Evidence for Matt

[Arthur]

Matt, it appears that you need some convincing evidence.  Don't we all.  It is there on the ga website, but I don't think you have read them. You say that we cannot judge after having known only a few assemblies.  Ok, point taken.  So let's look at what eye-witnesses say about other assemblies.



From geftakyassembly.com:

Part I

Wayne and Pat Mathews - Norfolk

"A piece of the puzzle: George was distressed after some meetings in Norfolk, NE because there were several people there who had obvious mental disabilities. (At the time, my husband worked in a mental health facility and was a great encouragement to many of his patients, none of whom were dangerous, BTW) George made disparaging remarks about people with such problems and made it clear that they should not be at our meetings. His position did not seem to line up with the gospel, but George the almighty had spoken, so we put the puzzle piece away (to our shame)."

"Another puzzle piece: on a visit here, George became very upset because there wasn't enough money for him from the Lord's treasury and he was embarking on a journey."

"Another puzzle piece: he told a room full of workers about a time when relatives were visiting his home and needed a place to stay for the evening. He gleefully reported to us how he made it very clear that they wouldn't be staying in HIS home. They weren't going to force him to be hospitable-- haha."

"Another puzzle piece: David G. had a reputation for always leading the conversation back to sex. We were subjected to several of these kinds of conversations where he supplied way too much information that part of his life."

"Another puzzle piece: So much outreach, year after year, week after week, but hardly ever any fruit. One came in, two left..."

more to come....

[Arthur]

Part II

Denise Standford - George spiritually abused her at a joint workers meeting.  A meeting attended by workers from assemblies all over california--"as far north as Humboldt County".

From geftakysassembly.com,


The Saturday after her return was to be a joint workers' meeting with the workers coming from all over California even as far north as Humboldt County.  Before this meeting, George had Denise write a letter of repentance and apology to the workers.  George began the workers' meeting with ministry about the awful sin of walking in pretension and its inevitable demonic consequences.

When you're walking in religiosity, you're walking in externalities, you're walking in pretension...there is a veil that lies on your heart... If you will get real with God and you call sin for what it is, you will find, if you are open with God and your fellow man, your life will be flooded with light... Start giving the glory to God instead of pretending to be something you're not.  And if you continue in that way, you're going to end up being a demon.  You're going to be possessed by unclean spirits.  You're going to be a demon...You'll be like the man who had one demon in his house and he went out and he swept and garnished his house through his self‑reformation.  Then he went out in the wilderness because he had no reality.  When he came home he brought back seven demons worse than the first... I see people living today demonic lives.  Now why?  Because you live pretentious lives. Because you pretend to be something you know you're not.[2]
This is George's usual method of dealing with a problem.  In ministry, he would make horrendous statements about the person on the "hot seat."  In this case, he was preaching to Denise, who was present in the workers' meeting.  In George’s thinking, Denise was inwardly harboring resentment towards him and at the same time covering it up (pretending all was well toward him when in actuality it was not).  Hence George announces that she was living a demonic life.  And if she continued this pretext, she would become a demon.  In actuality, Denise was not pretending outwardly; all along she openly admitted she did not want to work with him.

At the conclusion of the ministry, he tells the workers that he believed "in discussing things out in the open."  This had been his practice all these years and that he was not going to change.  He then proceeds to read Denise's letter of repentance.  When he's done, he addresses the "toxic poison" which was apparently coming out of her.

