I think it leaves us with this question? What do you think people should do whose lives, families, marriages, children, etc. were devastated by George and Betty Geftakys and their evil system?
-shrug it off?
-say, "oh well, better luck next time."
-forgive and forget (easier said than done)
-try, try, try to be a 'good" Christian who prays and smiles and acts like nothing is wrong (just like the "good old days").

Many of us need this forum to exchange ideas and experiences. I personally know people who don't seem to need to ever look back and I know others who must look back and reflect and ponder what has happened in order to move forward. I think it is important to respect that. This is a board where anger, pain, humor, etc. is permitted. It is a safe place to express what many of us could not express for years and years. Give us a break!
PM

I just saw the original post and tried to get caught up on what everyone was saying, but forgive me if I am rehashing something someone else has said:
-----------------------------

I guess three years isn't too long of a time if she really has to stick it out.  I'm glad she didn't commit to God to, say, live in the North Pole for 20.

Seriously, why does she feel God wants her to stay wherever she is?  How is God going to benefit with her being there as opposed to, say Yuma, Arizona?

More importantly, how did God give her this command?   I never experienced God talking to me directly especially about where to live and how long.  I would be interested in knowing what that is like.  I suppose if God told her directly (and there would be no mistake if He did as His voice tends to be unmistakably thunderous) or through an Angel appearing to her, I would probably lean towards sticking out the three years.

If God used a gobetween such as a leading brother to convey this information perhaps a simple phone call to the brother saying, "since we no longer have a church, any problem with me moving out of the area?"  That should clear things up.

Or, did she made it up herself thinking that by making such a commitment she was somehow doing God a favor?  Like the guy who groans in dispair because he has to speedread tonight 20 chapters in the Bible to get caught up with his "Bible in a year" commitment.  You know, to keep his commitment.  I hardly think such a negative ordeal is doing anyone a favor.

In this case, maybe its just better to drop the white knuckle martre approach and confess to God that she is just a silly child who at one time had an erroneous perspective on what is pleasing to God.

Or, she can sit still and be miserable for three years while the rest of the world moves on.  Maybe God will be greatly honored at such commitment and service.  But, I doubt it.

Thinking along the lines of keeping commitments, I was perplexed by the following: I was always told that just because some situation in our lives gets difficult, it doesn't mean that we should just abandon ship.  I agree to a certain extent, but I do not feel it is SIN to want to abandon ship.  Take the Assembly, for instance.  Many people left before all this excommunication stuff came out, and many of us were told that we were avoiging the cross in our lives by leaving, "just because things got difficult".  And, if one is to be steward over great things, one must be willing to steward the difficult things.

I agree, it is not sin to "abandon ship".  Quite the opposite can be the case.  GG is dependent on his followers.  Many of his followers believed that they depended on him, but he is really the one who depended on them to practice his wicked ways.  If he has no followers to enslave, then the means that he used to practice his wickedness will disappear.  If you don't want to partake in his wickedness, then not only is it not sin to leave, but it is your obligation to leave. He only exists through his followers.  Unfortunately he has convinced a good many people that they are the ones who are dependent on him.  I guess that if people can be fooled to reverence men like Hitler and make them their leader, they can also be fooled to reverence men like Geftakys.  Sad, very sad.

Regarding commitments, I read this last night from The Lord of the Rings, Fellowship of the Ring (Book II, Chapter 3).  The point made in this passage by Mr. Tolkien would have been a wise thing to consider before making many of the unbreakable commitments that I made to the assembly.


Elrond said, "The Ring-bearer is setting out on the Quest of Mount Doom.  On him alone is any charge laid...The others go with him as free companions, to help him on his way.  You may tarry, or come back, or turn aside into other paths, as chance follows.  The further you go the less easy will it be to withdraw; yet no oath or bond is laid on you to go further than you will.  For you do not yet know the strength of your hearts, and you cannot forsee what each may meet upon the road."

"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens," said Gimli.

"Maybe," said Elrond, "but let him not vow to walk in the dark, who has not seen the nightfall."

"Yet sworn word may strengthen quaking heart," said Gimli.

"Or break it," said Elrond.  


Making a rigid commitment without knowing what lies ahead may break the heart.  So true, so true.

If you are thinking that marriage and sailing are synonomous, I don't agree.  I told Suzie, till death do us part.  That means I am going down with the ship, unless we reach a safe harbor first.

Boats, while often a type of mistress, are not "till death do us part," stuff.  We carry life-rafts, emergency ditch kits, radios, etc.

Marriage is not something you enter into with an escape clause.  If you think you need one, don't get married.

Brent

Eulaha,
     I understand exactly what you mean:  In a sense we were all "mat-trained" to behave in certain ways, & the habits of years are not easily changed.  This BB is surely the best support group we could ask for.

Almost all marriages can be saved?

How would you know?  Have you been almost all marriages?  

Seriously,

And when do we hear from all the children who grew up in homes where the parents 'stuck together for the good of the children' and the children suffered more than they would have if the marriage was dissolved.  Sometimes, we presume we know what's best for everyone.  

I too have made this mistake.  It is a mistake.  You are mistaken.

I think.

Delila