WOUNDED PILGRIMS

[Mark C.]

Hi Sondra,

  I'm afraid, that the whole split quote thing, and trying to transfer what you wrote on SWTE, is something that I am unable to manage technically.

  It would be much easier if we could converse here and took one challenge at a time.  I am not in the least offended with your questions and think that you raised some very good arguments against what I have been saying, and I would like the opportunity to discuss these with you.

  Some of the questions can be cleared up quickly, where it is not a difference of opinion but statements of fact:  As an example, the Samaritan woman was corrected by Jesus for her heretical Samaritan beliefs by Jesus in JN 4:22, "you Samaritans worship what you do not know, for salvation is from the Jews." 

  The above verse states that Samaritan theology was heretical and the Jews had "the truth."  But, as I stated in my post, Jesus message was not a lesson on doctrine, but an appeal to this woman's needy heart.

   I think we do differ on how we interpret the bible, and this is probably an area where we will not be able to agree on much.  Also, the "deeper life -death to self" teaching is something that I strongly reject as erroneous.

   Re. the "weak and the strong":  This is an area that I have had to reconsider considerably, and you raise some very valid objections to my generalized classifications of former Assembly members.

  I get my view from reading the Gospel stories and studying the interactions between Jesus and the many different individuals who are recorded their who met Jesus.

   Some of these, prostitutues, a corrupt tax collector, an immoral and heretical Samaritan woman, lepers, etc. seem to all share one common thread: they were not making it very well within their religious/social culture.  These were generally considered to be the dregs of society and very far from God.

   In my recent postings I have referred to these as being "the weak," but not in the sense of our previous discussions re. the "weak in the faith, or conscience."   

   These examples from the Gospels of "the weak" are that way because their "infirminity" is not disguised, and even they accept the fact that they are sinners.

  In the Assembly, or similar hypocritical abusive religious communities, there tends to be two basic paths to continuance:

 1.) You harden your heart and disguise your needy sinful heart.
        This means you'll be able to move up in the ranks of the social order, but you will be moving away from God and actually allowing yourself to be made into a kind of monster ("Twice the son of hell (Mt.23).

    This "moving away from God" is not necessarily as extreme as GG's was/is, and I do not say there is no hope for recovery, but it is very rare that these individuals can ever take an honest look at what they have become. (Dr. Enroth has done an excellent study on what happens to these leaders after their own groups blow-up as the Assembly has.)

2.) The next kind of member is the one who just can't harden his heart to the awareness of his own sin.

    Yes, he may try to play the game that he is "overcoming" and "shout the victory", but his conscience was able to win out; he felt bad when he saw fellow members being put on the Assembly hot seat for not submitting to the status quo---he just couldn't "die" to the sensitivity within that there was something wrong with treating people this way. 

   This second individual was considered "weak," by the dominating powers that be, but it was that weakness that can become a great strength, for that is where that living water of grace flows to and empowers.

    To those thus dominated, and constantly shamed and humilated for their weakness in the group, there are also consequences.  They stay because they are told (and believe) that to leave will open their lives to Satanic attack, and that their old man will run rampant with sin if not controlled by the strict controls of the group.

  Yet, while in the group they know they just aren't "getting the victory" and settle for a life of tortured imprisonment.  Many developed health problems as a result of this double bind situation.  Some were told they could not marry, choose an honorable career that they wanted, or even follow their passion to minister Christ as they felt called to do.

  Yes, like the widow or motherless child, God does have a special care for certain ones.  He also has a special dislilke of certain other kinds of character.   In my example from the "withered hand" in Mark, Jesus did not like the hard hearted, but did have pity on the man with the infirmity.

  God's love is not some kind of general impersonal type of attitude, rather his love must be received as his deep personal interest in each one of us.

   To be hard hearted is to be beyond being touched by the above paragraph.  To be open hearted is to long for that kind of deep, satisfying, and very personal relationship that says, "yep, God takes a special interest in me and has a very unique use for my life!"

  Now, you can call this swarmy emotionalism, sentimentality, etc. but you may run the risk of being like Simon the leper and the disciples where they view with disdain the actions of the "sinner woman" as she washed Jesus feet with her hair and tears!! (pretty emotional outburst)

                                                 God Bless,  Mark C.

       

   
 

   

[Mark C.]

