Things I Reject

[editor]

I was inspired by my critics (a sincere thank you to them.)  It is so easy to get drawn into foolish and ignorant disputes.  Sometimes, people say the most obtuse things, and try to make the most illogical, non-sensical positions seem good and right.  You see this sort of thing in the media, and in the political realm today.  A good example is how the Democrats say the Republicans want to poison the water, or starve children.  This is essentially a lie, but the stupid Republicans find themselves debating with these scoundrels, actually pretending that their baseless, outrageous accusations can be overcome with reason.  In pondering all this, I determined that unreasonable people are not to be dealt with reasonably,  it is tantamount to casting pearls before swine.  Instead these types of people are to be rejected, and ignored, or should they lead people astray, they should be fought against and put down.  Mostly, if they are rejected and ignored, they will not be given any creedence, but if we make the mistake of treating with them, we do them and ourselves a great disservice.

With this all in mind,

I utterly reject:

The notion that talking about the Assembly means I haven't "gotten over it."

The Notion that speaking the truth about the false things taught in the Assembly means I am bitter.

The lie that exposing a false teacher is gossip

The pharisaical idea that talking about problems is worse than the problem.

The application of "Deeper Life," or "Higher Life," theology that makes fellow Christians second class, or in any other way demotes them and promotes those who claim a "closer," walk with Christ.

The foolish idea that forgiveness means forgetfullness.

The lie that I can move on from error, without addressing the error.  (See the Great Divorce, by C.S. Lewis.)

The evil doctrine that teaches that keeping silent is more Godly than warning others.

The attitude that labels people evil and slanderous because they speak the truth.

Confusing Moderation with weakness.

Teaching that says you can't be passionate about what you believe.

Any so-called servant of Christ who refuses to examine the truth, and insists that "God will correct me," when in fact he has already been corrected and yet refuses to listen.

The false teaching that salvation is a result of my works.

People who don't admit that they were involved in a cultic group for twenty years, but want to have positions of prominence at their "new" church.

And I utterly, totally reject and despise those that would take the Bible out of context, twist it, and mis-apply it in order to serve their own agenda, especially when their agenda is the Geftakys Assembly.

Remember, this section is Grace AND Truth.  The above falls more into the truth category.

(The tide was wrong, and there was no wind, so I didn't get to sail today!  Instead, I am going on Sunday afternoon.)

Brent

[editor]

This is the last thing I will say using Sondra Jamison's name.  This is in response to her post, "rebuttal of Brent's post."  I really wish you all wouldn't comment on her "sight," because I wasn't reading there, and now that I am, it seems like their trash is getting way too much coverage.  Nevertheless, I am going to respond to this.

Sondra, you are acting very foolishly with regard to this thing with Heide and Judy.

First of all, I know Heidi very well.  She is one of our close friends, and she was in my house, with my family just last week.  We see and talk to her frequently, go to dinner with her, and she and Suzie have a monthly standing lunch date.  We bought a dog from her, get advice from her with regard to animals, and in the future I hope that she will teach my kids gun safety, as she is a firearms expert.  I know Heidi...and you don't Sondra.  Don't pretend that you do.

Now, you have made all sorts of statements about Judy and David.  You have not spoken to Judy, I'll bet.  Have you spoken to Rachel?  

I have.  What Heidi has to say about Judy is known as hearsay.  What Judy has to say, and HAS WRITTEN about herself is known as testimony.  If you are going to believe hearsay, you are a fool.  There is a reason it is not allowed in court, whereas things like journals and witnesses are.  I don't know if Judy has seen your "sight," but you should know that she manages a law firm, and she could possibly bring an action against you for slander.  The best defense against slander is the truth, and all you have is hearsay.

The difference in standards between what I used and what you are doing is stark.  Where I have relied on first person testimony backed by eyewitnesses, you are using one person's hearsay.  The two are not to be compared, but if we did, yours would stink.

The fact that you posted personal, hurtful statements about Marcia's marriage, made by an anonymous person, without talking to Marcia first, and without any sort of confirmation is outrageous!  You should be ashamed of yourself, but you are too much "in the spirit," to understand shame.  You glory in it instead.

