find that it's far more widespread. Again, being in Fullerton, you had access to a lot more information than the LB's at other assemblies. Perhaps you knew things before - you're right to repent for that. But it's been established that the vast majority of LB's didn't know about the adultery and the wife beating - and thus are not guilty of supporting it.

We also participated in the abusive treatment of many many of the saints.  I'm not talking about the Dave/Judy type of abuse, but we micro managed the lives of hundreds of people.  We made them dependent on us, and did NOT lead them to trust the Shepherd of their souls.  The assembly leadership INTERPOSED ITSELF between the saints and God, and acted as if they were commissioned by God to rule over the flock.

Ok, I see. You say "we also participated in the abusive treatment of the saints." I can understand where you are coming from now. I would feel guilty too if I harmed the saints. However, because you abused the saints doesn't mean all the LB's did. It reminds me of a little kid who gets in trouble and then tries to implicate his innocent brother too so he doesn't have to be in trouble alone. It also isn't very logical:

I was abusive, thus all LB's were abusive. I speak German, thus everybody speaks German...

As for your cult list:
"12. Control through fear.  "If you leave you will...a. go into darkness.  b. Satan will get a hold on your life  c. God will punish you...you might lose your life."

We might lose our life if we leave the assembly? No, sir - that's ridiculous. What an imagination! Your self-composed list of cultic traits is quite off base.

"Members commited to intensive learning and proselytizing."

We are called on the Bible to reach out to the lost, sir. As for intensive learning, that's hardly a sin.

"Fortress mentality"

I believe many, many people were welcomed into the assemblies. If it was a fortress, then the Bible study invites should have said:

"bible study, mira mesa senior citizen center, tuesday 7:30pm. Oh, but you can't come."

"Financial Exploitation"

Already touched on this.

Mr. Maddux, you asked for forgiveness for your abuse of the saints. God has already forgiven you - accept his forgiveness rather than trying to implicate innocent leading brothers.

- Matt

[al Hartman]

Dear Saints,

     I have already replied personally to both Tom & Matt regarding their latest posts.  These are some general thoughts for all:
      As a matter of record, i agree with Tom's assessment, in principle, for the following reasons:  
     Both Tom's & my experience was confined to Fullerton, the San Fernando Valley, and workers' conferences, all of which were tightly within George's grip (neither of us was ever "sent out into the work").  Within those venues, it was deliberately made very clear to us that George intended to have absolute power in and over all the assemblies & works with which he was associated.  He assigned Fullerton-trained "workers" to all the assemblies for the express purpose of seeing that his directives were carried out, and reporting to him if they were not.  If there were LBs doing and/or saying things that exceeded George's parameters, it was only because for some reason he was unaware of it.  Otherwise they would have been immediately removed from their positions, and shortly thereafter from fellowship.  This is not speculation on my part.  i have heard it stated & seen it implemented.
     i hope you can see that this is why the assembly "system," or structure was not Christian-- because a tyrant  blocked access to the throne of grace, and assigned his minions to enforce his will.  Was salvation through Christ preached?  Absolutely.  But as soon as it was accepted by anyone, it began to be distorted and controlled.  Those who could not or would not be controlled were encouraged or forced to leave, in a manner that made it seem to be their (rebellious) choice.  Again, we saw this repeatedly and at that time we accepted & condoned it.
     Exceptions were not permitted, so if they occurred (as some say happened in their assemblies), it would have been by God's hand, and we (George & the "inner circle") would not have known it.  Could the Lord have done such a thing and none of us been aware of it?  Of course!  That's precisely why the possibility that it actually did happen  never occurred to any of us, perhaps, until now.  George's control seemed so absolute, that none of us could imagine its being bypassed, and since we accepted him as God's servant, the idea that God would circumvent him never occurred to us.
     The threads of the overall tapestry we are looking at are as varied as the individual lives involved.  God looks down upon the finished work, while we are still seeing the knotted and twisted underside of it.  You have never been me, nor i you.  We have not seen each what the other has seen.  We all need to cut each other some slack, and stop imagining that just because i have repeatedly explained something to my own satisfaction, everyone else is obliged to find it obvious.  Not by might(y argument) nor by power(ful teaching), but by My Spirit, saith the Lord.

In the love of Christ,
al Hartman

[Arthur]

This will be my last post. Yesterday I posted the message below and received an E-mail from one of the people I have been speaking about.

I realize now that this is useless. In the below statement with all sincerity I stated that "If we are following the Lord we will rebuke what he has rebuked, and not seek to cover up what he has exposed, and won't water down or try to lessen the Evil he has brought to light." We can never lessen evil---but we can try to mask it or lower it in the estimation of others.  EX: "Sure, George sinned, but...(exuses ad nauseum).

This E-mail mocked that statement saying "I'm sorry, but I was laughing very hard while reading this. Wow, Are you the Lord's spokesman now? Hmmm...So you know EXACTLY what the Lord is thinking regarding the Assembly? Wow! We have a new Pope!!! Just in time too!! This reminds me of those people that believe that getting sick is God's Judgement on you for sinning. Wow."

There's some humor there of course. But look at the attitude that is put forth. We have ALL seen George excommunicated. We have seen the brother's step down. We all know about David Geftakys beating his wife. we have all read the stories here of Assembly abuse and faulty teaching. Do we not see a rebuke from the Lord in this?? Do we not see great evil?? Do we not see how the Lord has exposed the Assembly??