Thank you Sondra (a Good Samaritan) !

   I have a hard enough time trying to keep up with this BB much less trying to join another one--- but thank you for the invitation.

  I do wish you were over here and posting because I think that you are one of the few who actually contribute to profitable debate re. my opinions.  There have been a couple of folks who have questioned my use of the word "emotions' in conjunction with one's Christian life, but have dropped the conversation quickly without explanation.

  It's easy to tell someone, "you're wrong, have bad motives, are suffering from bitter reactions from your past, or are just plain nuts", but it is a much more difficult thing to actually try to understand another's point and to make a meaningful discussion re. it.  I appreciate the fact that you eschew the former, and wish to engage in the latter.

  Much of the problem re. our discussion probably is a semantic one: that is, I say "human or emotion," and a picture develops in your mind of the representation of a spirituality that is false and shallow; based on a kind of swarmy sentimentality some have called "sloppy agoppy."

   I will confess, that when I hear you say things like "death to self" a picture comes to my mind of a middle aged adulterer (GG) preaching re. the fact that he has successfully crucified the flesh in his life and is God's special servant! 

   Both of our strong prejudice's are unfair to each other's position, but this just goes to prove how much emotions do mix with thought to produce our perception of things.  Our conclusions, even one's we think Spirit led, are the combination of our whole personality, and must be held with humility; lest we try to elevate our opinions/interpretations to innerant status (we see darkly through a glass).

   You are most correct not to want to see Jesus as merely responding to his "feelings" in some kind of mood driven event, where emotions get the best of him.  Neither, does this represent the point that I'm trying to make re. our humanity having a part in our lives as Christians.

   If you read the strong words of Jesus in Mt. 23 (the woes against the Pharisees), and in other Gospel encounters, you will notice that he often castigates them for how they treated other individuals in the name of God.

   To throw widows out of their homes, and then to proceed to the temple to make long prayers, displayed a lack of sensitivity to the value of an individual's suffering (past feeling Eph 5).

 In a Christian, according to I JN. 3:14  "We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers."  I JN was written as a kind of "reality check" so that we could test all the high sounding spiritual jaw-boning with some common sense observations about the "talker's" life.

   In James, the writer very simply states that true wisdom from above is humble ("easily entreated") while those refusing to allow their beliefs to be challenged are designated as coming from "below."  Former Assembly members refusing to discuss their past honestly are thus illuminated as to the source of their true character.

   I say all this to point out that our whole personality (conscience, volition, reason, and emotions) are made in the image of God.  True, the image is now distorted by the fall, but each part has a function to play in our perceptions, attitudes, and behavior as now redeemed.

  Emotions, as in moods controlled by our physical condition, should be understood for what they are: just animal instincts: like hunger, sex drive, etc.  If we let these control us (though the most spiritual person in the world still posesses these lower urges) we are not controlled by the Spirit.

   Emotions, as in a sense of revulsion against someone like GG trying to romance a young sister, "in the name of God", and then his denying it-----------  This kind of "feeling" is a higher kind of function that interacts with our concscience, which is embedded in our soul as humans, and creates a strong passion to take action against such an evil!

   The Pharisees, as did the Assembly and some cults, made their members "hard hearted", in that they were able to disable that sense of revulsion, shame, guilt, etc. in some of the members lives (we see it continuing in some still in the present day groups, and unrepentant former members).  The other half of that is that some members were actually given a false feeling of guilt, etc. and controlled via shame based tactics (but that's a whole diff. post).

    The church at Laodicea is a perfect picture of this kind of scenario in a NT church.  Jesus was on the outside knocking to get into, and have a relationship with, them and we are left wondering if they ever responded to Jesus' call to repent.

 As long as their "hearts" remained resistant to his entreaty Jesus would be on the outside, but he addressed their moral/spiritual condition in an attempt to provoke the conscience to again feel guilt, sorrow, and a desire to set things right.

  I hope this explains better what I mean when I speak of emotion, in it's highest activity in the human personality, vs. the lower kind of passions that we possess, and how that impacts our day to day life.

                                                     God Bless,  Mark C.

   

[tenderhearted]

August 7th

Happy Lord's Day to you Mark:

===================================
QUOTE:

I hope this explains better what I mean when I speak of emotion, in it's highest activity in the human personality, vs. the lower kind of passions that we possess, and how that impacts our day to day life.