Debate is fine.  I tried to enter into civil conversation with you, and you asked me to delete my account, which I did.  Then you go and talk about me on your website, and I am not allowed to post there.  Furthermore, you claim that I use "schoolyard" tactics, and yet you slander people, speak evil of people, and then don't allow them to defend themselves!  That is why your pathetic "sight," hasn't drawn the "moderates," you hoped it would.  

Please notice,  Matt is banned, and we don't speak about him, even though he speaks about me and others.  We won't speak about him either, because he can't come on here and defend himself.

Your thinking is so totally messed up, and you have no business whatsoever sticking your nose into Judy's affairs.  Heidi doesn't either.

BTW, this cuts both ways.  Verne had no business saying what he did about you either.  I'll bet you as soon as he reads this he apologizes.

I am going to alert Judy to what is on your website, and don't be surprised if you are contacted by an attorney.  Remember what my attorney told me:

"The best defense against libel is the truth."  

You have committed libel, and you have no truth to back it up.  Hearesay ain't gonna cut it, and in case you didn't know, Heidi is no Assembly apologist.

Take down your "sight."

Brent

[Mark C.]

Dear Brent !  
  Right on the money with the "things that I reject" comments that you made!!
   These folks that still try to defend the Assembly and it's teaching/practices are so far down the rabbit hole there is no way to go down there and try to get them out.
   I agree that the best advice is to ignore these folks as they no longer have a shred of credibility.  There can be no argument re. the clear set of issues to reject re. the Assembly that you mentioned.  Those that seek to defend evil, and call it good, and those who call those who expose  evil, evil, are in a very dangerous place and we should distance ourselves from them so that we are not burnt also when the lightning bolt strikes!
   I HAVE BEEN GREATLY BLESSED BY YOUR CLEAR AND BOLD PROCLAMATION OF THE TRUTH AND WISH YOU THE MOST BLESSED AND HAPPY BIRTHDAY EVER  !!
                      Happy sailing and God Bless,  Mark C.

[al Hartman]

     i'm going to go out on a limb here and break with BB tradition by not boxing a quote of Andrea's entire post.  (Has it occurred to anyone that these posts are twice as long as they need to be because of all the quoting?)  Anyway, i'm resisting the urge to play with the tag toys-- just read Andrea's post; it's right below this one.  Then you'll understand when i say "AMEN!"    i agree wholeheartedly.    i could almost have written much of it.
     But i gotta tell you, Andrea, while it is honest and generous of you to confess to the women's guilt in "propagating the skewed teachings" in the form of submission rendered, the men were eating it up & every bit as complicit as their wives.  It was all couched in the appearance of innocence, and a visitor would likely see nothing amiss & might even think it all looked right & good.  But we knew exactly what we were doing.  We knew it didn't feel right, but it gave us a sense of authority & power, so we did it anyway.  That sense was a strong psychological tool that was used by the enemy & his minions to control more of us, & more completely, than we like to think about.  But as Brent references C.S.Lewis's saying, we won't get beyond it until we have admitted it and dealt with it.

     Brent's posts in beginning this thread are solid & run deep, but i won't comment on them as extensively as i could because [1] i have butted heads with Brent in the past, because of which [2] my negative attitude points far outnumber my positive ones on this BB, so [3] if i start agreeing with him now, someone will create a kiss-up points category & before you know it i'll have a bunch of them too.
     So i'll just say that i don't disagree with anything he's said-- not even the things that may describe my previous misbehavior.  (But the guy is just so blunt, i really don't wanna be around on a day when he planned to go sailing then didn't get to!)  

al

[vernecarty]

BTW, this cuts both ways.  Verne had no business saying what he did about you either.  I'll bet you as soon as he reads this he apologizes.

Brent

I am not sure which of my many comments about this person (some of which were clearly tongue-in cheek) you are referring to Brent. Of course you are quite right if I said something untrue or even uncharitable in your opinion, I will glady apologise (whether or not I agree with your view but because I respect your judgment)
Verne

p.s She claims she has long ago given up rights to reputation. Has she? The fact of the matter is so far as this pitiable woman is concerned, I have not told half the story...never will...the day will surely declare it...mark my words......................................................................................


A final word to the wise. There are certain things about a person's  behaviour that cannot be fully explained saved by a clear understanding of what the Bible teaches about a seared conscience.... Get out your study tools and do a little digging. You will be surprised as well as enlightened. Folks, God in His widsom has admonished us to reject, not attempt to recover, certain kinds of people. Are we going to believe Him or no? Nuff said.