I'm sorry to have to read a letter like that.  We could sweep it under the rug I suppose and don't say anything and then afterwards it erupts out like a bad boil because someone has a lot of toxic poison in their body... Every so often I hear someone say, "I want to tell you something, but don't talk about it."  Now when you meet that in the work, my dear friends, and you listen to me, when you meet that in the work, you tell that person if you can't tell the others about it, then don't tell me.  And you stop this -- whoever does it.  You know, "There's something I don't like.  There's something that's bothering me.  Or whatever, but don't tell anyone about it."  If you have something to say, you say it to the individual that's bothering you or what's bothering you or say it before all the workers.  You speak it out.  Because when you do that sort of thing you're just doing the work of the devil.  And what you don't realize is, especially if you say to people outside the work.  It's bad enough you say it to other workers.
Are you listening, friends?  Listen, I want your attention.  I want you to listen to what I'm saying, because I'm talking to all of you.  Now one of the commitments we make in the work is that we don't talk about things in the work outside.  Are any of you ignorant of that?  Do you all know that?  You all understand that?  And things that are said -- if you've got a problem in the work, you know you're in a school in the work, my friends.  You're not in the work because you've arrived and you're suddenly perfected and you're canonized.  You're in the work, my friends, to be perfected.
And there are things you're not going to like.  Especially, some of the things I say and do, you're not going to like.  But the Lord is trying to teach you.[3]
He tells the workers,

This is not the first time this has happened.  And that's the reason Denise is not my secretary any longer.  This is the second time, and the second time is two times too much already.  This summer we had a big donnybrook up at the workers' conference.  And at that time she was supposed to be very repentant and gotten over her problems, which she hasn't.[4]
Then he addresses Denise.

And I'm going to tell you personally, Denise, I want you to know and the rest of you, I still don't think you're over it.  Now you say you've been broken.  And I don't believe it.  A person who's broken doesn't behave the way you behave.[5]
He describes to the workers the "donnybrook."  According to George, she was "kicking her heels over Bob Ford and Dan Notti."[6] Actually, she had no issue with Bob or Dan.  Her issue was the same issue of not wanting to work any longer in close association with George.  She had spent the two days prior to the seminar alone, praying for direction and strength to confront George with her lack of desire to continue with him.  This was a critical turning point because there had been talk all summer of Denise discontinuing her outside job and working full time in George's ministry.  She came to the workers' seminar convinced in her own heart that she needed to be true to her own convictions and make known how she felt God was leading her.

She made the "mistake" (because, later, George accused her of talking to all the workers) of asking several other women workers who were aware of her struggle to pray for her as she planned on talking to George.  Before she got a chance to talk with him, these "confidants" had already informed him.  George stormed to her cabin, asked the other cabin roommate to go for a walk, and began an hour or so of verbal abuse and insults.  He was visibly angry and said, "You're fired!  Go look for a full time job!"  He could not handle the fact that she did not feel called to serve him personally, so he turned the tables and "fired" her.  He made demeaning remarks such as, "You're inept anyway."  She asked, "Why, if I'm inept, were you planning on putting me full time in the work?" and "Why would you employ an inept person for 8 years even against my preference?"  His reply was, "You were the only 'thing' we had around."  At that point she did become angry with him.

In contrast this is how George tells the story to the workers.

And I told her I wasn't going to put up with it.  And then I got up to camp and found out she was talking to other people about it.  And I called her in and I gave her a good talking to and then she blew up at me.  So I told her as long as you're going to behave this way you're no longer my secretary.  I fire you right now.  You're finished.  [He laughs.][7]
The next day he asked her through a messenger to come to his cabin to talk with him and Betty.  She agreed, encouraged and hopeful that he was going to respect her wishes.  Instead, he had deceived her.  When she walked in, there were about 15 other workers sitting in a circle, all of them rallied to support him.  For the next two hours, she was persuaded to repent.  And she attempted to do so.  Everyone was "rejoicing" at the end that Denise had seen "the error of her ways."  She was reinstated from being "fired."  She was told again there was a need for her to be in the work full time.  In essence, Denise left the seminar "convinced against her will," as the saying goes.

more to come...

[Arthur]

Part III

Rachel's Story  -- it may be a bit hard to see the connection, but the point is, if you would read the whole article, this abusive man was doing these things, NOT ONLY IN SLO, but also in various assemblies in the midwest.

From geftakysassembly.com


"1974-1977 David and Judy were sent to the Midwest. They lived with a number of different people in different places."

"In retrospect, Judy said David's behavior with the women in the Chicago sister's house, which he was supposed to be taking over, was aggressive and angry. That may have been the reason they had him come back to Fullerton. [It is interesting to note that David was never again, asked to head a sister’s house and only had brother’s houses. He was less abusive towards men then women, probably because the men could fight back if pressed too far.]"

