Why Leaders Are Responsible

[Matt]

.
   There is a major distinction in the Assembly between "workers" who were leading bros. and just local leading bros.

Ok,Tom Maddux and Mark C. You need to read the ENTIRE thread. This thread was started as a criticism of "local leading brothers" with St. Louis as an example. And MarkC, you're a different example than the current leading brothers. You were not a leading brother when the assembly system disintegrated, and so you're situation is not comparable.

 Another good question that Verne brought up was what the leaders did at the disbanding of the Assembly.  If they were so concerned about their flock, what attempts did they make to follow-up with former members by inquiring of their needs?  

Unfortunately, the "needs" of the former members involved a kind of healing process in which serious hateful accusations were flung at leading brothers. Leading brothers have an obligation to protect their children and wives from this kind of harrassment. George G. and David G are not within sight of most saints in the assembly, and the saints badly wanted someone tangible to blame. Who better than the leading brothers, right? If anything, the leading brothers are probably silent now out of shock. I imagine it was stunning to see the people to whom you've given yourself heart and soul serving turn around and slap you in the face. It's time for the saints to take on a little bit of responsibility - stop accusing the leading brothers and look to yourselves. You're all adults. What do you have to accuse the leading brothers of? Loving you too much? Serving you too much? Come on people...if you wanted the leading brothers to stick around, you sure didn't act like it...the Lb's don't want to cuddle lions.

[Mark C.]

Hi Matt!
  Even though I've been gone for 12 years from the Assembly it basically operated the same as when I was involved.  There would be "local leaders" who belonged to the "workers" mtg. in every locality.  This non-Biblical governmental body was abuse central and at the very least influenced the satellite groups.  To ask leaders their relationship with this group and whether they took a stand against it's teaching/practice is logical and could be helpful.
  If a given Assembly leader attended Workers meetings and chose to not follow the directions given by GG, that would be a good thing, and would benefit the members.  This should be reported so that the individual could be commended.
  I can not speak to the San Diego situation as I am unaware of the facts.   I gave the Valley as a recent example of those who sided with GG and the system and it was to these that I made comment.
  This idea of "protection from attack" of the former members sounds like an unusual set of circumstances from San Diego and probably not the norm.  In the Valley the "questioning" brethren were only trying to get straight answers and were being accused of outlandish things for just asking.  The inaccesibility of the former leaders in the Valley was only due to a lack of willingness to respond to the questions of those who were confused, not fear of attacks (violent or otherwise).
  Not knowing about the SD situation maybe you could share the details of these "attacks" against former leaders that would invoke such fearful reactions from them.
                                        God Bless,  Mark

[editor]

Hello Everyone  

I am back from a luxurious 6 week vacation.  I did read the board, but not every day.  I only posted once, but that didn't count,  kind of.

All in all, I would recommend the 6 week vacation to everyone who is beginning to get anxious, preoccupied, or out of balance with regard to the BB.  Perhaps I'll start a 24 hour help line for BB addicts.  1-800-XPOSTER.  

Anyway, I thought this was the most intriguing message to respond to:

The leaders are responsible because the Bible clearly says they are.  The passages are many.  I don't want to qoute them all, but if a person was to read the pastoral epistles of Paul, especially Timothy and Titus, they must conclude that elders and deacons are responsible as shepherds.

Good shepherd protect the flock.  Bad ones flee when the wolf comes.  I seem to remember Jesus saying something about this as well.

Also, most of the LB's, across the country, knew DG.  All of them knew him to be a Jerk, as Tom Maddux outlined below.  Certainly ALL of the LB's in CALI, Tuscola, Charleston, STL, Omaha, and Chicago knew him.  David lived and sponged in these locations for years.  Anyone and everyone who knew DG more than a little would at least see an apparent hypocrisy.  Most people recognized him as a brute.  (this is important, keep reading)

As for GG, I KNEW about his adultery in 1999!!  I wasn't a leading brother.  How did I find this out?  Simple, I did some research and spoke with those in his family who were never part of his ministry, and wanted nothing to do with George, which is all of them.  Furthermore, other churches knew of his sin, and had disciplined him for it in the past.  George was fired from his first pastoral position for......adultery with the church secretary.  Does this sound familiar?

So, the info was there for anyone who had a conscience.  Some heard the rumors and rejected them outright.  I understand why they did this, but as elders, they were biblically obligated to investigate accusations from 2 or 3 witnesses, which they did not!!