                                                     
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Sorry to butt into your conversation with Sondra:

I like this last line you wrote:

Human emotions makes up our personality, makes us do things out of passion, gets us into trouble when we act on them with out thinking.

It is also the human emotions that can get us passionate for the things of CHrist, right or wrong, if we didnt feel, we would only be robots , under control, instead of willing to give freely to come to God in love. Maybe it should be only under emotions, but it does affect our choices.

Thanks you for speaking on the human emotional side of things.

Lenore

[Mark C.]

Hi Lenore,

  You are not "butting into" a private conversation, but are a participant of a public means of conversation that all are invited into in.

   I did not mean to say that emotions make up 100% of our personality, but that they play a part in our life as believers.

   There are Christian traditions that relegate emotions to an insignificant place in how we function as Christians, and those that take the other extreme of using them as a means to "directly sense" God's activity in their lives.

  You are exactly right when you say that we can't "love God" without it involving our emotions, but it also includes our active obedience to God's revealed truth, no matter how we feel.

   It is a funny thing how we can spiritualize the understanding of the word "love".

  In the Assembly a sister was told not to visit her sick mother, instead of attending some meetings, because this would not really be love.   It was explained to her that her mother needed to "come to an end of herself," and if the sister resisted her natural affections "God would honor her by saving her Mother"!

   The same argument was used for excessive spanking of children at a very young age (starting at six months).  If the Mother "really loved the child" she would be willing to "reckon dead her natural mother heart" and thus God would honor the Mom with the salvation of the child!

   This goes to my point that just plain ol' human feeling should tell us such advice is not from God.

   What of Abe and Isaac and the lesson here to put aside natural affections in submission to obedience to God?  "Doesn't that kind of throw a monkey wrench into your whole theory on how emotions work with faith?" some may ask.

  Good question, but I will have to tackle that one at a later date for it's time for me to head to bed for another week at the salt mines!

                                            God bless,  Mark C.

   

[tenderhearted]

Thank you Mark:  I appreciate your words.


Our topic on tonight evening services, dealt with skill that we need to learn to walk with Christ.
The verse of references were on Acts 9:31 then to Acts 13

We need develop Skills to love God.
We need to develop skills to love other people, both fellow Christians and unbelievers, to develop the ability to relate to other people, to be more effective for the work of God.
We need to develop skills to love Word of God.

Emotion of love came up during the whole sermon.
Love God, Love other people, and to love God's Word.

Some time it takes years to develop the skills in the ability to be of any use to God.

Well thanks for the conversation.

Lenore

[Mark C.]

Hi Everyone! 

   This thread has become what I did not want it to be, and that is a blog where I hold forth on my personal opinions re. recovery issues from the Assembly.

    These views of mine are formed from my own experiences with the Assembly, study of this issue since leaving some 14 years ago, and participation on BB's that relate to cults/fringe groups.

    My views will resonate with some and others will find that they do not reflect their expierences at all.  I know that some find these comments helpful, others boring, and there are also those that feel that my views are counter productive.

   I don't believe that I am an "Assembly expert", as in being some kind of "Answer Man" for every former member seeking recovery.  My views are very limited, because they come from my particular circumstances only.   The only slight edge I may have is because I  have been out longer than some and have spent that time trying to understand what the Assembly is/was, and what it means to live a Christian life.

   My original intention was to draw individuals to share their stories here, and in so doing provide a wider context of information that hopefully would connect with the most people.

   Some may believe that the time has passed for such a work, and for those further down the path from their Assembly past this may be true.  However, as recently seen via Gay's sharing of her story, there still are those out there who lurk in the shadows, and some who have posted reguarly here, who have not shared their stories.

   If there are no responses to my invitation to share one's Assembly "testimony" here, I will share some of those that I am intimate with and intersperse a few comments here and there re. them.

   I will not delete these comments (unless they contain foul language, or personal attack) and as such it will provide an opporutnity for all types of responses to be posted. As an example, you may be a present Assembly member who wishes to defend your  views/experiences,etc.

 Please understand that your post may be criticized, from either side.  If you stray in your comments by using this conversation to attempt character assassination I will first point out to you what violates this rule and give you an opportunity to correct it.  After this, if you continue, you will be history.

   What is "character assassination"?   

