The Assembly experience: Were there any good things you DID?

[Margaret]

Tom's question about what good things did you learn in the Assembly has produced insightful discussion. Here is another question: What were the good things you did in the Assembly to serve the Lord? Was it all tainted by the system? What about outreaches that were not subject to leadership control and "training", such as the retirement home outreach, puppets ,or mimes? What about individual talks with people to encourage them or share the gospel? What about helping folks?  There are former Assembly members in agony over this question, especially those who spent most of their adult lives in the system. Do they have to write it all off as a waste, or worse, as tainted and harmful?

[Joe Sperling]

Margaret--

Thanks. Despite the "system" there were many good things done "for the Lord",
from very sincere hearts. And the Lord remembers every one of them--even to
the point of "putting our tears in a bottle". I'm glad you brought that to mind.
My wanderings you have noted; are my tears not stored in your vial, recorded in your book?
Ps. 56.

[outdeep]

I personally really liked the outreach to the Union Rescue Mission.  I got to lead singing.  I got to preaching and I remember the thrill when men came forward.  I would sit in the audience and talk with the men and felt I did a little bit.

The nice thing about this was that this outreach was off the Assembly radar's screen.  No homeless person was going to drive from LA to Fullerton so there was really no interest or control from George and Betty.

I enjoyed being part of the campus ministry.  In my youthful zeal, I felt I was part of something important.  There are a million things I did wrong such as mass-handing out of tracts (instead of engaging in conversation like Elaine Finley-Minnamede did) and feeling a superiority over other Christian outreaches.  Nevertheless, in my youthful zeal, I felt I had a purpose and it kept me out of trouble.  At Orange Coast College and California State Long Beach, we weren't completely micro-managed by Tim or George so there was lots of room to feel like I was truly ministering.

In fact, I would say it was the campus ministry that really attracted me to the Assembly.

[Explorer]

I think that the churches in Rev. 2 & 3 probably give some insight into this and Tom's thread. There were good things that they did that they must have learned in these churches. The Lord commends them for this. There were bad things that they also learned and did in these churches and the Lord warns them about this. So the bad did not necessarily erase the good. And the Lord didn't seem to think that the mention of this promoted or excused the system.

The main problem with the assembly: There was plenty that pointed out the bad, but we were unwilling to see it. No excuse. There was also plenty of time and opportunity to repent of it, but we did not. No excuse.

The result: The promised judgment of God fell... no doubt about that. If you don't believe that, you probably weren't there.

[Mark C.]

Tom:  I don't think you followed the complete postings on this thread or you could not have come to the conclusion that either Joe or I were accusing you of supporting GG or his vision by asking the question that you did.  Our responses were mostly aimed at a poster who saw your question as a verification of his own belief in the superiority of what that gathering produced!  He also offered a very condescending series of comments to Joe re. Joe's assessment of the legalism, etc.. in the group.

Explorer:  You make a good point re. our failed responsibility as members to hold leaders accountable.  As to the Churches Of Asia:  There was one church, Laodicea, that the Lord had nothing good to say about; and to me the Assm. fits that bill.  God was trying to convince Laodicea to make an honest assessment of their gathering, and for former members who are in denial of what the Assm. was this is still of utmost importance.

You will also notice that God found great value in Laodicea or He wouldn't even have bothered to try and recover them in the first place. Ultimately though, it is God's loving pursuit of us (wherever we are) that is "the good" that we need to see in whatever we go through.

It was the earnest and sincere believers in God, vs. outreach techniques, that were "the good" that we can highly value from our Assm. experience because this is what God values too.  When one goes looking for the "good" it is best to look to a place where that most likely can be found, and for me, rummaging through the Assembly toxic waste dump is not the best place to search (in the words of Forrest Gump: "sometimes there just ain't enough rocks-----!")  The "good" is injured former members finding healing and life in the true Gospel of the grace of God!   

                                                                        God Bless,  Mark C. 

[Explorer]

Explorer:  You make a good point re. our failed responsibility as members to hold leaders accountable. 

I agree with that, but I don't think I made a point about that. Did I?

[trac4yt]

I agree with that, but I don't think I made a point about that. Did I?

Sometimes, there are undocumented features, within the kingdom of high-speed, interconnectivity, wherein translation amplifies into paraphrase.