"1978-1983 We moved from Fullerton to the Midwest and back again a number of times. Just before my brother was born, Judy talked with Dan Notti about her husband's abuse. Dan was a pretty young guy and really didn't want to have to believe this, let alone deal with it. Nothing was done to hold David to account.

While in Saint Louis, Judy gave birth to my brother, David Michael. She was sick the entire pregnancy. During this time David was gone on Itinerate preaching a lot. Two days after she gave birth to my brother, David was supposed to leave on a ski trip. Judy did not want him to leave, because she needed help in her postpartum state. David became so angry that he tried to smother her using a pillow, while she was lying in bed. While David was smothering Judy, she was kicking her heals on the floor, trying to get out from under the pillow. She kicked them so hard that she bruised them badly. She couldn't walk for nearly a week. David went on his ski trip after this.

David took her to the Houk's house in Oakland, Ill. While Judy was at the Houk's, David took me to Omaha on a trip. While at the Houk's home, Judy got shingles and milk fever. "

"In September of 1999 I got married. My parents moved to Cayucos a week before my wedding. They had Mike and Cheryl Zach[from Nebraska] staying with them for a month to help them with their marital problems. Mike and Cheryl were witness to the problems and abuse. During her stay Cheryl saw Judy jump up on the counter, begging David not to attack her. Cheryl later came to Judy and asked Judy to forgive her for believing the worst about Judy. She acknowledged that Judy was living in a horrible place.

Mike and Judy went to Betty to confront her regarding her counsel to Judy over the years. Betty flatly denied any responsibility. Finally she said, "If I did what you're saying I would be wrong and for that I am sorry." Mike and Cheryl, upon leaving promised to put in motion some sort of accountability for David both in his "work" and in his marriage. Of course, as before, this accountability never happened."

List of witnesses of the abuse:
...
"Greg and Marcie Holder – have known 14 years."  Greg was a leading brother in Spokane, Washington.
...
"Various brothers who lived in my parent’s home. This includes Mike Duwelling, who is now a leading brother in the Midwest."
...

[Arthur]

Part IV

Midwest and Tuscola History (by Brinda K. McCumber) - The whole article is chalk full of evidence of abuse and evil in midwest assemblies.  I will just quote a few highlights.

From the geftakysassemby.com website:

"The following account is the beginning history of the Tuscola assembly from Jim’s and my experience. As Margaret Irons said in her narrative of the assembly history beginning in Fullerton, there are a lot of other people who have experiences to contribute that would make a further complete and accurate account. I have found that our lives have been so intermingled with those of others that it is almost impossible to separate a lot of the details into just "our account." I hope others will come forth to relay "their account" as I think it will bring a deeper healing to see the bigger picture and to know that others were deeply hurt as well."

"The abuse we each suffered may be somewhat different in the details, but we need to know we were not isolated victims, that we need to identify with those who have/are suffering, to rejoice with others to whom deliverance has come, to know healing can take place, and to acknowledge our individual accountability in being willing to participate in the Geftakys ministry whether for a year or 30 years."

"In the beginning I believe it was a work of God, but in our naivety and George’s twisted sense of spirituality and manipulation, the Brother’s were not able to see what was taking place. George began to criticize the speakers and said unkind things about Dan Smith—called him a "pork chop preacher" because he got paid when he went someplace to preach, unlike George who "didn’t take a salary." Their testimonies and ministry were always filled with such love of Jesus, always directing us to Christ and spoken in genuine humility. George on the other hand was very dramatic, "charismatic" in his personality, boasted of his education and his "special calling" from God to a "heavenly vision." By now we knew we were part of that vision. He stirred things up, made it sound exciting, something new and fresh, because according to George, the mainstream churches by and large were dead, they had no real teaching and no vision for what God was doing in our generation.