After the website started, and the "rumors and gossip" could not be deflected any longer, the leadership finally dealt with the situation in a rather dissappointing manner, on the whole.  There were a few bright spots, but not many.  There has been precious little zeal for repentance exhibited, but there has been some!

Now, as I mentioned above, all of us, who were around for a few years, KNEW that something was wrong, and we ignored our consciences and hid our heads in the sand.  The leaders are no more guilty than the rest of us, it is only a matter of scale.  However, all with knowledge are guilty, and that's the point.  

The leaders who know, and attempt to deceive, are frightening.  Other leaders, like Tom, Mark and Steve, left years ago, when it was not so easy to get the word out.  These guys tried hard, but had limited success. (so it seemed at the time.  Years later, the fruit of their labor is quite evident on this website and the fact that their material comprises most of the files that various cult awareness groups have on George.)  However, they did the best they could, and the seeds they sowed were a blessing to others, including me.  What is being said on this BB, will in turn, bless others in years to come, when they wake up and discover the truth about Tim, Testa and the others.

So, the Apostle Paul instructs us not to receive an accusation against an elder, except in the mouth of two or three witnesses.  He also says not to lay hand on (commend them to ministry) anyone hastily, lest WE become sharers in their sins!!

That's what the leaders who commeded George, David and others to ministry are.  They are sharers in their sins.  The question is, did they share one cracker out of the box, or did they eat half the sandwich and split the dessert.  Only God knows, but He does know and is not forgetfull.

Brent

[Matt]

Anyway, I thought this was the most intriguing message to respond to:

The leaders are responsible because the Bible clearly says they are.  The passages are many.  I don't want to qoute them all, but if a person was to read the pastoral epistles of Paul, especially Timothy and Titus, they must conclude that elders and deacons are responsible as shepherds.

Good shepherd protect the flock.  Bad ones flee when the wolf comes.  I seem to remember Jesus saying something about this as well.

Groans...yes we have been given the scripture about elders being responsible shepherds. Nobody is arguing against that point. However, think about this: many of the saints were angry because they felt that the LB's were following GG rather than the Lord - in which case the Lb's position as sheperd would be invalidated. Yet, these same saints are also holding the LB's accountable as if they were, indeed, appointed by God to sheperd them. You can't switch back and forth people: Either the Lb's were following GG and not God, in which case they never were true sheperds and therefore not accountable. Or they were following the Lord, not GG, in which case you can't accuse them of following GG and thereby deceiving you. I think it's strange, too, how we ignore the scripture about backbiting and wrath in favor of the scriptures about pastoral responsibility. We all have responsibilities too, saints. You cannot deny that you were never served and loved by the leading brothers - do you think the Lord wants you to chuck those memories in favor of the times you were wronged? We as saints have responsibilities too, believe it or not. We have a responsibility to love the leaders like ourselves, to be thankful for them, to pray for their protection and favor.

 I wrote to Brent personally back in February, and for about a week, I had a pity party with him, outlining everything negative that had ever happened to me in the ministry. The Lord opened my eyes to that though. However, as Brent will remember, I always said: "I realize it's my fault..."

Also, most of the LB's, across the country, knew DG.  All of them knew him to be a Jerk, as Tom Maddux outlined below.  Certainly ALL of the LB's in CALI, Tuscola, Charleston, STL, Omaha, and Chicago knew him.  David lived and sponged in these locations for years.  Anyone and everyone who knew DG more than a little would at least see an apparent hypocrisy.  Most people recognized him as a brute.  (this is important, keep reading)

As for GG, I KNEW about his adultery in 1999!!  I wasn't a leading brother.  How did I find this out?  Simple, I did some research and spoke with those in his family who were never part of his ministry, and wanted nothing to do with George, which is all of them.  Furthermore, other churches knew of his sin, and had disciplined him for it in the past.  George was fired from his first pastoral position for......adultery with the church secretary.  Does this sound familiar?

So the leading brothers across the country knew that Dave G was a jerk? That's why they are responsible? They knew he was a jerk? Why would they know that and not all the other saints of the assemblies where he visited? Come on, sir - that's ridiculous. The fact that he was a jerk is hardly grounds to demand some kind of repentance from the leading brothers. As for GG, nobody is making an argument that he's innocent. We are all sinners.