  Assuming that you know the motives for why someone says what they say and using that assumption to kill their views as being without merit.

  How about Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc. who "perceived others to be in the gall of bitterness, etc.?"  As Margaret so well put it, such strong language is reserved for essential evangelical beliefs, and not appropriate to the vast majority of the topics discussed here.

  I know, I know----- there are those who consider mode of baptism, views on election, "N.T." type of gathering, etc. to be essentials.  If you have that view please try to keep your arguments rational and non-personal, and respond to criticism without taking it personal either.

  Some have made the charge that this BB often includes "vapid God talk", and we shouldn't be so shocked when we hear this charge being made.  Many of us spent decades where this kind of "talk" was a normal routine.  I have been very surprised to learn how much of this kind of false spirituality is woven deeply into my soul over the last 14 years.  Be willing to honestly consider the fact that this is a very real danger in your life now as a result of decades of involvement in the sick Assembly culture.

   This complaint above may be more a reaction to how the bible was misused by our former controllers, than an actual use of the bible by former members in a "vapid" kind of way now on the BB, but nonetheless, I have a suggestion in this regard.

   The BB is a place for discussion, not monologue.  On this thread some will respond to the invitiation (I hope) to tell their story, and so it will be somewhat like a monologue, but the intention is that it will invite disucssion.

  It is very difficult to respond to sermons or Sunday school lessons.  Yes, I realize that I have often sermonized on this thread, but I realize that this has been a mistake.  Sermons are great for church, but this is not a church, and I am a very poor preacher.

    Making long posts with a plethora of scripture references is too reminescent of seminar participation for many, and as such becomes worst than vapid; it triggers a strong rejection of whatever ideas you are trying to present.

   Try and put biblical ideas into your own words and make your presentation conversational in tone, vs. assuming a teacher's role.  This will make it easier to take for many and your arguments much more persuasive.

  I am very interested in hearing from others on my thinking and ask one and all to consider sharing their Assembly autobiography and point of view re. the same.

                                                       God Bless,  Mark C.

   

[Mark C.]

                                CARL'S STORY

  "Carl" is a fictional name for a real person that I met on another BB about 11 years ago.


    Carl, his wife and family, gathered in their living room and read print-outs from a website that Carl discovered on a BB designed to help former members of cults.

  As Carl read the "testimonies" of former members of cults he and his family could not hold back their tears.  These were not tears of grief or pain, but of immense relief due to the discovery that there actually were others who had experienced what they had in their former group.

  Carl was not a member of the Assembly, nor had he ever heard of the group.  Yet, I believe his experiences will resonate with some here, as the basic cultic systems that were/are operable in the Assembly are similar.

  1.) The group that Carl was in demanded complete loyalty (termed faithfulness to Christ) in order to gain an "inheritance" with the Lord.

  2.) Proof of 100% commitment was in submission to the leadership directives as being "God's will" (voice, vision, word, etc.).

 3.) Members who would not "die to self", and continued to allow "negative suspicions" re. the leaders and their teaching, experienced a loss of emotional support from the leaders and other members.  Any "questioning" was demonic and/or of the flesh.

     This last aspect of the group was a very powerful one for Carl, as he cut-off all previous relationships with those who did not agree with the group.   Acceptance by the group created a deep satisfaction in Carl that he had not found in the shallow local churches from his past.  Also, the former churches seemed so "worldly" and lacked real intensity in their lives, as he saw it.

   Carl sold his house and donated all his money to the leader in an effort to prove his faithfulness and moved out into the desert with the group to await the "soon return of Christ."   

   However, at the appointed date Christ did not return and Carl began to doubt the leader.   This was a watershed event as Carl began to see that he had been deceived and this led to his leaving the group.

  What to do now?!  Carl started visiting evangelical churches in his area, but he had a huge amount of emotional baggage that he brought with him into these services.

   He tried to share some of his experiences with these folks, but these Christians acted toward Carl and his family like the church members just discovered Carl had a case of Bubonic plague!  Carl learned that it was best to just not say anything, as it only increased his isolation with other Christians.

  He didn't blame them, he knew his story must sound like he was an unsaved cult member; and eveybody knows that these kind of people enter such groups because of serious psychological disorders (this is not true btw, but it was the consensus opinion among the churches Carl visited, and Carl had also accepted it as fact--- he was some how defective psychologically)!

