A New Start

[Uh Oh]

I think it could possibly be helpful if someone wrote a clear, well-reasoned, scriptural, objective, unemotional and brief appeal about why it is unwise and possibly unsafe (especially for parents of teens and especiallly daughters) to receive GG as a spiritual teacher and role model. GG's male enablers no doubt won't hear it, but the wives, mothers and single women might.

Here is my well reasoned, objective, unemotional brief appeal about why it is unwise to receive George Geftakys....

Prior to all of this, he was an absolute freak to begin with.  The freak was a power monger to begin with, wanting nothing but money and sex.  Anyone who believes differently should have their head examined. 

He was enable by capable people like Mike Zach and Tim Geftakys, who knew if they exposed their fearless leader, that they would have to go work for a living.

With all of the information out there, mature women at this point have no one to blame but themselves if they get involved with this worthless piece of.... On the other hand, fathers - hide your daughters - Georgie's back.

[Joe Sperling]

"Hello, Myrtle Friedlander here. I'd like to do a simple test using these two materials"(points
to the table in front of here). "One is Saran wrap, and the other is aluminum foil. I'm now
going to take a wad of these absconded church funds" (holds a large handful of paper money)
"and wrap them in the Saran wrap. I will now shake it vigorously"(begins to shake the Saran
wrapped money, holding both ends).

"Oh my, see how the money begins to fall out of the wrapping and to flutter down onto the
table. Now, let's try the aluminum foil. Here are some more recently pilfered funds from the
collection plate"(holds another huge wad of cash). "Let's wrap this up in the aluminum foil"
(wraps the money tightly in the foil). "Now, once again, I will shake this vigorously."(begins
to shake the package violently). "My goodness, this aluminum foil really does the trick. Another
plus is that you can never tell how much money is inside, and that can be important if anyone
gets a little too curious. This aluminum foil is just perfect for wrapping and hiding money".

"Well friends, the test has proven conclusively that aluminum foil is the better wrapper when
dealing with paper money, especially the pilfered kind. It offers not only the strength you need
in a material, but the secrecy you need also. I'll see you next time friends. Bye."




Marcia--I guess it will be the aluminum foil

[moonflower2]

Georgie's back and there's gonna be trouble,
Hey la, Hey la, gefjackie's bahack.
Ya better watch out 'cause he's comin' after you hoo,
Hey la, hey la, gefjackie's back.
And yer gonna get a fleecin'
And yer gonna get some preachin'......

[M2]

Why would anyone welcome George to their gathering?

Unwillingness to see and face the issues at hand
expressed by:
"Everyone who reads the website leaves fellowship" (quote from WLA sister - existing assembly member)
Forbidding adherants from reading the website as recommended in WLA and elsewhere
Avoidance of open honest discussion

Unwillingness to honestly face one's own sin leads to willingness to overlook another's and a lack of clarity of vision
expressed by:
"If I have done anything wrong" type apology
"We were feeling the pressure under George" type excuse
When specifics are mentioned the other is accused of being too hard &/or not forgiving and forgetting.

George would not have lasted as long as he did if it was not for the "shepherds" who enabled him to keep the system going.  It is appalling that any one would welcome George to their gathering, but I find it just as appalling that repentance would not be expected from the rest of the faithful adherants as well.

If one was to do the math, in the 3 years since George's excommunication, the remnant assemblies have not grown but are diminishing slowly.  It would indicate that they are not affecting the communities they are in, but are only circulating the poison amongst themselves.

Marcia

PS. on a positive note, it is refreshing to note that some former leaders have truly repented.  e.g. Margaret, Jem, MarkC  etc.

MM

PPS. Jem, the brave mouthy teens business is news to me too.
MM

[Jem]

I don't have time to write much now, but I will try and answer the teen thing I started. And my apologies, I'm going to use a lot of Assembly speak because we all know what it means and it makes it easier to say.