So, the info was there for anyone who had a conscience.  Some heard the rumors and rejected them outright.  I understand why they did this, but as elders, they were biblically obligated to investigate accusations from 2 or 3 witnesses, which they did not!!

After the website started, and the "rumors and gossip" could not be deflected any longer, the leadership finally dealt with the situation in a rather dissappointing manner, on the whole.  There were a few bright spots, but not many.  There has been precious little zeal for repentance exhibited, but there has been some!

The key word "some." Some of the elders heard the rumors. And 2 or 3 witnesses - did these 2 or 3 witnesses speak to every leading brother across the country? Now as for repentance, what do the majority of the leading brothers have to repent for? Opening their homes up to pray with the saints? Preparing Bible studies? Organizing outreaches?  Brent, you were wronged in the ministry and because you were wronged, you assume that everyone was. Think about it. Of the hundreds of people in the assemblies, maybe 30 post here regularly about how they've suffered. Even people who have left the assembly will tell you that the website does not provide a well-rounded view of the assembly. I know that when the saints in San Diego and I talk about the site, we laugh at it. It's one-sided purpose was to expose all wrongdoing. You can make a website from any church and only post their wrongdoings and make it look like the website for the first church of Satan. Think about the Rick Ross website. The assembly was racist because once Betty Geftakys said "black people are so lazy" in front of a black sister. Am i the only one who sees how silly that is?

Now, as I mentioned above, all of us, who were around for a few years, KNEW that something was wrong, and we ignored our consciences and hid our heads in the sand.  The leaders are no more guilty than the rest of us, it is only a matter of scale.  However, all with knowledge are guilty, and that's the point.  

Amen, brother to this: "the leaders are no more guilty than the rest of us." Again, I'm not sure why you think the LB's outside of the So Cal assemblies in question would be privy to information that the others saints of these assemblies weren't. AND..why would they be more guilty for David G's sins? It absolutely does not make sense? They didn't force David G to do anything. I'm sure a lot of leading brothers left the assembly for the same reasons as many of the saints - they were disillusioned and shocked.

The leaders who know, and attempt to deceive, are frightening.  Other leaders, like Tom, Mark and Steve, left years ago, when it was not so easy to get the word out.  These guys tried hard, but had limited success. (so it seemed at the time.  Years later, the fruit of their labor is quite evident on this website and the fact that their material comprises most of the files that various cult awareness groups have on George.)  However, they did the best they could, and the seeds they sowed were a blessing to others, including me.  What is being said on this BB, will in turn, bless others in years to come, when they wake up and discover the truth about Tim, Testa and the others.

Saints, we were NOT in a cult! These cult awareness groups are non-Christian organizations, beware of those. I'm glad you make a distinction here between the leaders who knew and tried to deceive and those leaders who did not know (the majority of leading brothers). Again, the willingness to blame the leading brothers is absolutely groundless.

So, the Apostle Paul instructs us not to receive an accusation against an elder, except in the mouth of two or three witnesses.  He also says not to lay hand on (commend them to ministry) anyone hastily, lest WE become sharers in their sins!!

That's what the leaders who commeded George, David and others to ministry are.  They are sharers in their sins.  The question is, did they share one cracker out of the box, or did they eat half the sandwich and split the dessert.  Only God knows, but He does know and is not forgetfull.

Brent

Brent, are you saying that you believe that most leading brothers are commending the Geftakyses right now? No, sir - that's ridiculous. Brent, I must say that I allowed you to disillusion me more than any of the leading brothers during my entire time in the ministry. I admit that I shouldn't have been angry about the North Carolina trip or the campus conference incidents. But you didn't give mel verses or Biblical counsel to encourage me to let that all go. You tried to rile me up by saying things like "shame on so and so" and encouraging me in those emails to Dave Lee in which i expressed all the wrongs he's done to me. I've talked to Dave Lee about you - he knows what I told you and he knows what you said too. You think you are acting Godly in encouraging people to be angry at the leadership - and there is certainly an element of revenge here in light of your own personal story regarding your involvement in the assembly. You were wronged more than the average Joe Schmoe so you feel the need to get everyone else to fling rocks and mud at the leading brothers who had served them for years. I think you are in for a surprise when the Lord does not say "well done thou good and faithful servant" for making the website and promoting anger. You are right: the Lord knows the truth. Lord bless.
- Matt

Oh Lord, grant that I may never seek so much to be consoled as to console...to be understood as to understand...to be loved as to love with all my soul. Make me a channel of your peace...