First Ex-communication
Fred saw what George was doing, that he had no use for other servants of God, that George wanted control and that his teaching had flaws etc. Fred began to confront George and quickly became a threat to George. In 1973 Fred Boyer and Dave Bragg—who had stood with Fred because he knew Fred and believed he was spiritual mature and grounded in the word, were both "excommunicated" from the assembly. Unfortunately, Jim and Gerald stood with George. Fred and Jan Boyer and Dave and Doris Bragg were a loss that profoundly affected the assembly. George was now in control.

George put a stop to "guest" speakers except for Bakht Singh who came for a couple more years and also spoke in the Chicago assembly and in Fullerton, but that eventually stopped also. We did question George about this, but he in his way talked us into believing it was best, because these people just didn’t have the vision we had and it wasn’t just George’s preaching. After all, we now had brothers who were bringing a word from God too.

George always said there was nothing in Tuscola until he came, but he was wrong. Actually there was a wave of spiritual awakening that swept the country from about 1969-1972 and George just got in on that wave. Boyers and others were already working. The Houks, though a young newly wed couple had a desire to see God work in their community as well. And there were others that we just weren’t aware of at that time.

With Fred and Dave out of the picture, leadership needed to be filled. Cecil Smith and Denny Frederick were asked to join the leading brothers. Gerald became an elder and had been in "the work" from the beginning. Jim became an elder, but was not in the work until 4 years later, which we couldn’t understand at the time. "

<continued in next post>

[Arthur]

Part IV <continued>

"David and Judy Geftakys
David and Judy also lived at the House of Promise off and on when they were in the Midwest. Judy came to me one day and told me about how David would beat her. She told me how he would hit her on the chest, stomach, back&#8212;places that would not be obvious. She also told me about how David was always very controlling of her time and finances&#8212;which we could see, but he was always spending money on his cars and whatever he wanted to do. Judy told me about his smoking, drinking and taking those long drives that I could never figure out where he went in the middle of IL and be gone for hours, but was always too tired to go to meetings. I then went to Jim and relayed to him what Judy had told me. We were very concerned about her because even though Judy and I were not close (you couldn&#8217;t really have close friendships in the assembly) I knew that if she actually came to me and told me about her relationship with David that she was in need of some help. Jim and I talked to her together and Jim told her that she must go to George or he would have to. Judy seemed uneasy about telling George, but decided it would be better coming from her. I think she was afraid of what David might do to her, and certainly she didn&#8217;t know what George might do.

George was there at the House of Promise shortly after that and she arranged to have some time with him in the afternoon. Unbeknownst to George, I was sitting on the steps that went to the second floor landing at the House of Promise so I could hear what she told George and see how he responded. Judy told George that David was beating her, but it was obvious George didn&#8217;t want to hear it and he kept questioning her and asking her what she meant. She told him that David had been hitting her and how he was doing it etc. Ultimately his response to her was that "IF David did that, you must have deserved it!" That really took the wind out of her sails as it did mine. Nothing was ever done about David&#8217;s abuse to her. I don&#8217;t believe anyone really saw David hitting her during that time, but I believed her. For one thing, Judy would not have come to me, nor would she have been willing to go to George had it not really been true. Judy never had any money and very little necessities unless Betty and George would take her out shopping&#8212;then it was usually expensive things that Judy didn&#8217;t even particularly like. She would have much rather had the money and use it to buy twice as many things. I cannot put a definite year on this, but it was sometime between 1977 and 1980 because it was before their son, David, was born. George has lied all of these years in denying that he knew anything about David&#8217;s abuse to Judy.

I do know that Brenda Houk was witness to David sitting on Judy and hitting her just after she delivered her son, David, while living in St. Louis. Brenda had gone to St. Louis to help Judy with Rachel and she happened to see through a windowed door. Ken Teater had also witnessed that and stepped into the room, but David told him to leave. It was very unsettling for Brenda. (Brenda followed up on this later with Betty at a workers seminar. But that is part of their story to tell.) Nothing was done about David&#8217;s abuse to Judy even though Judy came to the dinner table (at David&#8217;s "request") with a black eye.