[retread]

...
I am not sure which of my many comments about this person (some of which were clearly tongue-in cheek) you are referring to Brent. Of course you are quite right if I said something untrue or even uncharitable in your opinion, I will glady apologise (whether or not I agree with your view but because I respect your judgment)
...

The only thing that I can think of was with regard to your thoughts on why she left.  To me it sounded like you heard some rumors that were spread about more people than just Sondra.  Although the stories told may be true in some cases, I tend to disregard what I here about reasons why people left unless I hear it from the horses mouth.  I have heard lots of negative things about people who left (as I am sure that you and others also have).  Perhaps it is true about Sondra's reason for leaving, but I don't know - do you?

[retread]

...
Please notice,  Matt is banned, and we don't speak about him, even though he speaks about me and others.  We won't speak about him either, because he can't come on here and defend himself.
...

Excellent point. This sounds fair to me.  I will try my best not to speak of M*.  Besides, it only ends up with more things I disagree with showing up over at the S* W* T* E* site.  Just an exercise in futility - not worth it.

[vernecarty]

...
Please notice,  Matt is banned, and we don't speak about him, even though he speaks about me and others.  We won't speak about him either, because he can't come on here and defend himself.
...

Excellent point. This sounds fair to me.  I will try my best not to speak of M*.  Besides, it only ends up with more things I disagree with showing up over at the S* W* T* E* site.  Just an exercise in futility - not worth it.

It's funny how this agreement has largely been unspoken nontheless fairly diligently observed. The rumors of our lack of civility have been greatly exaggerated...
Verne

[BeckyW]

Brent and all,
It may have been your birthday yesterday, but I think all the readers here got the present.  Your "things I utterly reject" post (sorry stats, don't know the #) written around 6:50 pm was so radiantly clear I told someone I almost needed my sunglasses to read it.
And Andrea, some very funny memories came to mind as I read your posts.
Thinking of those makes me esp. grateful for my husband who largely ignored all that other side of the garden stuff, even when I thought we should be conforming.  And he says it's true, he could care less what I choose in the grocery aisle, he has enough responsibilities in life without having to micromanage mine.
Well, we live and learn, by the grace of God.
Have a great weekend everyone,
Becky

[editor]

I was inspired by my critics (a sincere thank you to them.)  It is so easy to get drawn into foolish and ignorant disputes.  Sometimes, people say the most obtuse things, and try to make the most illogical, non-sensical positions seem good and right.  You see this sort of thing in the media, and in the political realm today.  A good example is how the Democrats say the Republicans want to poison the water, or starve children.  This is essentially a lie, but the stupid Republicans find themselves debating with these scoundrels, actually pretending that their baseless, outrageous accusations can be overcome with reason.  In pondering all this, I determined that unreasonable people are not to be dealt with reasonably,  it is tantamount to casting pearls before swine.  Instead these types of people are to be rejected, and ignored, or should they lead people astray, they should be fought against and put down.  Mostly, if they are rejected and ignored, they will not be given any creedence, but if we make the mistake of treating with them, we do them and ourselves a great disservice.

With this all in mind,

I utterly reject:

The notion that talking about the Assembly means I haven't "gotten over it."

The Notion that speaking the truth about the false things taught in the Assembly means I am bitter.

The lie that exposing a false teacher is gossip

The pharisaical idea that talking about problems is worse than the problem.

The application of "Deeper Life," or "Higher Life," theology that makes fellow Christians second class, or in any other way demotes them and promotes those who claim a "closer," walk with Christ.

The foolish idea that forgiveness means forgetfullness.

The lie that I can move on from error, without addressing the error.  (See the Great Divorce, by C.S. Lewis.)

The evil doctrine that teaches that keeping silent is more Godly than warning others.

The attitude that labels people evil and slanderous because they speak the truth.

Confusing Moderation with weakness.

Teaching that says you can't be passionate about what you believe.

Any so-called servant of Christ who refuses to examine the truth, and insists that "God will correct me," when in fact he has already been corrected and yet refuses to listen.

The false teaching that salvation is a result of my works.

People who don't admit that they were involved in a cultic group for twenty years, but want to have positions of prominence at their "new" church.

And I utterly, totally reject and despise those that would take the Bible out of context, twist it, and mis-apply it in order to serve their own agenda, especially when their agenda is the Geftakys Assembly.