- St. Francis

[MGov]

Dear brother Matt,

Looks like you qualify for the position of 'adamant poster'.
You know I'm joking, but I am posting this on public forum for you to consider:

Let me point you to KingDavid(KD) 'a man after God's own heart'.
When he was fleeing Absalom, Shimei came and started hurling  abuses at KD.  KD reponse to Abishai(who wanted to kill Shimei) was:
2SA 16:10 But the king said, "What have I to do with you, O sons of  Zeruiah? If he curses, and if the Lord has told him, 'Curse David,' then  who shall say, 'Why have you done so?'"

and later KD protected Shimei again:
2SA 19:23 And the king said to Shimei, "You shall not die." Thus the  king swore to him.

Personally, I think that most LBs would have the attitude that they deserved  what was being dished out to them because the Lord had allowed it and  He does not make any mistakes - a humble response rather that of  self-defense.

An example from KingSaul(KS):
1SA 15:30 Then he said, "I have sinned; but please honor me now  before the elders of my people and before Israel, and go back with  me, that I may worship the Lord your God."

KS cared about his image and about how things looked, the outward  appearance. No real humility and repentance here.

What do you think?
M

[editor]

You were wronged more than the average Joe Schmoe so you feel the need to get everyone else to fling rocks and mud at the leading brothers who had served them for years. I think you are in for a surprise when the Lord does not say "well done thou good and faithful servant" for making the website and promoting anger. You are right: the Lord knows the truth. Lord bless.
- Matt

Oh Lord, grant that I may never seek so much to be consoled as to console...to be understood as to understand...to be loved as to love with all my soul. Make me a channel of your peace...

- St. Francis

Hi Matt

In what way was I wronged more than others?  I am not aware of this.  In fact, I am under the impression that I did more wronging of others than the converse.  Since you and I have never met, you probably know more than me how I was wronged.

As for LB's and their service, no one is demanding they repent of bible study, or baking cookies, prayer or pulling weeds.  We don't repent of those things.  It's the stuff like telling lies, being willfully blind, and sincerely deceived that we are to repent of.

When  a person finds out they have been deceived, like with OUR (mine and your) following of GG, they are to stop it, and follow Jesus.  Many LB's did this, many did not.  Quite a few stuffed the knowledge, violated their consciences and kept serving GG.  

That's all I'm talking about.  In no way am I suggesting that we are not responsible.  We certainly are.

OK, I know I must have said some things that are totally off base just now, because I was typing....so, I'm listening.

Brent

[Matt]

Hi Matt

In what way was I wronged more than others?  I am not aware of this.  In fact, I am under the impression that I did more wronging of others than the converse.  Since you and I have never met, you probably know more than me how I was wronged.

Why, brent, everyone knows how YOU were wronged! You put your entire ex-communication story on your website for all to see. You included that part about being shunned and such. It's an experience that the vast majority of saints do not share. Now, sir, I'm not going to outline every way you were wronged. I'm sure you've already done that!

As for LB's and their service, no one is demanding they repent of bible study, or baking cookies, prayer or pulling weeds.  We don't repent of those things.  It's the stuff like telling lies, being willfully blind, and sincerely deceived that we are to repent of.

I'm afraid the leading brothers did rather more than "pull weeds" and "bake cookies." The fact that you are trivalizing the ways they've served us is a testimony to your disrespect and ingratitude. I'm aware that people are not asking the LB's to repent for those things anyway. I'm asking people to remember the Lb's for the ways the Lb's served them - as the LORD would do. I can't imagine that ALL the LB's were involved in some kind of massive cover-up in which they "told lies" and were "willfully blind". How did the LB's coordinate this massive cover-up? by phone? by a mass email forward? If you will read Eulaha Long's story on the website, she admits that she had no idea of David G's sins until after she left. If she didn't know and this occurred at her home assembly, how would a leading brother in Chicago know? or St. Louis? Or Providence? The Leading brothers in San Diego didn't even know. And Brent, just because you say they knew, doesn't mean they did! oh...you got TOLD!

When  a person finds out they have been deceived, like with OUR (mine and your) following of GG, they are to stop it, and follow Jesus.  Many LB's did this, many did not.  Quite a few stuffed the knowledge, violated their consciences and kept serving GG.  

That's all I'm talking about.  In no way am I suggesting that we are not responsible.  We certainly are.