Twenty-five years ago domestic violence was not "open" like it is today. There were few shelters at that time and the laws were just beginning to change etc. It isn&#8217;t that the brothers here didn&#8217;t want to help Judy or that they wanted David to continue to abuse Judy (all of the brothers did not know). It was not something Judy told many people about at that time. But if Judy wasn&#8217;t willing to do anything and George and Betty knew and didn&#8217;t do anything&#8212;what could they do? I do believe the brothers in Fullerton had a responsibility to David. He was George and Betty&#8217;s son and he was sent to the Midwest as a worker. He should have been accountable to them. No one can ever make right what happened to Judy. It was WRONG and it was pure lawless abuse. The problem was that we trusted George and Betty to do something about it&#8212;just like Judy trusted Betty&#8217;s advice and counsel. We were taught that we "handle our problems within"&#8212;we don&#8217;t go to outside courts and counselors. We were so "spun in their web of deceit, twisted doctrine and fear" that no one could break through to George and Betty and it never entered anyone&#8217;s mind to call the police. I don&#8217;t think that is what Judy wanted, she just wanted David to quit beating her! George and Betty had created a power structure and surrounded themselves with young, trusting people who wanted to believe George was a true servant of God, and so we just prayed and waited, believing God would "somehow" take care of it.

David was never subject to the brothers in Tuscola. He was sent there by George as a worker&#8212;answerable to George (at least we thought that was how it was suppose to be. He never appeared to be answerable to anyone) and really just to spy on the brothers! George didn&#8217;t really know what to do with David. He was always Betty&#8217;s project. I think he sent David to the Midwest because David liked it here&#8212;away from Fullerton and it got David out of George&#8217;s hair!! George knew David would be loyal to him and Betty and he also knew the brothers here would not "handle David." David was a way in which George maintained control of the assembly. The workers he sent to each assembly were part of his loyal hierarchy and that was a big way in which they maintained control.

Actually, I wanted to be Judy&#8217;s friend. I admired so much about her. Not only was she tall and "model" material, but she was much more than just a beautiful young woman. She had strength, yet she was vulnerable, she had such a gift with children&#8212;they all loved her truly, she was obviously intelligent, a hard worker and always made things "fun." She was artistic and loved working on the banners. She had a wonderful smile and I think she always wanted to just have a "real" family life with her own home, children and a husband who cherished her.

Before we moved into the House of Promise, I remember one time when I was quite sick with the flu. One morning she just appeared at my house and took care of me. She did my laundry, straightened my house and watched my children. She just enjoyed being in a home. But, I couldn&#8217;t be her friend because of the structure in the assembly and the distrust. After all, she was David&#8217;s wife and George and Betty&#8217;s daughter-in-law. She could only be trusted so far. That&#8217;s just how it was.

You couldn&#8217;t really have close friends or special friends because it opened doors for conversations where you "really opened up" to people. That might bring questions about the leadership or about the ministry. Brenda Houk was my sounding board. I knew she had her own questions about the ministry and she would not go "running to George and Betty." We kept each other sane. You can only "stuff" so long before something happens!"

[Arthur]

Part V

Bill and Joyce Hines - http://www.geftakysassembly.com/Articles/PersonalAccounts/BillJoyceHines.htm

Ok, I'm growing weary of this excercise.  Matt, the address is:

www.geftakysassembly.com

read it before making any more obviously uninformed statements, OK?

Arthur

[Matt]

Hi, Arthur,
You really wasted your time on this one. I've already read most of the things you've posted. We've discussed all these before. You don't have something on every LB here, and I certainly never denied that there was abuse. This evidence only tells me that there was abuse at sporadic times and locations among a few people - something I've never denied. I'm not even sure why you brought up the Judy thing - not even people at the SLO assembly knew what was going on. It was a nice effort, though.
- Matt

[Heide]

Actually Matt you are incorrect. Of the 211 people who either lived with Dave & Judy or they lived with knew something was going on but couldn't put their fingers on it, exactly. Most of the accounts that happened in SLO were pushed off onto Dan Notti and Mark Miller on request of Betty. Our leading brothers in SLO didn't have much clue because they were kept out of the loop by Betty. Our LB's witnessed black eyes and scratches. Also our LB's were not trained to see spousal abuse. However, this does not make them any less responsible.  Ignorance is part of the problem. Most of the LB's have claimed repentance except for Roberto.