These are never-ending, cascading benefits of the Al Gore invention.

[outdeep]

Sometimes, there are undocumented features, within the kingdom of high-speed, interconnectivity, wherein translation amplifies into paraphrase.

These are never-ending, cascading benefits of the Al Gore invention.

It took me about two minutes to actually answer this question in posts below.  It took others weeks to discuss, explain, philosophize, theologiize why such a question should not be asked or answered.

Not my idea of efficient, high-speed.

[Joe Sperling]

It took me about two minutes to actually answer this question in posts below.  It took others weeks to discuss, explain, philosophize, theologiize why such a question should not be asked or answered.

Not my idea of efficient, high-speed.

Actually Dave, I may be mistaken, but I believe Trac4yt's reference to a "paraphrase" has to do with Explorer's
question regarding a "reference" Mark made about "Leadership". Since Explorer never actually said anything about
Leadership, Mark's reply could be taken as a "paraphrase" of her comments. A paraphrase does not necessarily repeat the exact words used---but can cover the general idea with either words added or extracted. If that isn't what Trac4yt meant, I stand corrected.

<ring!, ring!> "Hello?  Oh Hi Pete! What's that? You've got a question you want to ask, but your afraid it might take quite a while to find an answer? It might take weeks to discuss, philosophize and theologize before you could come to a valid explanation? Oh--that's a shame! Oh, wait a minute! I know this guy named Dave from the Bulletin Board--let me call him and see if he has two minutes.   Yeah--just two minutes. No, really, just two minutes. Oh I know, normally it could take weeks, but this guy is amazing!! Let me post your question on the Bulletin Board, give him a call, and we should have an answer within minutes.  I'll call you right back".

Just kidding with you Dave-----One thing I DID learn in the Assembly (I'm not sure if it's really good or not) is sarcasm. 

[Marty]

Our responses were mostly aimed at a poster who saw your question as a verification of his own belief in the superiority of what that gathering produced!  He also offered a very condescending series of comments to Joe re. Joe's assessment of the legalism, etc.. in the group.

                                                                       God Bless,  Mark C. 

I suspect that comment was aimed at me.

Mark, you just can’t seem to get past the “assembly.”

Let me explain something to you. Never in those posts did I say anything about the goodness of the assembly system. But because something good may have come from the assembly you and Joe can’t stomach that.

I made a simple comment that I learned a discipline in the assembly that I doubt I would have gained outside the assembly. It’s like an athlete training. They will do better when a coach is pushing them as opposed to training on their own. I’ve had some experience with that as well. That has nothing to do with whether the coach is good or bad. It has to do with someone pushing you to do things you may not otherwise do.

Now Joe took my comment and made these statements about mormons and jws and how they are disciplined to study and its all for naught. So? Does that mean because they are lost students of the Bible we might as well all throw in the towel? Well I’ll tell you, I’m not. My God is bigger than that. I believe He is able to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. So I am going to trust Him for that. I am thankful that He used the assembly to push me. I would be just as thankful if He had used some other means but He didn’t.

Now back to the assembly. The assembly was neither good nor bad in the same way Calvary Chapel is neither good nor bad. These are vehicles that God uses for the brief period of time we are on this earth to affect our lives, that is if you believe God is at work in ones life. Some may find the experience of it less palatable than others but that does not make things good or bad. Life’s experiences are that way. I love watching football, my wife can’t stand it, does that make football good or bad?

Some people got saved in the assembly. Was the assembly good or bad? Some people joined a fraternity of friends they never had before. Was the assembly good or bad? Folks, it had nothing to do with the assembly. It had to do with God at work, if you believe that sort of thing.

“But the assembly taught heresy.” To the scholar that is a significant issue. To the guy who is going through bankruptcy and divorce, the simple knowledge that Christ died on the cross for his sins and that “as many as received Him to them He gave the right to be called son’s of God,” the other stuff may not be so important. As Paul says, “I determined to know nothing among you save Jesus Christ and Him crucified.”

I remember when the burden of sin was lifted off my back. It matter not to me about some speaking in tongues, some saying you can lose your salvation, some saying you must be baptized to be truly saved. I was just weeping for joy over the reality that I am now saved, saved, saved….I’m on my way to heaven.