OK, I know I must have said some things that are totally off base just now, because I was typing....so, I'm listening.

Brent

Of all the leading brothers, how many are still serving GG? I can answer your Tim G. question posed on the website last Jan. He was down in San Diego on fri night and had dinner with an ex-assemblyite here. He's been estranged from his father for quite a long time. He's not even serving his father, how many LB's do you honestly believe are still serving GG? The people in San Francisco? Scott Testa? Because a few people are ignoring George's sin, we have to pin that on all the leading brothers by starting a thread against them?

I'm going to address a question that some on this thread had about leading brothers answering questions of saints. I can only imagine the venemous questions that some saints have for their leading brothers. It would be nice if leading brothers were omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent - you know supernatural beings who could answer any question and solve every problem, beings who had all the facts. But the LB's are just men, they're not God. Saints, you need to rely on the Lord - not the LB's. It's a wonder they could handle all the problems of the saints prior to the unfolding of recent events, let alone now. Let them tend to their families and get their own bearing's straight. You still have an obligation to be loving to them no matter what. By the way, if you need someone who is omniscient, talk to Brent. Evidently, he knows everything AND, get this, AND he knows how much everyone else knows too.   Lord bless.


- Matt

[editor]

By the way, if you need someone who is omniscient, talk to Brent. Evidently, he knows everything AND, get this, AND he knows how much everyone else knows too.  Lord bless.

Hi Matt

Thanks for your response.  I am OK with you having a different opinion from mine, in fact I haven't attacked you, but rather just clarified my position.  However, I am wondering what I did to deserve the statement you listed above?

Please let me know so I can publicly correct it.  That's the thing to do on a forum like this.  If a person puts their foot in their mouth, they should publicly pull it out.  I want to be that kind of person, so please let me know what I said that was deserving of that.

Your other comments are quite helpful with regard to this topic.

Question:

I had a friend when I was in highschool, whose father would buy his wife flowers all the time.  He provided well for his family, saved money for college, bought the kids cars, attended little league games, donated to the school, and everything else a model father and husband should do.  He did lots of really good, loving things.

However, he also was carrying on an affair for 8 years, even though he was doing these good, fatherly things for his wife and kids.  The kids didn't find out about it until the youngest was 18, then the beans were spilled.  They were devastated.

Question:  Was this man a good husband?  He did far more good than bad.  The only bad thing he did was adultery.

I don't buy my wife flowers that often, sometimes I yell at her, and the kids.  I don't miss many of my kids games, but I am not nearly as "devoted" as the guy above.  However, I have NEVER cheated on my wife, not even a little.  I have been totally faithfull.  He has done more good things than me, and was "nicer" and "more loving" than I am, so is he a better husband and father than I?

What should I tell my friend, who is still suffering as a result of his father's unfaithfulness.  Should I upbraid him for only concentrating on the one bad thing his father did?  Should I tell him to forget about it and move on?  Also, is this "father and husband" responsible in any way for what he did, or is it his kids fault?

Brent

[Matt]

"Now, as I mentioned above, all of us, who were around for a few years, KNEW that something was wrong, and we ignored our consciences and hid our heads in the sand."

Evidence of your all-knowing powers, Brent, as requested. Also refer to the thread in which you "know" that Tim G. is trying to rebuild the assemblies.

Brent, sir,
I'm afraid I do not see the purpose of your analogy. It almost looks like you want me to tell you that, yes, you are a better father and husband than your friend. I cannot for the life of me see how it applies to the leading brothers though. I don't think very many LB's cheated on their wives - ? I'm afraid you are in the class that expected perfection from the leading brothers, and, sadly sir, you'll always be disappointed. They are men, just like you're a man. You're a sinner, they're sinners. Everyone needs to repent...leading brothers, pastors of the baptist church, pastors of the lutheran church, etc (and get this, their congregations too!). But you worry about your own repentance. I'd like to see you repent for wrongly implicating leading brothers whom you could not possibly know for sure how much or how little they knew. I'm mostly concerned for how you view the San Diego leading brothers as you made specific mention of our assembly in the thread about us being "tight" with Tim G.