Remember, this section is Grace AND Truth.  The above falls more into the truth category.

(The tide was wrong, and there was no wind, so I didn't get to sail today!  Instead, I am going on Sunday afternoon.)

Brent

I also utterly reject the idea that there are different levels in Heaven.  As one seagull put it, some Christians will occupy the "cheap seats."  I utterly reject this idea, for not only it is not seen in the Bible, it makes the means for getting better seats my works/faithfulness/choices, etc.  I'm sorry, the guys in the box seats indeed have a reason to boast, of this were the case.

I totally, utterly reject this idea.   I am going to sit wherever Jesus tells me to.  If He has a "seat" picked out for me, than I know it will be perfect.  I am going to trust Him to set me up in the right mansion.  I don't dare come before Him with an expectation of getting a higher status as a result of my choices!   What hutzbah!

Brent

[Kimberley Tobin]

If I remember my bible correctly, doesn't it say, "the first shall be last and the last shall be first."  Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, sounds much like if I'm expecting a front row seat, I'm probably gonna end up in the last row.  

I like Brent's expectation much better (not because Brent said it, btw, it happens to be my belief......no........my conviction! )

I too, utterly reject this premise, as it is self defeating and elitist, something which I repudiated when I left the assembly.

A little aside:

re·pu·di·ate:  disown something: to disapprove of something formally and strongly and renounce any connection with it.

Verne:  I too love the english language.  And I find it helpful when using words that some (I'm not putting anyone down here) may not know to give the definition.  It sooooo opens up the meaning you are trying to communicate.

In my early days in the assembly, as a single mother, I would use "ten dollar words" with my young daughter (according to the LB's wife who was discipling me.)  She "entreated" me to cease from using these "ten dollar words."  I rejected her entreaty and now have a daughter who is very well spoken.  I have always loved the language and wanted to develop my use of it.  

I love the words you use Verne, and well, the amount of them, maybe you can't supply the definitions.  But sometimes it would be helpful.

Just my 2 cents worth!

[Mark Kisla]

I was inspired by my critics (a sincere thank you to them.)  It is so easy to get drawn into foolish and ignorant disputes.  Sometimes, people say the most obtuse things, and try to make the most illogical, non-sensical positions seem good and right.  You see this sort of thing in the media, and in the political realm today.  A good example is how the Democrats say the Republicans want to poison the water, or starve children.  This is essentially a lie, but the stupid Republicans find themselves debating with these scoundrels, actually pretending that their baseless, outrageous accusations can be overcome with reason.  In pondering all this, I determined that unreasonable people are not to be dealt with reasonably,  it is tantamount to casting pearls before swine.  Instead these types of people are to be rejected, and ignored, or should they lead people astray, they should be fought against and put down.  Mostly, if they are rejected and ignored, they will not be given any creedence, but if we make the mistake of treating with them, we do them and ourselves a great disservice.

With this all in mind,

I utterly reject:

The notion that talking about the Assembly means I haven't "gotten over it."

The Notion that speaking the truth about the false things taught in the Assembly means I am bitter.

The lie that exposing a false teacher is gossip

The pharisaical idea that talking about problems is worse than the problem.

The application of "Deeper Life," or "Higher Life," theology that makes fellow Christians second class, or in any other way demotes them and promotes those who claim a "closer," walk with Christ.

The foolish idea that forgiveness means forgetfullness.

The lie that I can move on from error, without addressing the error.  (See the Great Divorce, by C.S. Lewis.)

The evil doctrine that teaches that keeping silent is more Godly than warning others.

The attitude that labels people evil and slanderous because they speak the truth.

Confusing Moderation with weakness.

Teaching that says you can't be passionate about what you believe.

Any so-called servant of Christ who refuses to examine the truth, and insists that "God will correct me," when in fact he has already been corrected and yet refuses to listen.

The false teaching that salvation is a result of my works.

People who don't admit that they were involved in a cultic group for twenty years, but want to have positions of prominence at their "new" church.

And I utterly, totally reject and despise those that would take the Bible out of context, twist it, and mis-apply it in order to serve their own agenda, especially when their agenda is the Geftakys Assembly.

Remember, this section is Grace AND Truth.  The above falls more into the truth category.

(The tide was wrong, and there was no wind, so I didn't get to sail today!  Instead, I am going on Sunday afternoon.)