You seem to feel that not all LB's should have to give an account or apologize for any misdoings. I disagree! Every man gives an account. It is called clearing your conscience and your heart. If a LB has a clear conscience and someone comes to him and states something has hurt the individual, I would hope the LB would offer an apology.  This is not a pride issue.

** Hey Arthur! It is great to see you!!!!

Heide C. Johnson

P.S. I keep hearing how we are wasting our time on this BB but let me tell you something. It is MY time, not yours. One of the things I have hated about the assembly is someone who feels they can tell me how to spend my time and on what. So you can stop trying now. It is a mute point~!

[Arthur]

Hi, Arthur,
You really wasted your time on this one. I've already read most of the things you've posted. We've discussed all these before. You don't have something on every LB here, and I certainly never denied that there was abuse. This evidence only tells me that there was abuse at sporadic times and locations among a few people - something I've never denied. I'm not even sure why you brought up the Judy thing - not even people at the SLO assembly knew what was going on. It was a nice effort, though.
- Matt

<sigh>  Ok, let's take it one step at a time.

I've already read most of the things you've posted.

Really?  Good to hear.  What articles have you read in their entirety?

We've discussed all these before.

We have?  When was that?

You don't have something on every LB here, and I certainly never denied that there was abuse.

Haven't I?  While it is true that there has not been written a statement of the exact involvment of each leading brother, they are guilty because they were the leaders, guides and protectors of the flock at the time that these evils were taking place in their respective assemblies and they did not do anything about it, rather they invited and allowed George and David to continue to preach and teach and give counsel to the sheep that they were supposed to protect.

This evidence only tells me that there was abuse at sporadic times and locations among a few people - something I've never denied.

Your choice of the word, "sporadic" is incorrect.  
sporadic -
1. Occurring at irregular intervals; having no pattern or order in time.
2. Appearing singly or at widely scattered localities, as a plant or disease.
3. Isolated; unique

These abuses were not sporadic, rather they were frequent and continual. I will post the entire list of references if need be.  However, it is obvious, if you've read all of the articles.

I'm not even sure why you brought up the Judy thing - not even people at the SLO assembly knew what was going on.

Ah, but the leaders did.  And not just the leaders in SLO.  Leaders knew about it in Fullerton, and the midwest as well, as the evidence I submitted shows.  

I agree with you that not every leading brother had the same amount of knowledge or the same level of culpability, nor have all the leading brothers commited all of the same sins.  However, each has committed the sin of allowing sprititual abuse to take place and  allowed false teachings to be taught in the flock that they were supposed to protect.  Furthermore, they were in league with a most wicked man, namely George.  By saying, "in league with", I mean that they approved of him as a person, a Biblical teacher, and invited him and/or allowed him to speak at their assemblies.

Before you deny this, answer me this question.  Did the San Diego assembly have a tape meeting where they would listen to George's tapes?  
Here's another:  Did the leading brothers in San Diego encourage members of the SD assembly to go to the seminar?
And a couple more: Did you ever hear the leading brothers in SD say that George is a godly man, or were there times when George would visit and the leading brothers would announce that George was available for times of counseling?

Arthur

[Arthur]

Actually Matt you are incorrect. Of the 211 people who either lived with Dave & Judy or they lived with knew something was going on but couldn't put their fingers on it, exactly.

211 is a lot of people.  I can attest to noticing the same thing, seeing as how I lived there also.  I don't see who wouldn't.  It's like living with and 800-pound gorilla.  You can't help but notice the smell...or the fits of rage.

Arthur

[Mark Kisla]

P.S. I keep hearing how we are wasting our time on this BB but let me tell you something. It is MY time, not yours. One of the things I have hated about the assembly is someone who feels they can tell me how to spend my time and on what. So you can stop trying now. It is a mute point~!-
 
Heide ,
I agree with You.
I can also appreciate the bb as a place where a Christian can say what they think and get feedback. This would'nt happen in the assembly because if you opposed anything of G&B system and they found out, G&B would send  the LBs on you and if the LBs did'nt obey G&B; their demotion was put in motion.
  Mark

[Oscar]

I would like to add something to the discussion about the "innocent" leading brothers.