   Now, some may say,"Carl needed some serious professional psychological help," but Carl was raised in churches that taught that this kind of "help" was "of the Devil" and had read Dave Hunt, and other books that made these negative claims re. psychology.

  He sought out pastors of various churches and received the following advice:

 1.) "One cannot be as deceived as you were and be saved----- you must be born again!"

2.) "You spent hours studying the Bible and in prayer in your previous group.  You need to turn the lemons of your experience into lemonade by taking all your bible knowledge and using it  for good."

3.) "You need to just get-over-it and get on with your life now.  Paul says, to forget those things that are past, etc."  Get involved in the church life in a positive way and form new friendships here.


   Carl did his best to accept this advice, but this advice had the effect of Job's comforters in that it only increased his great emotional pain.  He had received tons of advice on what to do, but felt like he was dragging a huge anchor as he attempted to move in the right direction. 

   There were those who wanted to help him, but were so intent on giving advice didn't seem to even hear what he was saying.  Their advice usually involved a "happy and hopeful" little phrase about "rejoice always", or something like that. 

    Carl just couldn't attend church anymore, as there were things preached (and social interactions) that triggered very intense negative feelings--- not just in him, but in his entire family.  People in these churches looked at Carl and his family as weirdos, and worse yet Carl believed it too!!

    Next:  Carl finds a place of hope and recovery.

                                              God Bless,  Mark C.

 

[al Hartman]

Following is a continuation of the previous post by Mark Campbell (See "Mark Campbell By Proxy" thread):

 
                                          CARLS STORY CONTINUED:
 
    Carl received a lot of advice, re. direction in finding his footing, but still felt like he was very alone and struggled to just live out each day.
 
  He was living in a kind of limbo world:  he believed he may not even be saved, and yet still hoped that his "advisors," from the local churches he had visited, might have been wrong as to how they perceived his true need.
 
   This is when he discovered a web site called, "Wounded Pilgrims", where former members of cults just shared their experiences since leaving their respective groups.  It was not a place for "counsel", rather a place to discover that you are not so alone as a former member of one of these groups.
 
   This discovery that, "I am not so weird after all", was the key to Carl's escape from his own private hell.  Carl had learned the doctrines of grace, and now knew that God was a God of love, but despite this was unable to enjoy that facts of these truths because of the deeply rooted belief that he was somehow defective spiritually/psychologically (and this was reinforced by his experiences in visiting the churches---both in how the church members reacted to his story and the advice that he received).
 
  This brings us back to where I began "Carl's story":  Carl gathered his family and just read stories that he printed out from the site, as a kind of Sunday morning religious service, and they all cried together in great relief over their knew awareness that they were not the only oddballs in the world to have been so deeply deceived!
 
   This awareness enabled these deeply wounded individuals to find freedom from a prison that was "made," bar-by-bar, via decades in a group that formed their concepts of God, self, relationships----- altering their basic perceptions in ways that they were not even aware of.
 
  Carl then got up the nerve to share his own story on the site and it was the most powerful "testimony" that I have ever read ,and had a lasting impression on me personally.  Carl then moved on from the site, as it had served it's purpose in his life.
 
   There seems to always be such wounded souls as Carl, who leave such groups with the desire to discover where they went wrong and how to find the path back to blessedness in Christ.   As we can see from his story just "finding a healthy church and new Christian relationships" was not only not helpful, it actually hurt him!
 
   While I understand that some scoff at folks like Carl and will join in with those that would consider him as one having weak character, psychological problems, or maybe even as being spiritually defective.   
 
   Only God knows if someone is using their status as a victim in an unhealthy form of self pity, or if an individual is more like the "Sinner woman" mentioned in the Gospels. We run the risk of taking the part of "Simon the Pharisee, Judas, and the disciples" if we automatically judge the character of ,and despise the condition of, folks like Carl.
 
   "Weep with those that weep", show us that there is a place in the church for those who can listen to those with emotional pain due to spiritual abuse.  Paul also paints a picture of how grace works in relationships when he cautions "the spiritual" in Galatians to bend down and lift those "taken in a fault" with humility---in the recognition that they are human as well.
 
  How about those that use victim status to avoid honestly facing their problems?  We are not God, and as such need to be careful in making quick judgments in this regard.  The next story that I tell will hopefully deal with that question.
 