Brent

I also utterly reject the idea that there are different levels in Heaven.  As one seagull put it, some Christians will occupy the "cheap seats."  I utterly reject this idea, for not only it is not seen in the Bible, it makes the means for getting better seats my works/faithfulness/choices, etc.  I'm sorry, the guys in the box seats indeed have a reason to boast, of this were the case.

I totally, utterly reject this idea.   I am going to sit wherever Jesus tells me to.  If He has a "seat" picked out for me, than I know it will be perfect.  I am going to trust Him to set me up in the right mansion.  I don't dare come before Him with an expectation of getting a higher status as a result of my choices!   What hutzbah!

Brent

There is no such thing as a "cheap seat" if you are in the presence of the living God.
I remember the first time George preached in Chicago that the day you received Christ all your sins are forgiven but after that one time forgiveness, you will be accountable for every sin you commit. I was heartbroken, it did'nt make sense. I read my bible, I knew I was saved and my love for God was growing because He did for me what I could not do for myself. Jesus Christ paid the debt for my sin that I was unable to pay. Now according to George, I was going to have to pay for my sin anyway. I reject that teaching.
I'm not intested in box seats or front row parking in the kingdom, I just want to be with Jesus Christ.
Then there was George talking about himself teaching the deep mysteries of God in the kingdom...I reject that. I want to hear what Jesus Christ says.
Any good work I had done or will do are out of my relationship with Christ and will not earn me a greater reality or position in heaven (Matt. 20: 1-16)

[vernecarty]

Verne:  I too love the english language.  And I find it helpful when using words that some (I'm not putting anyone down here) may not know to give the definition.  

Point well taken Kimberley. My mom would smilingly hand me the dictionary when I looked askance at some hitherto unknown expression...

I sometimes hesitate to define for fear of appearing to patronize BB readers. In some cases though it porbably would be helpful...like I-M-P-R-E-C-A-T-O-R-Y...

IMPRECATE : to invoke evil upon, to curse, (Latin imprecari  in - on; precari: to ask or pray...

Verne

p.s I was smiling from ear when Brent said he knew who Jaco was...I figured the few bassists or jazz-fusion heads reading here would too...
The best balllad ever written is A Remark You Made...  Viva Zawinul!!  

[Kimberley Tobin]

It is someone's own low self-esteem that makes them feel patronized when simply "giving information".  My oldest daughter thanks me today for using a diverse vocabulary, as it is assisting her transition to adulthood.  People have called her the "walking dictionary" and other such things and she attributes it to her childhood of a mother who was unafraid of introducing the "large" words into her vocabulary.  It does nothing but arm them with tools when they grow up and must interact with the world.

At least I won't feel patronized if you give us definitions, in fact, let's just say that from now on, if Verne supplies us with definitions it is for my benefit.

[editor]

Verne:  I too love the english language.  And I find it helpful when using words that some (I'm not putting anyone down here) may not know to give the definition.  

Point well taken Kimberley. My mom would smilingly hand me the dictionary when I looked askance at some hitherto unknown expression...

I sometimes hesitate to define for fear of appearing to patronize BB readers. In some cases though it porbably would be helpful...like I-M-P-R-E-C-A-T-O-R-Y...

IMPRECATE : to invoke evil upon, to curse, (Latin imprecari  in - on; precari: to ask or pray...

Verne

p.s I was smiling from ear when Brent said he knew who Jaco was...I figured the few bassists or jazz-fusion heads reading here would too...
The best balllad ever written is A Remark You Made...  Viva Zawinul!!  

Verne,

My favorite Jaco work was when he was with Joni Mitchell.  I went through a Jazz fusion stage in Highschool, but really can't get into it much now.  Joni's music was much more accesible, and also very complex, with layer upon layer of very subtle, awesome playing.  

Jaco was there, in the background, doing unbelievable things on what could masquerade as a Pop tune!

That's what I like.  His playing was restrained in one way, but never, ever more tasty and unbelievable.  Are you familiar with Joni's band that included Gad on drums, Jaco on bass, Mays on keyboards,  Metheney on guitar and  Brecker on sax?  If not, you should be!  

Check out the live album  "Shadows and Light," which features everyone mentioned above except Gad.

Brent

YIKES!! This thread is things I reject.....I don't reject Jaco.  Bad post.