As to bringing down George the teens weren't as clean as the websites, but they had a similar effect. As saints kids grew up they started asking questions. The few saints that were a bit older--and so had older kids--had to go through this alone. The Irons, Maddux, M. Millers. Most of these kids left fellowship and sometimes their parents wisely followed. But there was sort of this more mass coming of age, thus the beginning of the teen teams. The teen teams were to be a sort of corporate indoctrination, but when you get that much energy in one place things can go horribly wrong.

The teens did what we were all trained not to do:

They didn't take pat answers. This resulted in their parents having to think. When their parents couldn't come up with logical answers they turned to leadership, who came up with new twisted responses to simple questions.

They did talk among themselves about what seemed whacked.

Marcia, you said there was an "Unwillingness to see and face the issues at hand." The teens were more than willing. While we were all ignoring that elephant in the room, they would tug on our sleeves and say, "Dude, did you notice that elephant over there? How come know one is talking about it? How come no one is cleaning up the mess?" So many of them said "I'm so outta here" in one way or another. Some physically, most all emotionally. I won't say spiritually, because we were so messed up I'm not sure if any of us really knew what that meant.

Again Marcia, you said there was/is for some an "Unwillingness to honeslty face one's own sins leads to willingness to overlook another's and a lack of clarity of vision." Again the teens were not unwilling. Some of them, saddly, were boldly sinning and more than willing to point out everybody else's sins. I believe some desperately wanted "clarity of vision," but could see that they were in a Pharisaical, hypocritical system.

By the time everything hit the fan the honest, not always innocent, questions of our children had created enough unrest that people were finally willing to see the obvious. When all this stuff about David started to become known and then was followed hard by George's bizarre response and ultimate unmasking the teens were not in the least surprised. The grown ups were shocked, but the teens sort of knew it all along. We just didn't listen for a long time because we knew so much better than they did, and besides, didn't they wear their sins all on the outside?

That is sort of the short version. It wasn't clean like I said, it wasn't pretty, but the teens were a force to be reckoned with.

[M2]

Jem, thank you for the info re. the brave mouthy teens.  The teen years are a challenge for most families and an opportunity to re-evaluate one's belief system.

I noticed that GA.com has an update on WLA welcoming George back to "fellowship".
see: www.geftakysassembly.com/Reflections/Home.htm#whatsnew

Marcia

[Mark C.]

Hi Everyone!

 A very sad announcement, but certainly not surprising considering the half-hearted stand these WLA leaders took when GG was outed re. his scandalous behavior.

It just goes to show what many of us have warned about re. these "Geftakys Lite" groups.  Those trying to continue as an Assembly, sans GG, but try to keep the group going are not really dealing with the most important issues:

1.) Open and honest discussion re. Assembly history.

2.) An understanding the culture that GG created in these groups continues, even though he is not there and is technically rejected.

3.) A willingness to accept constructive criticism re. clear violations of God's word where applicable.
    (I'm not talking about speculative theological views here, but actual behavior that violates the very clear instructions of scripture; as in, accepting an unrepentant GG back into fellowship.)

4.) A recognition that there were/are strong forces that form dysfunctional thinking and acting within their group. 
    (This is not a "psychological" critique, but an understanding of spiritual truths--- as in the "blind, naked, etc." rebuke of Jesus to the Laodiceans.)

  What to do?

  " Go to this people and say, You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
    For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears and they closed their eyes.
    Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them." Acts. 28:26-27.

   This message is a quote from the OT and was addressed to those committed to a toxic religious system.  It shows the great danger of living under such false perceptions that pervert the true nature of God and his grace.

   Paul at this point in Acts turned away from these as he recognized that their condition was beyond any appeal to reasonable discussion.  They simply refused to have a dialogue!  Whenever this happens we can be assured that the refusal is based in a very darkened state indeed.

  We do, however, have a responsibility to sound the alarm and try to warn others; not just in the hope some may listen, but to help us in our own recovery to learning courage in our faith.