I want you to type this out, not quote it:
I, Brent Tr0ckman, know for a fact that Bob Starr, Eric Ferrien, and Brian Dom knew everything about David Geftakys' abuse and GG's squandering of money. I know for a fact that they abused the saints of their assembly and deceived them.
Now, to qualify this statement, type this, not quote it:
I, Brent Tr0ckman, also certify that I have supernatural powers that allow me to know what's in a person's mind. I know just how much every individual leading brother knows and what he feels about it. With these powers, I can adequately say without a doubt that Bob Starr, Eric Ferrien, and Brian Dom were involved in a massive cover-up and deception.

- Matt

[editor]

Dear Matt

You got me.  I can't reason with you.  I concede to you the victory.  You win.  Your logic and command of the facts is simply beyond my ability.  I don't know what else I can say.

People, I am not all knowing, and my dialogue with Matt proves it.

Matt, I am actually trying to help you, but I will cease from doing so from now on.

Brent

[Matt]

Dear Matt

You got me.  I can't reason with you.  I concede to you the victory.  You win.  Your logic and command of the facts is simply beyond my ability.  I don't know what else I can say.

People, I am not all knowing, and my dialogue with Matt proves it.

Matt, I am actually trying to help you, but I will cease from doing so from now on.

Brent

Sir,
Your idea of trying to help me (judging by your posts), is to get me to see things the way you do. You need to know that I'm not using this thread to defend every leading brother out there, certainly not any of the Geftakys. I have yet to see anyone on here make a post thanking their leading brothers for serving them for so many years. I'm also making an argument that all the leading brothers cannot be responsible because they did not ALL know about what was going on in Fullerton, SLO, etc. Are you able to make any positive statements about leading brothers in general without qualifying it with a "but..." statement? I know you can make a negative statement without qualifying it. But can you make a positive one without sarcasm?
- Matt

[MGov]

Matt,

I'd be interested in seeing the brothers you are defending post their thoughts so that you do not have to do it for them.

M

[Mark Kisla]

[quote author=Matt                                                                ( I know that when the saints in San Diego and I talk about the site, we laugh at it. It's one-sided purpose was to expose all wrongdoing. You can make a website from any church and only post their wrongdoings and make it look like the website for the first church of Satan. Think about the Rick Ross website. The assembly was racist because once Betty Geftakys said "black people are so lazy" in front of a black sister. Am i the only one who sees how silly that is?)


 Matt,
  Back in the early to mid 80s leadership in Saint Louis began driving home the concept of total commitment to "this ministry" What qualified you to "this ministry" was either being saved or brought to fellowship through its outreach.
  Another Brother and I went witnessing in a low income black neighborhood where 4 kids (10-14) on the same street received Christ. Two of the childrens mother was so happy and told us she was praying for this and offered her home to use to reach other kids in the neighborhood. We began an outreach in that home and more kids received Christ, once 5 in one night.  One youngster asked me if he could go to church with me on a sunday.Dave Geftakys met with me one day and told me to " shut it down ". I asked him why ? He told me "those people need to go to there own church"
 Why did'nt "those people" qualify for "this Ministry" ?
 STL leadership said and did nothing.

[MGov]

Think about the Rick Ross website.
The ssembly was racist because once Betty Geftakys said "black people are so lazy" in front of a black sister. Am i the only one who sees how silly that is?

I could not leave without commenting. Boy this says it all does it not?
If you are an African-American formerly in one of the assemblies and read this, please ignore it. Clearly, the point is proven...I have now made up my mind about this young man.
Verne

Verne,

I find this statement of yours quite amazing.  Matt seemingly draws a conclusion based on one bit of information he had; and then you draw a conclusion about Matt, based on the one bit of information you have.  Now this is diabolical ... just joking here

Maybe Matt has changed his mind based on Mark Kisla's post?? Who knows? Maybe Matt does.

God bless,
M

[Matt]

Concerning the racism issue Mark Kisla and Verne,
Racism is a subjective issue, quite personal in nature. Because the Geftkayses were racist at individual times, how can we say that the entire assembly was racist? You will find racist people wherever you go - does that mean every church is racist? Verne, I understand from various people that you are black and that you are bitter at Betty G. I cannot speak for the assemblies outside of CA, but I can tell you that assemblies in so cal were quite culturally diverse. These people aren't told to go "find their own church." Because David G, whose mental abilities are in question, did that once in STL way back in the mid 80's, we cannot say the assembly was a racist system. Just like we can't say the assembly was racist because Betty G. once said "black people are so lazy." I'm sure you have personal stories too, Verne, but you can't strut around crying foul because you were mistreated - racism is by the person, not a teaching in the ministry.