1. Every leading brother, in every assembly, was appointed by George Geftakys.  Sometimes this was done on the recommendation of others, but GG would discuss it with the workers that knew the man well.  Tim G, Jim H, Mike Z all figured in this.  He would also question the local workers at regional worker's meetings.

So, before the SD, or any other assembly's leading brothers were recognized they were "approved" by GG.  They could also be removed by GG at a moment's notice.  (In doing this, all leading brothers participated in denying to God's people their right to fellowship in an independent local congregation).

2.  The financial practices of GG were definitly abusive.

  Teaching people to tithe is false teaching.  I am well aware that many churches do this, especially the (semi) Reformed churches.  They are not, however, alone.  This error comes from looking to the Law of Moses as a guide for Christian living.  The NT standard is 2 Cor. 9:7:  "Let each one of you do just as he has purposed in his heart; not grudgingly or under compulsion; for God loves a cheerful giver."  The tenth required of Israel was linked to the possession of the land and blessings from God through good rainfall.  Malachi 3:10.  

There is much more to say on this subject, but this is enough to establish my point.

2. GG taught that gaining one's inheritance was contingent upon faithfulness in all things pertaining to godliness.  Tithing was included in this.  In other words, people were taught to live in fear that by failing in some detail they would lose out eternally!  Extorting money from Christians, or anyone else, by threatening them with God's wrath and judgement IS ABUSIVE!

3.  All leading brothers read their Bibles.  They all knew what the Bible says in 2 Cor. 8:18-22.  Open disclosure of financial dealings, multiple witnesses to what is done with money, in other words, accountability is clearly taught.

4. NO leading brother, in any assembly I ever heard of, EVER refused to follow GG's instructions on transmitting the money to Fullerton.  NO leading brother that I ever heard of, (other than myself at the very end), challenged GG on his unbiblical practices.  

(If any leading brother did this I will most joyfully admit this once I am informed of the fact.)

5. Therefore ALL leading brothers, in ALL assemblies, were guilty of this particular abuse.  AND there are many other abuses that could be added.

6.  That does not mean that leading brothers had no love for the saints, it just means that they were blind leaders of the blind in many respects.

Thomas Maddux

[Mark Kisla]

 I have wondered and hoped that more former LBs and workers will post on this BB. I think it will take awhile.
 One thing the Lord has used this bb to do in my life is remove any doubt that there was corruption by design.
In times of weakness  a deep seed  would sprout up, 'What if I was wrong about the Assembly'? That seed has been removed by the truth shared from the mouth of many witnesses and the Word of God.

[d3z]

I know this posting is a little bit to late:

Before you deny this, answer me this question.  Did the San Diego assembly have a tape meeting where they would listen to George's tapes?  
Here's another:  Did the leading brothers in San Diego encourage members of the SD assembly to go to the seminar?
And a couple more: Did you ever hear the leading brothers in SD say that George is a godly man, or were there times when George would visit and the leading brothers would announce that George was available for times of counseling?

Yes, yes, yes, and yes.

The tape meetings were exclusively devoted to listening to George's tapes, usually from seminars many years back.  Not very many people came, but the message was conveyed that everyone was supposed to go.

This attitude that everyone was supposed to be involved in everything was very pervasive. Gift had nothing to do with involvement or "exercise".  Although, amusingly, after one brother got up to preach first, and delivered a particularly bad word, another brother got up and preached about gift.  He stated that not all men should be preaching.  He was not a leading brother.

The LBs made us feel that not going to the seminar was like not being "in fellowship".  In fact, just missing too many meetings meant you were well on your way down the road of perdition.  George's visits were treated almost like the apostle Paul were coming to visit.  There was extra invitation, and nobody would dare miss that meeting.

Dave

[Eulaha L. Long]

Heide,

YOU GO GIRL!!!