“There were bad people in the assembly.” You can list a number of high profile Christian  leaders who have been involved in immorality, money fraud, drugs. Does that make their congregation bad? Does that make other leaders bad?

Some want to say the assembly was this evil entity that had only diabolical intents toward the members. Some will say the assembly was the best thing that ever happened to them. The fact of the matter is, the assembly is over. Its time to move on to what God has in His plan for us.

I check in here every 6 months or so, just to see what’s happening. Well, nothing has changed. It’s the same old stuff. Just like political talking heads. Is there nothing else in your lives? Now, to use a bulletin board as a means to keep in touch can be a good thing. But come on people. How many more years are you going to lament over your injustices? Just some thoughts. See you in 6 months, or maybe not.

[Mark C.]

Hi Marty,

  Yes, your suspicions are correct  .

  As to the allegation that "I just can't get past the Assembly":  The group "The Assembly", if it existed as just an isolated group that was "neither good nor bad," should indeed just be forgotten. However, what the Assembly believed and practiced is still alive and producing great damage in the World today via many other groups just like it.  Studying it's history is necessary in order to prevent that same history from being repeated again and to help those still in these groups.  Also, there will always be those who need help in recovering from their injuries. 

  The curse of spiritual abuse finds it's roots in human nature, and like the Stanford experiment demonstrates, easily escalates into a very ugly thing.  There are specific things to evaluate about a church that will indicate whether they are "good or evil."

  I, and others, have mentioned The 7 Churches of Asia from Rev. re. this topic and that God did indeed evaluate these churches; clearly his evaluation was a moral and spiritual one.  In other words, God cared what they taught and how they behaved as a group, not just as an individual believer in that organization.  These facts seem to fly in the face of the arguments in your last post that see a church as an inanimate object ("vehicles") and theological truth as impractical in nature (not touching our real lives).   

  The Assembly, however, was not an inanimate object;  not only was it theologically in error, it also practiced evil.  If we can't, or refuse to acknowledge this fact, then we as individuals have a moral problem.  If we participate in that group and have no problem with how others around us are treated---as long as I personally am benefiting from my involvement ( as in your experience of learning discipline Marty) then "how dwells the love of God in you?"

  This is part of the problem I have with asking the question re. "what good things did I learn, etc."  Let's say we ask this question of someone like Judy Geftakys.  And if she declines to respond should we come back to her with, "I feel sorry for you because you can't remember one good thing!"   

  If a former member wants to remember something good from their Assembly past--- fine, but don't insist that others must try to wade back into what was a horror for them and find "the good."  It is probably best for some to try and find the good they never really knew in a wholly new location: apart from any of their former Assembly associations.  In that sense, I would agree with you Marty that we must leave the Assembly behind--- and indeed I do.

  The one reason I still involve myself with discussions about the Assembly is because I believe "good" can come from not only understanding the negatives, but in the discovery of a true relationship with God that becomes apparent when free from those negatives.

                                                              God Bless,  Mark C.   

   

[Aslan213]

Hello All,

It's been ages since I visited this website.  After reading many posts, I think both Marty and Mark are right.  As regards to the topic:  of course there were good things I did.

1.  In the last 1-2 years I was there I was usually assigned to go by myself on outreaches.  I led a number of people to Christ and invited them only to other Bible believing churches.  I even discipled some secretly until someone from that church took over.  (The leadership never found out to my knowledge.)  I usually had church invitations from 2-3 different churches in my Bible pouch.  Although I was disgusted with the assembly at the time, I still thought it could change.

2.  The week before I left, I presented to a number of people in the assembly that I was leaving and why from a scriptural standpoint.

3.  The night I left, I met with the leadership and others.  I presented the truth and although they did not want to open their bibles, they heard it.  Even though I was "condemned to wander in outer darkness for all eternity as a disembodied spirit for leaving", God has opened my eyes and heart to experience His grace and truth and liberty we have in Christ.

God bless,

Eric

[Mark C.]

Hi Eric!

   Great to hear from you again and to have your contribution here!