                                                            God Bless,  Mark C.

[al Hartman]

Hi Folks,

Mark Campbell is still having difficulty posting on the board, so he sent me the following to post on his behalf:

 
 
                                                        Ann's Story
 
 
 
       Ann is not the real name of the person of which this next wounded pilgrim's tale is about, but I wish to protect the privacy of this individual.  Her story is a real one, however, and unlike "Carl," her bad experiences were in the Assembly.  The first part will be about her Assembly experiences and her post Assembly story will follow.
 
 
       Ann grew up in a home where her father constantly belittled her; providing a loveless and hopeless environment.  She moved out as soon as she turned eighteen and was successful in her desire to be dependent only on her own resourcefulness.  Her older sister, also a victim of her father's abuse, moved out with Ann.
 
   Ann received Christ after this, and was directed by the man who led her to the Lord into the Assembly.  Ann visited other churches as well, but found them to be shallow and lacking in the kind of strong commitment she observed in the Assembly.
 
   Her strong sense of responsibility,and dependable character,were immediately noticed by the leaders and she was heaped with different kinds of "ministry of service", such as giving up her Saturday's to baby sit Workers children, picking up individuals without cars and taking them to meetings, etc.
 
    There was one hitch in all of this "service" and that was Ann's feeling that sometimes these leaders were using her, for their own convenience, vs. a true "service for the Lord."  She would feel guilty that these thought's were negative, but sometimes she would express her views and this earned her a permanent designation as a "negative person."
 
   It didn't matter how many years of dedicated un-paid "service" that she gave to the group, because she was diagnosed by the leaders to have a defective character.  This defect in her "heart" was a "root of sin and bitterness" that must be ruthlessly put to death via her need to "stand against herself."  When she gave in to the "sin of negativity" she "opened the door for the Devil and his destructive behavior," she was warned.
 
    What made it so difficult is that these leaders never expressed any thankfulness for all her sacrifices, as they felt that Ann's "service" was her expected duty.  Any problems that Ann noticed with the Leadership children, etc. were instantly dismissed as being Ann's problem and thus ascribed to her "negative attitude."
 
  Ann, owing to the kind of home she grew up in, was very resentful of those who always tried to heap guilt and blame on her, and never having a kind and encouraging word to share.  Her mentality of independence was formed as a means to survive abusive relationships, and in the Assembly this attitude of independence was described as evil, but to her it was matter of survival.
 
   She was instructed to trust that these leaders were "from God and represented His government in her life", but instinctively she did not trust them, and was given plenty of evidence that they were not worthy of her respect.
 
   She married a brother from the group who lived in a constant state of denial, and would respond to Ann's "complaints" with a plethora of verses that attempted to excuse the behavior of leaders and turn the problem back on Ann.  This bro. was "positive and knew how to work in unity," because he knew how "to go the way of the cross."  He used "God-talk" to make a spiritualized defense of the group in an effort to "make" Ann submit to the demands of the group.
 
   This did not stop Ann from noticing the hypocrisy of those demanding compliance with "God's direction for her life", as these leaders always seemed to be free from the same constraints they yoked the lowly member with. 
 
   Ann was taught to begin the spanking of her child, and an entire system was developed on how to do this via "mat times" and using wooden spoons in the meeting.  When outside visitors came in and threatened to go to the authorities re. this, a new dictum was released by the management calling for a stop to this in the meetings.
 
  Betty claimed at this time that this discipline system was never taught by the leaders, thus dishonestly avoiding responsibility for it, and set about to start a new system where the "child training" went on away from the prying eyes of the public.
 
  When Ann confronted the leaders with their dishonesty she was viciously attacked as a "negative person" and some of these persons from that time on ignored her and openly gossiped about her as a person of bad character.
 
  To this day, none of these persons have contacted her and apologized for their behavior toward her.  There was one former leader who was made aware of Ann's feelings in this area, and he responded with a general apology where he said, "if I have done anything to hurt you I apologize, but Ann really needs to learn to get over her bitterness, etc."  As you might expect Ann was non-plused by this weak apology.
 
  What the above "apology" conveys is:  "I am unaware of any wrong doing on my part while leading the group, and if you were hurt it probably is your fault not mine, but if it makes you happy I will apologize for your being offended at what you really shouldn't have been offended at all about!!"
 