  Here I see a wonderful opportunity for some:

  Former leaders, as in Tim G., Mark M., Jim H., Roger G., Dan Notti, etc. (if any of these have a care for God's interests) could protest the action that WLA has taken and warn other groups re. the same.

 I call on these to take a responsible stand for truth and justice in this matter via a direct rebuke of the WLA leaders. They could again present the facts of the GG excommunication, GG's response to it, and the present dishonest contention of GG and his promoters.  It probably would fall on deaf ears, but what it could do for these former leaders would be a great step toward spiritual renewal.

                                            God bless,  Mark C.
       

[Margaret]

Hi everyone--

I think it would be helpful to publish some of the good commentary on WLA over on GA.com. Rather than emailing each of you individually to ask your permission, how about if anyone does not want their BB post quoted on GA.com you can PM me or post your objection here.

There is still quite a readership over there, by the way. January averaged 184 unique visitors per day. Resources, Links and Continuing Assemblies all get a lot of hits--358, 273, 252 respectively in January alone. In January Final Weeks was read 125 times, Rachel's Story 48 times, Kristin's 44 times. Biblical Exposition articles comprised 10 of the top 30 pages for page hits, averaging among them 84 hits each in January. Another interesting facet is the number of countries represented among the visitors--the top 10, in order, are USA, Canada (go Marcia!), France, Sweden, UK, China, Singapore, Romania, South Africa, Netherlands.

We are getting visitors who are not connected with the Assembly, it seems. But I suspect that there are also covert readers in the existing Assemblies who are secretly catching up.

Anyone can look at the stats, but the way. The URL is http://webstats.geftakysassembly.com/.

Margaret

[aragorn]

I was in the West LA assembly for 15 years.  This recent event reminds me of when the same hegemony of four in similar isolation decided how the assembly would respond to the news of George's sins and subsequent execommunication. Their response, not surprisingly, directly contradicted how God was speaking to my wife and I, but there was never an open forum to express such dissenting opinions with the current members.  It was late January 2003 when we made our  clean break.  After all the healing, re-learning of grace, and enjoyment of my family I've had in the past three years, it blows my mind to think my former comrades are still carrying the heavy burden of how to process all this information and find God's will through all the noise coming from years of rhetoric and conditioning about what it means to "stand for God's best".     

As far as welcoming George back - even though he is not preaching, I presume that he will be allowed to offer up his prayers during worship, and that it will bring back a longing to hear his message for those who are still susceptible to it.  So I would not be suprised if there is fresh momentum in the movement. 

This is troubling, but for people that have stuck around this long but really do want to respond as genuine Christians, these more obvious demonstrations of the movement's true colors are a neccessary wake up call.   

[Randy]

What does this mean?  My friend goes to the assembly in Riverside where George meets.  Do they want him to preach?

[Oscar]

What does this mean?  My friend goes to the assembly in Riverside where George meets.  Do they want him to preach?

Randy,

According to the page on existing assemblies on the Assembly Reflections website, Riverside receives George as "the Lord's servant."

According to Margaret, West LA is allowing him to share in the Lord's Supper, but not to preach.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

[Margaret]

To clarify the West LA situation:  According to someone in the West LA Assembly, they had George come to their meeting one time.  He sat in the back and wasn’t allowed to speak.  Basically he was allowed because Mike Almanzor still associates with WLA and Mike Almanzor is still taking care of George at some level.  They allowed George to come so that the saints could confront him and he would have opportunities to repent. 

[Mark C.]

To clarify the West LA situation:  According to someone in the West LA Assembly, they had George come to their meeting one time.  He sat in the back and wasn’t allowed to speak.  Basically he was allowed because Mike Almanzor still associates with WLA and Mike Almanzor is still taking care of George at some level.  They allowed George to come so that the saints could confront him and he would have opportunities to repent. 

 Thanks for sharing the above Margaret.

  I would love to be able to talk to the person who gave you the above update, as it stirs many questions in my mind:

1.) If Mike Almanzor has the job ("at some level") of "taking care of GG" (and I would assume that includes Mike's assistance of GG in his deplorable state of denial)--- why is Mike allowed to "associate" in WLA?  If WLA leaders are so interested in providing  "opportunties to repent", why allow the sleazy lawyer for the cover-up to have free access to the group?