  I suppose there is no way to really settle the dispute between Marty's view and mine because there are such strong emotions on either side.  I see the Assembly as an organization rooted in a kind of evil that is the worse kind of evil possible: where God and His word are misused as a means of abusive control.  God is good and His word is good, so one could say that there was "good" there to be found, and most certainly there were many individual members who sincerely intended to only do what was right.  I think Marty sees things as stated in the latter part of the above.

  Here's an example of what I'm trying to say in my argument re. this whole issue:

  At the end of WW2 Eisenhower thought that it was important to bring the local Germans to the death camps to see for themselves what had happened there.  Why?  He was afraid that it would be too easy to quickly forget what happened and that Germans (as well as the whole world) might try to deny that these evil events ever really happened.  I would say that Eisenhower's efforts paid great dividends for "good" in German society as a result. 

   The Germans who were forced to look had to face the horrifying fact that their passivity allowed Nazism to rise, even though they never supported such evil as the camps.  These Germans knew that evil was going on, but feared the personal cost of opposing it.  Sitting down after the War with these Germans who were personally against this evil, but passive in their opposition, and asking them: "what good things did you do while you were in Nazi Germany?" would not be the appropriate question to ask.

  Some of these Germans were probably good folks who hated much of what they saw going on in Germany at that time, but they probably were unwilling to consider just how evil this country had become.  Then, there were those who participated as abusers and for the salvation of these souls it was absolutely necessary for them to understand, confess, and repent of their participation. 

  Some will object to using Nazi Germany as being in any way analogous to the Assembly, but the moral principles are the same.  Also, the means of recovery from participation in any kind of evil must follow the same kind of path.

  The test that can be applied to whether or not my contention above is valid is to ask yourself, as a former member, the following question:   

 How do I respond to the "testimonies" of former members like, Judy Geftakys, Flora, Kristen, etc.?

1.) Do I tend to deny the veracity of their stories, or see them as only isolated events that have nothing to do with the Assembly as a group?

2.) Do I view my past in the group as not really being a participant in a group that did great evil?  One way to answer this question this way would be to say that, "I saw bad things but didn't agree with them." (The problem with this was that you were passive in the face of the wrong, as were the Germans. These Germans just couldn't believe that these horrible things had happened and had to be forced to come and look).

3.) Do you have no feelings of having wronged people by either your active or passive participation in the group? 

     I could add some questions to these, but the main idea is whether or not your heart is sensitive or hard when considering some of the bad things that went on in the group.

                                                     God Bless,  Mark C.

[outdeep]

Personally, I doubt if all that is implied in the simple question that was originally asked.

How this all started is Tom said
1.  I am involved in a church plant.
2.  We would like to use ideas in this church plant.
3.  Any idea that you may have picked up in the Assembly that we could use?

It was a simple straight-forward question that I answered in two minutes without feeling that I was betraying those who suffered or looking at the Assembly in rose colored glasses or with any kind of emotion really. 

If someone asked me the same question about the Mormon church, I would talk about their radio and TV ads as good ideas without feeling the need to relate the question somehow to the history of Nazi Germany.

The strong responses is not about the question itself but the strong emotions people have about their cherished views they forged in the fires of recovery from the Assembly.  This is not a light thing.  We undercomers came out as a confused and hurting lot and it took lots of time, energy, and thinking to turn our world up right again. 

To me, this conversation is like a parent driving along with his son and asked casually, "Isn't that a lovely church steeple?"  The son whips around in anger and screams at the parent, "STOP SHOVING RELIGION DOWN MY THROAT!!!!" 

The problem is clearly not with the question but something going on under the surface.

[trac4yt]

From a link to Lee I..

We were steeped in the Bible. We did Bible studies several times a week using the Navigator’s chapter summary method. When listening to sermons, we were exhorted to turn in our Bibles to every passage that the preacher read, and this often meant turning to what seemed like hundreds of passages every Sunday. And we took notes too, filling up reems of paper over the years. I did this as a child and so my mind was chock-full of Scripture.

Assuming your "churches" were churches that lasted
approximately 30 years at 4 meetings per week...

1) People chose to go to 6,240 meetings.  Followed Christ, 10,950 days.
2) People believing the essentials = 80-100%
3) People with variable views on the non-essentials = 80-100%
4) People praying for other people, weekly.  God hears, answers, remembers.
5) People learned a lot.
6) People reached out a lot.

It would seem a couple of things would be picked up along the way.