Yet, this person refuses to see this. He claims that I am speaking for the Lord when it is OBVIOUS what the Lord has done through the Website and the BB. When I speak for the Lord I speak from what is an obvious occurence--to say otherwise would be to deny the work of the Lord in all of this.

I received a similar email, Joe, immediately after posting the five points about the problems of the assembly.  I think we see a pattern here.  Stand for the truth about the assembly and you'll get an email from someone who doesn't like it that you did, personally attacking you.  

So, I see that these people will continue here and it is fruitless to continue in an atmosphere like this. "If the blind lead the blind they will both fall into the ditch". I've seen what the Lord has done since the Rick Ross Website. I saw the founding of the Webiste and how the Lord used it to expose the Assembly and bring evil to light. I saw George excommunicated and all that followed.

It confirmed to me what I had known for a long time---that the Assembly had something very wrong with it. The Lord has done what he wanted to do--and now he seeks only to heal. But this BB has become only a place for bickering, and a forum for those who want to question what the Lord has really done. There has been enough rebuking, and they will not desist.

As I mentioned to this person---this BB was supposed to be a place of healing for those who have "escaped" from the legalism, and the hurts of the Assembly. If you were at an AA meeting to help get free of Alcohol, would it help you to hear someone get up and say "OH, alcohol isn't all that bad. People say it hurts people's lives, but it never hurt me. Until I seem some "reasonsable doubt" that completely convinces me I'm going to keep drinking, and I think you should too". And what if this person stood up and argued with you every time you mentioned the pain alcohol had brought to your life? Wouldn't you want this person to cease and desist? Sure, he has a right to his opinion..., or does he in a setting like that??

As long as this place continues to be forum like this I don't want to even visit here anymore. I'm sure there will be further sarcastic remarks made about this most recent post too---it's a pattern with them--to argue, make sarcastic comments and ignore obvious truth.

God bless all of you who continue to post here. I've enjoyed all of the old threads where we had great conversations and fellowship.

--Joe

This is such an excellent analogy!  The rest of us who are seeking recovery from "alcoholism" (aka assemblyism) should stand up and kick the hoodlums out.  

Arthur

[mithrandir]

Hi all.

I'd rather not give you my real name just yet.  I too was in a Geftakys assembly for a long time.  I too have stories of how I was hurt (and unfortunately, how I hurt others) in my participation in George's system.

I'd like to thank Brian Tucker for getting rid of certain troublemakers who were trying to sow confusion on this BB.  Now that they are gone, I have a request.  Could this thread be dedicated to news of assemblies that are still meeting, especially in Southern California, and of how God is dealing with them?  I think when we all hear of the complete disappearance of everything George started, it will help many of us come to closure regarding all this.

[BeckyW]

Welcome, M.  I understand not wanting to use your real name.  Some people are still being told by their leaders that to read the bb or web site is to participate in divisive gossip, listen to railers attacking God's servants, etc.  I find that hard to understand after the rather spectacular fall of this work, but it's happening.
I agree that any of us around for any length of time were both hurt by the assembly ways, and hurt others, though I believe we meant well and thought we were serving the Lord.
I hope we do hear what's going on in the other places.  We certainly spent enough nights of prayer praying for them.  It'd be helpful to hear how things turned out after all.
Becky Wieser, Annandale,VA since late 1987, out and very glad since Jan. '03.

[Mark Kisla]

M,
I too would like to here the testimonies of those in Southern CA. Assemblies deliverence from the bondage of the Geftakys system.
Mark

[Kimberley Tobin]

Hi all.

I'd rather not give you my real name just yet.  I too was in a Geftakys assembly for a long time.  I too have stories of how I was hurt (and unfortunately, how I hurt others) in my participation in George's system.

I'd like to thank Brian Tucker for getting rid of certain troublemakers who were trying to sow confusion on this BB.  Now that they are gone, I have a request.  Could this thread be dedicated to news of assemblies that are still meeting, especially in Southern California, and of how God is dealing with them?  I think when we all hear of the complete disappearance of everything George started, it will help many of us come to closure regarding all this.

I guess I'm a little dense.  I am wondering what info you are wanting.  You want news of "assemblies that are still meeting"?  But then "I think when we all hear of the complete disappearance of everything George started, it will help many of us come to closure regarding all this."  

I know that there are still assemblies meeting and I think it will be difficult to really give a clear picture as to what is transpiring i.e. "How is God dealing with them".  Why?  Because those who are still meeting are not talking with those of us who have left (we are looked at as divisive and railers.)

For example, I know that West L.A. is still meeting, going strong and that they tell their flock that they should not visit this website or others like it, that it is gossip and lies.  Placentia is still meeting and much like West L.A., they don't want to entertain any discussion as to what was wrong with the Assembly.  Santa Barbara is still meeting trying to reevaluate things (I don't think they are going far enough however, as until you are "out" and under correct teaching, how can you truly understand what was wrong about the assembly?)

I know that the assembly in the S.F. Valley disbanded but the members are scattered to the four winds and those who were still apart of the "assembly" when it disbanded, who didn't "choose to leave" are struggling.  There are saints who refuse to have anything to do with those who left before the whole fiasco in January.  I believe this is due to the fact that they didn't "leave".  The assembly just stopped having their meetings.  These people don't even see that there were huge problems with the assembly.

Could you clarify what information you are wanting in order to answer accordingly?

[mithrandir]

Kimberly,

The information you just posted is exactly what I'm looking for.   I'm glad that the Valley has disbanded, though I'm sorry for the people who are struggling.  I am praying that the other groups disband also.

mithrandir