           Next:  Ann leaves the group and her post Assembly life.

[GDG]

Ann's story sure strikes a familiar chord.  Thanks for the post.  I look forward tot he next installment.

Gay

[grown up]

Thank You for this story. It certainly sounds familiar. I am looking forward to the next installment

[Mark C.]

Thanks Gay and Mario!

  I think I can post a short post and not lose it, so here goes a try!

                                        God Bless,  Mark C.

[Mark C.]

                 
                      Ann's story, continued

   There is, of course, much more to tell about Ann while in the Assembly, but most, as some have acknowledged, find her story familiar.

   Those that identified with "Carl's" story most likely will never post a reply, but I know that you're out there and please consider the lesson he provides for those of us like him:  You are not crazy, defective, spiritually/morally weak, etc. but are very deeply loved and valued by God!  The broken hearted have God's eye and heart--- and especially those whose hearts have been broken by those claiming to represent God.

   I'm sure if a post this long will take, so I will try and send it, and if it does, continue the story in the next post.

                                                        God Bless,  Mark C.

[Mark C.]

 I'm on a roll!


       Continued:

    Ann was in the group for decades, and some may wonder how such a capable, intelligent, and independent person would continue in such a place; knowing what she plainly saw in the leaders.

   Her husband constantly worked at convincing Ann that if "they submitted to God, by obeying the leaders and standing in unity, God would vindicate them.  The husband spiritualized the abuse, hypocrisy, and downright evil of the leaders as a kind of spiritual battle.  His ego was tied into his standing in the group in a way that twisted and shaped his soul  (we will get to the story of this fellah later).

   Ann was married to this guy, and so kind of stuck, but also believed just enough of this stuff herself to cause her to try to continue to hope that God would answer her prayers for truth and justice to win out in the group.

   The years went by, but no justice came, and finally the husband was beginning to see these things as well, and this led to their finally leaving.

   Ann's problem coming out was not like "Carl's".  Carl didn't trust himself, but Ann couldn't trust others; especially those carrying big Bibles and telling her "what God wanted for her life!"

   She was not going to allow anyone to control her life again, because when people did they only used her for their own selfish motives, and never related to her on the basis of love and friendship------- she knew only deep betrayl, and had no desire to form a close relationship again!

                                  To be continued,

                                           God Bless,  Mark C.
   

[Mark C.]

                                ANN'S STORY CONTINUED


    Ann's lack of trust in groups claiming to follow Christ did not mean she did not try to oppose her fear of meeting with other Christians.  She did enjoy hearing the word of God preached, and other such activities, as long as she didn't have to interact in the church social scene.

    She also learned that her initial joy of salvation by grace was not just "the launch pad" of her Christian life, but that it was supposed to be the entire means of her life in Christ.

  Ann no longer had any "doctrinal problems", but she still had serious difficulty in handling social interaction, especially with "church life."

  The first church she visited was a mega sized "seeker sensitive" church, and she did enjoy the fact that she could get lost in the crowd, and keep any relationships on a shallow basis.  The pastor preached a great message on the dangers of living a performance based life vs. a gift based life with Christ (perfect message for former Assm. members).

    The "worship" service, however, was more than she could take.  The service seemed dedicated to those parading on the stage and exercising their "gifts" of music, and seemed to her to be more about their need to be the center of attention, vs. any real worship of God. 

I'm not saying that Ann was right in her assumptions, but her lack of trust in the sincerity of Christians still had a very strong control in her life, and this led her to give a cynical title to these kinds of displays as, "my gift ministries", that she saw were all about the minister's abilities, and drawing attention to themselves, vs. building up the church.

   She also tried an old fashioned Baptist church, and really enjoyed the old songs and the fact that the meetings seemed more centered on God, vs. "the seeker", but this group would not let you remain a visitor for long.   They, in their very friendly ways, wanted to sign you up for every ministry under the sun!

   Ann was very reluctant, but agreed to take on some of the tasks requested of her, and ended up feeling like she was getting hooked into the same old rat-race that she had been in before.  Indeed, it seemed the group had the same kind of social dynamics that the Assembly had, in that guilt was used to "persuade" her "commitment" to the church.

   Next:  How can Ann get out of this conundrum?

                                                                    God Bless,  Mark C.