2.) What exactly did these WLA leaders tell GG?  Did they say, "sit in the back and don't say a word because_____________", you fill in the blank.  I would love to hear the reason given for why GG should be instructed not to speak and to sit at the back.  Just telling him to do so without any clear deliniation of charges against GG violate God's instructions on how to deal with unrepentant sinners in the church.  It's not good for GG, MIke A., the WLA leaders and group, and as such is a woefully inadequate response.

3.) This opportunity for confrontation by the WLA saints that the WLA leaders provided is a wonderful twist on NT teaching re. how to deal with an unrepentant sinner in denial.

   Some comical parodies did come to mind re. the above twist on church discipline, but none that included new lyrics for old Hymns, rather I thougt of such as the old means of shaming that the American Puritans used of putting moral reprobates into the stocks in the public square. 

    Were "the Saints" supposed to give angry glares as they passed by?  Did the speakers that Sunday bring subtle messages that were obviously pointed in his direction? 

   All this beating-around-the-bush is so typically Assemblylish and very much not like what the bible instructs us to do in such a situation.  GG is clearly a former leader of a group (though he continues to lead Mike A., etc.) who refuses to admit a great deal of sinful behavior.  The bible tells us to "have nothing to do" with these kind of people and to openly rebuke them!  Those that support GG in his unrepentant condition are partners in his crime and share the same rejection!

   The fact that the WLA leaders have come up with the above rationalization for their acceptance of GG (albeit to the back bench) shows that GG layed a strongly unbiblical foundation to the thinking of those still running the groups that GG started.  GG and MIke should have been met at the door by the "door brothers" (they still use these guys don't they?) and been sent on their way!

                                                                  God Bless,  Mark C.

[brian]

i learned a little more about this situation. apparently the west la assembly decided to invite people who used to be involved in assemblies in the area before everything fell apart, and who are having a hard time finding a new church they are comfortable with. but george was the only one who showed up. he was told he couldn't preach and had to lay low, but he was allowed to partake. he left, and that was that.

when questioned directly about it, bill bradbury reportedly responded by saying they had prayed about it, and decided that if george is welcome to be in fellowship in riverside, who are they to question it? so george is welcome to attend and partake in west la, but not preach.

the rationale behind this decision is almost more disturbing to me than the decision itself. who are they to question it?? they are men who accepted positions as leaders of gods people! if all their praying and 'seeking gods will' can't result in any greater moral and spiritual clarity than that, they need step down. a known adulturer and abuser who has still not accounted for the millions of dollars that flowed into his pockets is accepted into their midst on the basis that riverside said it was ok?? and what was riverside's justification? something like 'we don't believe george messed around with those women because it wasn't confirmed by multiple witnesses'??

but lets face it, we are dealing with a few tiny groups of people here. is it really that big of a deal? probably not. but it is important to me that, if george and others are not actually going to be held accountable and pay the consequences of their actions (yet), at least they are not allowed to repeat the same abuses again.

brian

[Nancy Newswander]

Brian -

The very reason I finally left Chicago was because of the same response from a Midwest leading brother.  I had started questioning the situation with David's abuse in the early summer of 2002, but I wasn't getting anyone to acknowledge that this was a big deal.  So in August, at Sarah's wedding, I asked to talk to one of the Midwest leading brothers about my concerns.  We sat & talked for quite a while.  I had always seen this man as a peer, and someone who I respected.  We usually problem-solved/thought things through in the same kind of way.  But, after telling him of my concerns regarding David's abuse not being addressed & brought into the open, he simply responded something to the effect that SLO wasn't in his realm of accountability.  I was amazed.  So that's how these men in responsibility could sleep at night - they simply told themselves that George's problems, and David's problems, weren't their problems.  After that meeting, which really saddened me, I knew I needed to leave.